Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986/04/03 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 7, 1986 ACTION AGENDA TO: Commercial/Industrial 1977 Design Review Committee Herman Rempel Dennis Stout Dan Coleman FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF APRIL 3~ 1986 REVISED 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 (Dino) DR 86-05 - BARTON - The development of a 12,000 square foot restaurant on 12.68 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue - APN 208-35-5. 6:30 - 7:00 (Nancy) PR 85-62 - MESSENGER - A proposed 25 acre Master Plan for multi-tenant industrial development within the General Industrial/Rail Served District located at the east side of Vineyard Avenue between Arrow Highway and 9th Street. 7:00 - 7:30 (Dino) ENVIROtlIENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-02 - BARLII~ - The development of a 189,640 square foot warehouse addition to an existing warehouse building on 11.74 aces of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) District, located on the east side of Baker Avenue and the north side of the AT & SF Railroad right-of-way - APN: 207-27-25. This item was scheduled for the March 20, 1986, Design Review Committee meeting; due t~ uncontrollable circumstances, the applicant was unable to attend. As a request by the applicant, DR 86-02 has been added to this agenda to avoid any further delays. NF:ko Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENDA April 3, lg86 1. DR 85-52 - A~a Review of outdoor plaza/eating area (Nancy) Committee Action: Approved with conditions that the benches against berm wall be extended at both ends and that small lunch tables be added. 2. DR 85-19 - Forecast Review of change in roof color (John) Committee Action: Approved. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Dino April 3, 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-05 BARTON - The development of a 12,000 square foot restaurant on 12.68 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue - APN 208-35-5 Design ParanN~ters: The proposed project is located at the primary entrance to the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park that has an approved Master Plan. The Master Plan indicates a food park for the project site and the sites directly south of the project site and on the east side of Spruce Avenue. Issues: The proposed site plan differs with the approved Rancho Cucamonga Business Park Master Plan in that the building is located behind a parking area rather than the building being placed at the corner of Foothill and Spruce as shown in the attached Master Plan. The intent of the Master Plan is to create a strong architectural entry statement. Site Plan: 1. Should the project be revised according to the approved Master Plan of the project site by locating the building at the intersection and parking to the south and west? Buildings located at the seback line would provide stronger entry statement and screen parking. c a u lot to the building and connecting public sidewalks to the restaurant. 3. Disperse compact parking spaces throughout parking area, rather than concentrating in one area. Architecture: The elevations appear consistent with the quality desired along Foothill Boulevard. However, the neon signage is not permitted by the Sign Ordinance. Landscaping: The conceptual landscaping meets Industrial Specific Plan requirements. Design Review Committee Co~l~ents Members Present: Dennis Stout, Dan Colemen Staff Planner: Dino Putrino The Committee recommended approval with the following conditions: Site Plan: 1. Continue pedestrian access through second parking bay, on the east side of the proposed restaurant, similar to proposed pedestrian access within the first parking bay. Revised plan shall be submitted for DRC review on Consent Calendar prior to scheduling for Planning Commission. 2. .Provide pedestrian access from the proposed building to Laurel Street. 3. Provide wind screening at restaurant entrance. 4. Provide outdoor seating area (for waiting purposes) at entrance. 5. Develop full planter adjacent to parking area on the west side of site at the limit of construction line. Architecture: 1. Building to be raised 3 to 5 feet to create a greater architectural statement. 2. Architecture meets the quality desired along Foothill. Landscaping: 1. Streetscaping along Foothill and Spruce to be bermed and densely landscaped in order to completel~ screen parking area and all vehicles. - FOOTIfiLL nLVD STATISTICAL SUMMARY I I LA~I[) USE ACRES _~UUrOTAL ......... ":' io3~2 STREETS ( WIT~ npw ) 436 , .......... RANCHO CUCAMONGA BUSINESS PARK A DAON/BARTON DEVELOPMENT · _ l DSCAPE BUFFER , 40' LANDSCAPE BUFFER .,' ;.';.. t I '50' R.O~ ~ 15' kANDSCAPE BUWFER a ' ' WATER CARRYING STREET R~C!-IO CU~ON~ BUSINESS A ~/~ ~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Nancy April 3, 1986 PRELIMINARY REVIEW 85-62 - MESSENGER - A proposed 26 acre master plan for multi-tenant industrial development within the General Industrial/Rail Served District located at the east side of Vineyard Avenue between Arrow Highway and 9th Street. n the site (formerly Wheat Motor Co). North of the site are new condominiums and Bear Gulch Park. West of the site is a multi-tenant industrial development under construction. East of the site is an industrial building. Background: The latest proposed master plan consists of two parcels. Parcel i is of 4.46 acres in size and planned for multi-tenant industrial development. Parcel 2 is approximately 22 acres in size and is planned for a mix of multi-tenant industrial buildings and large speculative industrial buildings with limited rail service. A related parcel map (P.M. 9537) has been submitted for staff review and is pending to be scheduled for Planning Commission review. The applicant initially submitted a Master Plan last September 1985 for review. Both Engineering and Planning staff have, in several occasions, reviewed different concepts of their proposed Master Plan. Staff has pointed out the same design and technical issues such as access/circulation, flood control, rail service, centralized open space/plaza area, site planning, and land use. The applicant, after several