HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/08/04 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 27, 1988 A£TION A~ENDA
TO: Cmnercial/Industri al ~ 1977
Design Review Committee Peter Tolstoy
Larry McNiel
Dan Col eman
David Blakesly (Alternate)
FROM: Debra Meier, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 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 usin9 the
blank space provided under each project on the at,tached sheets. After
the meetin9, 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 desi9n 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
(Chris) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-22 -
ALLSTATE RECYCLING SERVICE - The development of an
office and warehouse building totaling 5,000 square feet
on 1.7 acres of land in the Heavy Industrial District
(Subarea 15) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan
located on the south side of Whittram Avenue, east of
Pecan Avenue - APN: 229-192-10.
6:30 - 7:30
(Scott) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-
03 - WHEELER AND WHEELER - The development of a retail
center and service station totaling 4,416 square feet on
0.63 acres of land in the Community Commercial
designation (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard
Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of
Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-192-
06.
DESIGN REVIEW CONMITTEE AGENDA
August 4, 1988
Page 2
7:30 - 8:00
(Brett) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-24 -
DICKER-WARMINGTON - The design review of site plan and
elevations for a 5,800 square foot retail building (Pad
D) within the approved Tetra Vista Village Shopping
Center in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located
at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Base Line
Road - APN: 202-801-
8:00 - 8:30
(Brett} ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-
28 - MAX WILLIAMS - The development of a 5,915 square
foot retail building on .52 acres of land within an
existing shopping center in the Community Commercial
District of the Foothill Specific Plan, located on the
southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Klusman
Avenue - APN: 208-261-20.
DM:vc
Attachments
CC: Planning Commission/City Council
Commercial/Industrial
CORSENTCALEkq)AR ITEHSAGENDA
August 4, 1988
1. DR 87-26
~ Revised color sch~,
Committee Action: The Committee concluded that the
proposed one-color scheme was not
acceptable and that the two-color
scheme originally approved should be
used.
2. DR 87-44 - CARNEY-THEODOROU
(Chris) !eechanical equipment screen.
Committee Action: The integrated mechanical screen was
accepted with the use of metal
lattice. The free-standing roof
screens were not approved. The
applicant should design an integrated
roof screen similar to the approved
design.
3. DR 88-11 -/4ATLOCK
(Chris) Revised elevations.
Committee Action: The Committee approved the design
revisions with the addition of the
following recommendations:
1. An arch treatment should be given
to the stair access door on the
south elevation.
2. An arbor/trellis should be
provided at the pedestrian area
south of the building.
3. A continuous paving treatment
should be carried from the plaza
to the office entries and used at
the storefronts.
4. CUP 85-1g - KEN RUBY CO.
(Chris) Design Review Co~mnittee modifications.
Committee Action: The building modifications to the
buildings were approved. The
Committee suggested the use of tile on
the underside of the two main arches.
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
Consent Calendar Items Agenda
August 4, 1988
Page 2
5. DR 87-55 - RILLHER
(Tom) Revised elevations and equipment
screen.
Committee Action: The ribbed concrete elements on the
east elevation of building 3 shall
extend from the finished grade to the
roof line.
The material used in screening roof
mounted equipment shall be a cement
board (approved samples was
manufactured by Minerit). No roof
equipment is to be visible and the
roof screen shall be painted to match
the top color band on the buildings.
6. DR 88-05 - ROUSE
(Scott) ~aterial sample board, site plan and
elevations.
Committee Action: The Committee recommended that the
plans be revised for additional review
as follows:
1. The plaza for building "E" should
be more substantial.
2. Additional color or texture
variation should be provided on
the building elevations.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:00 - 6:30 Chris August 4, 1988
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-22 - ALLSTATE
RECYCLING SERVICE - 13~e development of an office and warehouse building
totaling 5,000 square feet on 1.7 acres of land in the Heavy Industrial
District (Subarea 15) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan located on
the south side of Whittram Avenue, east of Pecan Avenue - APN: 229-192-
10.
Design Paramters:
The project site currently has a single family house on it which is not
proposed to be removed or relocated. The balance of the parcel is
generally flat with some degree of slope towards the south. Curb and
gutter have not been constructed on Whittram.
Staff Comments:
Site Plan
1. The east and west parking areas should either be adjacent to the
northern screen wall with a landscape buffer or facing south.
Architecture
1. The building proposed is metal, rectangular and has little
distinguishing articulation. Metal buildings are permitted in the
Heavy Industrial District. Aesthetics, however, must still be
considered.
