Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/04/21 - Agenda Packet CITY OFRANCHOCUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 27, 1988 ACTION AGENDA TO: Cmm~ercial/Industrial Design Review Committee Peter Tolstoy Larry McNiel Dan Coleman David Blakesley (Alternate) FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF APRIL 21, 1988 The following is a description of projects which require review and rating by the Design Review Committee. Please review the attached plans, visit the project sites, and write down your comments using the blank space provided under each project on the attached sheets. After the meeting, the consensus of the Committee's concerns will be typed up as the formal action/recommendation of the Committee and distributed to the Commission and Council. As always, feel free to contact the appropriate project manager (noted in parentheses along the left margin), prior to the meeting date, if you have specific questions related to the scheduled projects. Dinner will be provided between 5:00 5:30 p.m., Consent Calendar items will be reviewed between 5:30 p.m. 6:00 p.m., with the first design review item being heard at 6:00 p.m. Please notify our department if you will be unable to attend the meeting, or if you will be late, so that the dinner can be properly ordered and the necessary arrangements made. 6:00 - 6:30 (Greg) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-56 - DAVIS DEVELOPMENTS - The development of three warehouse, storage, and distribution buildings totaling 177,008 square feet on 8 acres of land in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District located at the southwest corner of Jersey Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-111-07. 6:30 - 7:00 (Chris) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87- 29 - WIERICK PROPERTIES - A proposal to develop an office retail center consisting of a 13,200 square foot two-story building for office and medical use, a 16,168 square foot building for retail use, and a 5,000 square foot fast food restaurant totaling 34,368 square feet in an Office Professional District on 4.4 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Lomita Court and Archibald Avenue - APN: 202-151-33. April 21, 1988 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-10 - DIVERSIFIED - The development of Phase III of a neighborhood commercial shopping center consisting of two retail buildings totaling 14,800 square feet on 12.96 acres of land within an approved shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District located at the northeast corner of Haven and Highland Avenues - APN: 201-271-65 and 71. 7:30 - 8:00 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-07 - SWAN POOLS - The development of a 1.25 acre industrial Master Plan and Phase I development consisting of a 7,409 square foot building for a contractor's office, yards, and warehousing use on 0.5 acres of land in the General Industrial District, Subarea 13 of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, north of 4th Street - APN: 229-283- 03. NF:te Attachments cc: Planning Commission/City Council COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSENT CALEkq)AR ITEMS AGENDA APRIL 21, 1988 1. CUP 8B-12 - WESTERN PROPERTIES (Debra) Review of the revised driveway alignment for town center. Committee Action: It was the opinion of the Committee that the driveway realignment and accompanying architectural revisions constituted a modification to the original approval. This will be rescheduled to May 19 for full Committee review. 2. NOR 86-34 - CARL'S · {Chris) Review of colors. Committee Action: The Committee deferred action on the awnings and color until the building has been painted the new colors (greys and greens). 3. DR 87-19 & DR 87-20 - LENNON (Chris) Review of revised Site Plan. Committee Action: The Committee approved the revision to the Site Plan as submitted. However, additional architectural treatment consistent with the original approval should be provided to all elevations. 4. DR 88-05 - CARNEY-11JEODOROU (Chris) Review of revised Master Plan. Committee Acti on: Rev iew postponed, DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Greg April 21, 1988 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-56 DAVIS DEVELOPMENTS - The development of three warehouse, storage, and distribution buildings totaling 177,008 square feet on 8 acres of land in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District located at the southwest corner of Jersey Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-111-07. Background: The Committee (McNiel, Tolstoy, Coleman) reviewed the project on February 18, lg88 and recommended that it be revised for further Committee review. The applicant has submitted revised plans which will be discussed in the following section. Staff Ce~m~ents: i. The Committee stated that the plaza area should be provided along the south side of Building "B", and should be similar in size and include amenities and landscape features consistent with the plazas provided at Buildings "A" and A lunch patio area is now proposed on the south side of Building "B", however, the emenities proposed within this area are limited to wood benches around the patio perimeter and tree well. Staff recomnends that a point of access from the build(rig be provided instead of the access from the parking area currently proposed. 2. Additional variety to the building footprints should be provided to enhance architectural interest and provide greater articulation of building entries. The applicant has attempted to provide a greator degree of building entry articulation and architectural intorest by using angled corner entries and columnar elements for Buildings "A" and "C". Angular corner statements are also proposed adjacent to the patio areas of Buildings "A" and "C" along the Jersey Boulevard street frontage. No changes to the footprint for Building "B" are proposed. 3. The Committee recommended that breaks, openings, recesses, etc. should be utilized more extensively along all elevations exposed to street frontages to provide a more significant architectural statement. The revised elevations are substantially the same as those originally reviewed. April 21, 1988 Page 2 4. The Committee also pointed out that rail service may be required for the site; however, recommended that this issue be forwarded for full Planning Commission discussion once all other technical and design issues have been resolved. 