attempts, still failed to address the two main issues of: 1) land use and 2) rail service. The purpose of this preliminary review before the Committee is to provide direction to staff and applicant regarding these two main issues. Issues: Land Use: The applicant has designed a product in response to the surrounding land use and their own market study that encourages service, office and retail types of business. Subarea 2 is designated as General Industrial/Rail Served District whose purpose is to strengthen its manufacturing and warehousing activities complemented by rail access. Therefore, the applicants proposal of a multi-tenant industrial park and potential for retail uses does not implement the long range plans for this subarea. Attached for your review are a copy of the permitted and conditional uses allowed within Subarea 2. Rail Service: As mentioned before, the primary function for Subarea 2 is manufacturing and warehousing. Lot divisions and building layouts within Subarea 2 should be done in a manner to insure for full potential future rail access and should not preclude rail access to other properties within the subarea. The proposed design of the master plan with its multi-tenant industrial spec buildings provides for rail service to only one building. Further, the Planning Commission, at the workshops for the Industrial Area Specific Plan revisions, stated that new development within the Rail Served area must be designed to accommodate such services with appropriate site planning and architecture. Non rail-served buildings should be discouraged on property with a potential for rail service. Design Review Committee Comments Members Present: Herman Rempel, Dennis Stout, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Nancy Fong 1. The Committee stated that the conceptual master plan proposed meets the intent of the rail service requirements for the site. 2. The proposed master plan should address the issue of centralized and useable plaza/open space area. 3. The Committee stated that the corner of gth Street and Vineyard Avenue is the gateway to the City and should be enhanced with special landscape treatment, bringing the building forward to the setback area, and designing the buildings that provide an architectural statement. 4. The Committee stated that they could not support a driveway access off a major street {Vineyard Avenue}, as it is inconsistent with the City's access policies and could create traffic hazard due to Vineyard Avenue's high volume traffic. 5. The developer should address the issue of screening loading area from public view for the two large warehouse/manufacturing buildings on 9th Street. 6. The Committee stated that the developer should not design the building with storefront type of architecture that encourages retail, office, and service type of business. FIG. IV-2 a: Z I subarea I subarea 3 A3 CIRCULATION TRAILS/ROUTES 120' R.O.W. O O O O Pedestrian ~***,me Creeks & Channels 1OO' R.O.W. t · · · Bicycle 88' of less R.O.W. ~E~ Regional ~ Multi-Use Park 1 RAIL SERVICE · , , , , , | I Bridge , , , , , Existing I I ~ Special Streetscape/ ,~ ~ Landscaping --t-+++-{-- Proposed Access Points 0 400~ 800~ 1600~ 1The sites shown may not be ctaTently owned nor is the location site speci~c. The depiction of a site is an Note: Parcel lines and lot configurations hdication of a projected future need that may be are shown as approximation only. adjusted over time as the City develops. \ SUBAREA 2 General Plan Designation General Industrial/Rail Served Primary Function This subarea is bounded on the north by Arrow Route, on the east by Hellman Avenue, on the south by AT&SF Railroad, and on the west by Vineyard Avenue. Of the 155 acres in the subarea, approx- imately 60. acres are occupied by existing indust- rial uses, most of which are served by rail. The proposed long-range planforthis subarea is to strengthen its manufacturing and warehousing activi- ties, complemented by rail access. Permitted Uses Building Contractor's Offices and Yards Custom Manufacturing Light Manufacturing Light Wholesale, Storage and Distribution Agricultural Suppties and Services · Eating and Drinking Establishments · Repair Services Conditional Uses ~edium Manufacturing Building Supplies and Sales Business Support Services Convenience Sales and Services Fast Food Food and Beverage Sales Heavy Equipment Sales and Rentals Recreation Facilities Public Safety and Utility Services Access and CirCulation t 100' Right-Of-Way - Arrow L ,4'f ,8. 1,2.1 2't ,8. ,4' Iv-9 March 12, 1986 Mr. Brad Bullet City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 C Baseline Rd. Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 RE: 26 acres - Arrow Route & Vineyard Dear Brad: Thank you for taking the time to meet recently in order to review our proposed development plan. Your comments were well received and we have given them serious consideration. We feel that the plan that we have submitted is a well thought out master plan for our site and that it works to everyone's advantage. Below are, by phase, the thoughts and reasoning that have gone into our plan. phase I Phase I is a multi-tenant industrial park with small ~ree sXan~Ax~ buildings. This product type houses arious li h manufacturing, wholesali ~-- =~n~e. an~ distrib ti Derations ~ servicesUand repair services, all uZ which are consistent'with the industrial specific plan for Sub Area 2. The multi-tenant industrial park has been located fronting on Arrow Route due to Arrow,s higher traffic count, signalized intersection with Vineyard, and its proximity to differing non-commercial uses. Considering its location across from a residential project, Bear Gulch City Park, and Bear Gulch Elementary School, this product type is best suited to create a transition zone for the heavier industrial buildings. 