An 8' masonry screen wall exists along the entire frontage of this
site except for the driveway entrance. Because of the existing
special circumstance, the Committee may wish to consider treatment
of the screen wall, which will virtually hide the building, versus
architectural upgrades for the building.
2. The existing perimeter fencing should be replaced by a fence with
uniform design consistent with the special considerations of the
Industrial Specific Plan (view obstructing).
Landscape
1. Trees should be provided within the streetside landscape pallette
which have color for accent.
2. Vines or tall shrubs should be planted adjacent to the screen wall
to soften its impact.
DESIGN REVIEI~ CO~iMENTS
DR 88-22 - Allstate Recycling Service
August 4, 1988
Page 2
Design Review Co~m~ittee Action:
Members Present: Bruce Emerick, Brad Bullet
Staff Planner: Chris Westman
The Con~ittee reviewed the proposal and requested that the applicant
work with staff to revise the site plan and elevations to create more
interest. Additional landscape should be provided in the parking area,
additional treatment should be given to the 8' screenwall and variation
should be given to the roof line and wall planes of the building.
The project should be reviewed at the September 8th Design Review
Committee Meeting.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:30 - 8:00 8rett August 4, 1988
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-24 DICKER-
WARMINGTON - The design review of site plan and el evations for a 5,800
square foot retail building (Pad D) within the approved Tetra Vista
Village Shopping Center in the Neighborhood Con~nercial District, 1 ocated
at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Base Line Road - APN: 202-
801-
Design Parameters:
The site is currently vacant (a graded pad) within the Tetra Vista
Village Shopping Center. A Tetra Vista Con~nunity monument sign and
plaza area abuts the pad area to the west. The building architecture
appears to be in substantial conformance with the approved plans.
Staff Q~aaents:
1. A planter area should be added between the building and the parking
lot.
2. A planter area should also be added between the plaza area and the
building to provide more shade in this area.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Brad Buller
Staff Planner: Brett Homer
The Committee reviewed the project and determined that the following
modifications should be made:
1. Landscape planters should be added to the storefront and should be
designed to match the storefront planter areas which exist in other
areas of the Tetra Vista Village Shopping Center.
2. The design of the paving area adjacent to the existing plaza should
be revised to better interface with and match the existing paving
area.
The Committee will review the changes at their August 18, 1988 meeting.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:30 - 7:30 Scott August 4, 1988
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-03 - WHEELER AND
WHEELER - The development of a retail center and service station
~g 4,416 square feet on 0.63 acres of land in the Community
Commercial designation (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific
Plan, located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard
Avenue - APN: 208-192-06.
Design Parameters:
The site is presently vacant with an average slope of roughly 2.5% from
northwest to southeast. There are three billboards on the parcel that
are in line with future building and circulation areas. The Red Hill
Liquor Store is located immediately to the east of the lot and the Villa
Paloma condominium project is located to the south.
In conjunction with the development of the site, the applicant has also
submitted a variance request to reduce the parking setback along
Foothill Boulevard from 50 feet to 40 feet and to reduce the landscape
setback along the south property line from 15 feet to 5 feet. An
analysis of the variance request will be prepared and presented to the
Planning Commission in conjunction with the Development Review
application.
Staff Commnents:
A. Activity Center at the corner of Foothill and Vineyard: The
Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan provides for a pedestrian oriented
design at all four corners of the intersection through the
reduction of building setbacks alon9 the streets. To try and
address the activity center concept, the applicant has pulled the
building up closer to the streets and is proposing a large
hardscape area at the corner to include enhanced pavement, benches
and a planter containing annual color. Eight foot sidewalks will
continue down Foothill and Vineyard with landscapin9 borderin9 both
sides of the sidewalks. Staff feels, however, that the intent of
the activity center is not bein9 fully realized with this
concept. The sidewalks and landscapin9 configuration are similar
to any convention development resulting in a separation between the
sidewalks and the buildin9. To create a more pedestrian oriented
atmosphere, staff suggests that the followin9 items be incorporated
into the plan:
1) Greater use of hardscape, particularly at the east end of
Building "A" and south end of Building "E".
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 88-03 - Wheeler and Wheeler
Au9ust 4, 1988
Page 2
2) Greater use of a storefront design along the Foothill and
Vineyard frontages. The design could include actual windows
and doors/openings to the streetside or display windows. The
additional hardscape areas should be coordinated to allow
pedestrian traffic at the storefront or display window
locations.
3) Sidewalks should be provided on the east side of Building "A"
and the south side of Building "B" from the public sidewalk to
the interior of the site.
B. Architecture:
1. Staff suggests that the tower element be a more prominent
feature and should incorporate additional detailing. A
possible solution could be the use of windows that are open to
below to provide natural light in the corridor between
Buildings "A" and "B".