5. The Committee stated that additional color treatment should be provided to all southern elevations. Similarly, the west elevation of Building "B", north and west elevations of Building "A", and north and east elevations of Building "C" should be upgraded through the use of additional reveals, texture/color bands, etc. The revised elevations reflect expanded reveal and color treatments to the southern elevation of each building. The color and reveal treatment provided to the west elevations of Buildings "A" and "B", and east elevation of Building "C" have been expanded. No additional color, texture, or reveal treatments have been provided to the north elevations of Buildings "A" or "C". Design Review Coam~ittoe Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Grog Gage The Committee reviewed the revised plans for the project and made the following recommendations: 1. Building entries should receive additional treatment through provision of free standing or semi-free standing brise soliel structures and stronger entry recesses. 2. Pedestrian furniture (table, benches) should be provided within the plaza area of Building "B" similar to that used within other plazas. Convenient access should be provided from buildings to all plaza areas. In directing the applicant to revise the project as noted above, the Committee also indicated that the project should be forwarded to the Planning Commission to determine whether rail service will be required and to allow the Commission an opportunity to review the overall project design. The Committee recommended that the project be returned for further review after consideration by the Commission. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Chris April 21, 1988 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-2g WIERICK PROPERTIES - A proposal to develop an office retail center consisting of a 13,200 square foot two-story building for office and medical use, a 16,168 square foot building for retail use, and a 5,000 square foot fast food restaurant totaling 34,368 square feet in an Office Professional District on 4.4 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Lomita Court and Archibald Avenue - APN: 202-151-33. Oesign Parameters: The site is vacant with no significant vegetation. The site drops in elevation from the north to the south 18 feet at 3 percent. There is development on all four sides of the site. To the south is an Alpha Beta commercial center. The rear loading area of that center is adjacent to the subject site and therefore very visible. To the west is a senior housing project. There is a block wall which separates the two sites. North of Lomita Court to the west is another apartment project, and directly across the street is a vacant lot which has a Master Plan approved for expansion of a retail hardware store and office building. East of Archibald is an apartment complex and a retail neighborhood shopping center. There is not any one consistent design theme among all these projects. Street improvements have been completed on Archibald Avenue and Lomita Court except for driveways and sidewalks. Background: The project was originally reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Chitlea, Kroutil) in September, 1987. Direction only was given to the applicant at that time to comply with guidelines which were drawn by the City Council regarding land use. Those five points are: 1. Retention of a significant portion of the site for office and office related uses; 2. Planning Commission approval of a development plan (for entire site) to promote a mixed use concept; 3. A significant portion of the project be devoted to pure office with no store fronts or parking directly in front of buildings (office); 4. That the design be compatible with and sensitive to the residential character (the mixed use project need not be of a residential character) of the senior housing complex to the west; and April 21, 1988 Page 2 5. Project phasing be included which calls for timely development of office services to insure that all the retail commercial is not constructed first and the offices are never developed. The Planning Commission had reviewed the related General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment to change the Office Professional District to Neighborhood Commercial District. The Commission recommended denial to the City Council. The Council reviewed the proposed amendments and stated that they would consider such a proposal if a Development Agreement is submitted along with it and the Conditional Use Permit. The developer agreed to this. He retained another architectural firm to redesign the Site Plan and architecture in compliance with the guidelines mentioned above. Staff Cmm~ents: Site Plan 1. A turn-around area should be provided at the west end of the parking row south of Building "C" and north of retail Building "B". 2. A service loading area should be designated for the restaurant. 3. A potential conflict is created by the angle of intersecting rows of parking south of the office building. Architecture 1. The architectural style proposed seems appropriate and is well articulated. Landscaping 1. Greater emphasis should be provided at the Archibald Avenue entrance. 2. Some evergreen trees should be introduced into the streetscape on Archibald. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Chris Westman April 21, 1988 Page 3 The Committee reviewed the project and made the following recommendations: 1. The service area for the restaurant should pr6vide a service truck loading zone, be reorganized to locate the trash enclosure out of the north drive entry line of sight, and be properly screened. 2. The parking lot lighting standards should be of metal. 3. Benches or integrated seating should be provided throughout the project. 4. Enriched paving should be provided at points of ingress and egress. 5. Sufficient area for service truck turn around should be provided for Buildings "B" and "C". 6. The Archibald streetscape should be consistent with the concepts for the Archibald beautification project. 7. Parking lot trees should be low residual maintenance and canopy type. 8. The Archibald entry should be designed with a stronger landscape statement. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Nancy April 21, 1988 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSIlENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-10 - DIVERSIFIED - The development of Phase III of a neighborhood commercial shopping center consisting of two retail buildings totaling 14,800 square feet on 12.96 acres of land within an approved shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District located at the northeast corner of Haven and Highland Avenues - APN: 201-271-65 and 71. Design ParametePs: The site is within the Haven Village Shopping Center. Attachment "A" shows the approved Master Site Plan for this shopping center. The developer is requesting design review of the elevations for the two retail buildings as shown on Attachment "B". The proposed McDonald's is not part of this Development Review. McDonald's has submitted a separate Conditional Use Permit which will be reviewed by the Committee at a later date when all technical issues and Code deficiencies have been resolved. Staff Comments: Site Plan 1. Continuous pedestrian connections should be provided from the west elevation around to the east elevation for the proposed Retail No. 3. The same consistent textured material for the pedestrian walkway should be provided. Elevations The proposed elevation is consistent with the theme established in this shopping center. However, it could be improved with the following: 1. The south elevation for proposed Retail No. 3 should be upgraded as it is subject to public view. This could be achieved by adding the same roof treatment and colonade along the south elevation and wrapped around to the second service door of the east elevation. 2. The tower element on the south elevation of Retail No. 3 appears small in size. It should be the same size as the ones existing in the center. 3. Additional elements should be provided to the elevations for the proposed commercial pad along Haven Avenue. April 21, 1988 Page 2 Landscaping 1. Additional pedestrian amenities and special landscaping should be provided along the east, south, and west elevations of proposed Retail No. 3. 2. Planter areas should be provided along the north and east elevations of the proposed commercial building. 3. When the Commission approved the Master Site Plan for this Phase III development on September 26, 1986, a condition of approval required the developer to landscape the future freeway right-of-way. Detailed Landscape Plans have been approved by staff, but to date, the developer has not completed this condition of approval. Staff recommends that a condition of approval be placed on this Development Review which requires the landscaping to be completed prior to issuance of any permits. Design Review Coam~ittee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Continuous pedestrian connections should be provided from the west elevation around to the east elevation for the proposed Retail No. 3. The same consistent textured material for the pedestrian walkway should be provided. Pedestrian amenities such as benches and free standing trellis work should be provided. 2. The store front design for Retail No. 3 should be consistent with the theme established in the center, i.e. "pop outs" and "recesses". 3. Additional architectural details such as river rock treatment should be provided to the south and west elevations of the commercial pad. 4. Vine pockets should be provided along the east and north elevations of the commercial pad. April 21, 1988 Page 3 5. River rock treatment should be provided to the south elevation of Retail No. 3. 6. The landscaping work for the CalTrans right-of-way shall be completed prior to issuance of any permits. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Nancy April 21, 1988 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-07 - SWAN POOLS - The development of a 1.25 acre industrial Master Plan consisting of three industrial buildings, and Phase I development consisting of a 7,409 square foot building for a contractor's office, yards, and warehousing use on 0.5 acres of land in the General Industrial District, Subarea 13 of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, north of 4th Street - APN: 229-283- 03. Design Parameters: The proposed project was previously approved by the Planning Commission on February 13, 1985. The Conditional Use Permit was necessary at that time because of the significant amount of office use in the mezzanine of each building. On October 17, 1985, the Design Review Committee approved the changes to the phasing of the project by switching Phase I (2 industrial buildings) with Phase II. On November 7, 1985, the Committee approved changes to the Site Plan by allowing Phase I Building "A" to align with Buildings "B" and "C". However, two conditions were imposed as follows: 1. Special landscape treatment along the west elevation of Phase I Building "A" such as intensifying the number and size of trees, shrubs, and providing mounding and rockscape, etc. 2. Reverse the bottom scored split-face block with the building's split-face block in order to create visual interest and subtle color tone change between Phase I and II buildings. This project expired on February 13, 1987. The developer is submitting the same project for the Committee to review. Staff Co~ents: Landscaping 1. Special landscaping should be provided along Rochester Avenue and at the project entrance. 2. Special landscaping treatment should be provided along the west elevation of Building "A" such as intensifying the number and size of trees, shrubs, and providing mounding and rockscape, including pedestrian amenities. April 21, 1988 Page 2 Elevations 1. The elevations for Building "A" should reflect the condition of approval from Design Review Committee action of November 7, 1985 by reversing the bottom scored split- face block and the building split-face block in order to create visual interest and subtle color tone change. Design Revie~Cosnittee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee reviewed the project and stated that the elevations provided do not show the true picture. The Committee requested that the applicant provide revised elevations with a more three-dimensional view. The applicant agreed.