2. Consistent with Planning Commission policy, natural stone
should be used instead of veneer.
C. Landscaping:
1. Additional tree planting should be provided on the south side
of Building "B".
2. The activity center hardscape and formal tree planting concept
should be continued along Foothill to the new driveway on the
Red Hill Liquor Store site. This would be consistent with the
extent of the urban parkway approved for Thomas Winery. The
suburban parkway design would then continue east of the new
driveway.
3. Extensive landscaping should be required along the south site
boundary.
4. All trees within tree wells should be 24" box or larger.
D. Miscellaneous:
1. All light fixtures, benches, tree well grates, etc. should be
consistent with the historic nature of Foothill Boulevard.
2. Consistent with Planning Commission direction, the trash
enclosure should be designed with a trellis and overhead door.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 88-03 - Wheeler and Wheeler
August 4, 1988
Page 3
Design Review Comittee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Brad Buller
Staff Planner: Scott Murphy
The Committee reviewed the proposed and recommended the following
revisions to be resubmitted for additional Committee review as a consent
calendar item:
1. Textured paving should be provided in the driveway off Vineyard to
the first parking stall.
2. A sidewalk should be provided on the east side of Building "A" to
connect to the public sidewalk along Foothill.
3. Trees should be provided on the south side of Building "B".
4. Additional hardscape should be provided along the street
frontages. Four to five foot planter areas can be provided
adjacent to the buildings. Also, an alternative plan should be
prepared showing how hardscape could be provided to the buildings
if businesses wished openings to the street areas.
5. Nine foot wide parking stalls should be provided along the east
side of Building "B".
6. The entire wall at the south portion of Building "B" facing
Vineyard should be rock.
7. The sidewalks along Foothill and Vineyard should be bordered with
textured paving (i.e. pavers) consistent with the Foothill Specific
Plan.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:00 - 8:30 Brett August 4, 1988
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PEPJ4IT 88-28 - MAJ( WILLIAMS
- The development of a 5,915 square foot retail building on .52 acres of
land within an existing shopping center in the Community Commercial
District of the Foothill Specific Plan, located on the southwest corner
of Foothill Boulevard and Klusman Avenue - APN: 208-261-20.
The project was initially reviewed by the Design Review Committee on
July 21, 1988. At that time, the Committee recommended that the
proposed project be revised and submitted for further review. The
revised plans were to address the following concerns:
1. The storefront of the existing building east of Perry's Market and
the new building should be improved by adding a colonade which
would provide continuity and consistency in design.
The roof height shall be increased along the storefronts to match
the height of the roof on the northeast corner of the building.
2. Landscaping such as tree wells should be provided along the
storefront of the new building and the existing one east of Perry's
Market.
3. The east elevation of the new building should be upgraded with
additional roof overhang and adding the same tower element at the
south side of east elevation that wrap around to the south
elevation.
4. Trash enclosure areas should be provided on-site rather than along
the alley.
5. The south elevation should be upgraded with additional
architectural elements.
6. The Committee stated that they strongly encourage the developer to
work with the legal property owner of this center and the owner of
the small corner parcel to upgrade the entire shopping center. The
Committee stated that they would have recommended the total upgrade
of the center based on this proposed expansion. However the
Committee understood the financial burden on the developer just to
expand 5,000 square feet of retail space. The Committee stated
that the design and the upgrade of the new building and the
existing building east of Perry's Market should set the tone for
future redevelopment of the entire center.
Design Review )ittee Action:
Members Present: Brad Buller, Larry McNiel
Staff Planner: Brett Horner
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
CUP 88-28 - Max Williams
August 4, 1988
Page 2
The Committee reviewed the modifications to the site plan and building
architecture and recommended that the proposed project be revised again
and submitted for further review as a consent calendar item. The
revised plans should address the following concerns:
1. Landscaping, in the form of tree wells, should be provided along
the storefront of the new building.
2. The right side of the north elevation of the new building should be
upgraded and should incorporate the same tower element on the left
side of the north elevation. The element should improve the
connection between the new and old storefronts.
3. The Committee stated that they strongly encourage the developer to
work with the legal property owner of this center and the owner of
the small corner parcel to upgrade the entire shopping center. The
Committee stated that they would have recommended the total upgrade
of the center based on this proposed expansion. However, the
Committee understood the financial burden on the developer just to
expand 5,000 square feet of retail space. The Committee stated
that the design and the upgrade of the new building and the
existing building east of Perry's Market should set the tone for
future redevelopment of the entire center.