16912-A Von Karman Avenue, Irvine, CA 92714 714/474-1300 Mr. Brad Buller City of Rancho Cucamonga March 12, 1986 Page Two The smaller building product typically generates much lighter truck traffic which is better suited to this environment. These types of buildings in conjunction with the type of traffic typically accessing this development can better utilize the one main "dramatic,, entry and one additional joint use driveway that you are desirous of creating. Keeping in mind the fact that Arrow Route is designated by the Industrial Sepcific Plan as a major pedestrian and bicycle route, we feel larger truck traffic will not be able to utilize this configuration and would also seriously conflict with the other traffic in the area. The architectural relief and heavy landscaping of these high identity buildings will create a significant streetscape along Arrow Route that will best tie in with adjacent uses and improve the overall "feel" of Arrow Route. Phase II Phase II consists of two large manufacturing/distribu_ tion and warehousing facilities. These buildings have been located in Phase II for many reasons, primarily in order to preserve and utilize the opportunity for rail service, as specified in the Industrial Specific Plan. This layout not only preserves the existing rail spur serving the Wheat Motor Company facility, but also creates additional rail service. Because of the existing topography of the site, these buildings will be at a lower elevation so that they will not impose on the overall skyline of the area. They take advantage of the existing slope conditions and will be heavily bermed around the north end of the buildings. These buildings are very flexible in nature and can accomodate a mixture of medium size and/or large users. The use of multiple entry state- ments on the buildings will provide for more architec- tural treatment and common "people,, type spaces. This location for these buildings will provide the safest access for large trucks. All the heavy truck MESSENGER INVESTMENT COMPANY Mr. Brad Buller Rancho Cucamonga March 12, 1986 Page Three traffic will enter and exit via 9th Street, a much less travelled industrial-type street. Trucks leaving this phase of the project would need only to turn right on 9th Street and then, left at the new signal on Vineyard in order to travel towards the ariport. The trucks would only have to cross on-coming traffic once and that will occur at 9th and Vineyard. This is a benefit because 9th Street has a much lighter volume than does Vineyard. This layout also best suits your desire for limited curb cuts along 9th Street in that these building function very well with one major joint use access point. Phase III Phase III has been designed in order to buffer the heavier industrial rail served uses from the Vineyard Avenue frontage. These buildings will be an industrial park type product that will mix well with other product along 9th Street and, being located on the corner, will be an excellent window to the City of Rancho Cucamonga when entering the city travelling north on Vineyard. This product type will also house various light manufac- turing, wholesaling, storage, and distribution opera- tions as well as business support services, convenience services, and repair services which are all permitted and desired uses as specified by the Industrial Specific Plan for Sub Area 2. With regard to access off of Vineyard, we are willing to drop one of the existing curb cuts from the Wheat Motor Company facility in order to provide for a "plaza type" joint use entry statement for the industrial park. This would work very well in conjunction with the joint use driveway you are desirous of in Phase II along 9th Street. If we were to move a curb cut down from the Wheat facility in order to serve the new development, we would then provide for the bus stop turn- in that you desire on Arrow. This will be the last portion of the project to be constructed and will be consistent in timing with the future signalization of the 9th Street and Vineyard intersection. MESSENGER INVESTMENT COMPANY Mr. Brad Bullet City of Rancho Cucamonga March 12, 1986 Page Four Brad, your suggestions for changes to the site plan have been thoroughly considered and we feel the large distribution buildings will not be a good use if located up on Arrow Route due to the type of traffic generated and the adjacent land uses. The truck traffic would interfere severely with the more residential type traffic being generated from the school, the park and the apartment development. The large truck traffic would not function well with the joint use driveway access that you have in mind, nor would it be able to effectively make use of the plaza type entry located on Arrow. Additionally, large truck traffic leaving the site would have to cross on-coming traffic twice in order to travel southbound on Vineyard'from Phase I. The primary concerns with regard to this larger truck traffic are the number of trips that would be generated, as well as the turning radius required by the truck and trailer rigs. We feel this would pose a serious health and safety risk for traffic along Arrow Route. This would be detrimental to the overall safety for the residential and park/ school traffic traveling this portion of Arrow Route. Additionally, there is a much greater volume of east- bound traffic crossing Vineyard on Arrow which will conflict with large trucks turning left from Arrow onto Vineyard. The existing building (Wheat Motor company) at the southeast corner of Arrow and Vineyard is a good example. Although this building fronts on Arrow, its large truck access is off Vineyard. Our plan would therefore be consistent with this existing situation by encouraging only the lighter small truck, van, and automobile traffic to enter and exit this phase of the project on Arrow Route. A large facility built on Phase I of our project will not be able to be rail served due to the topography of the site. It would require that we construct an additional rail spur to the north of the existing and there is not enough land area for this spur radius. If this were to be attempted it would leave only the west MESSENGER INVESTMENT COMPANy Mr. Brad Buller City of Rancho Cucamonga March 12, 1986 Page Five most corner of the building able to be rail accessed. This is the area in which you suggested an L-shaped building. This would not be feasible because any tenant that is using rail service would need to be capable of loading directly across from the rail doors to the truck doors. An L-shaped loading pattern, or a distance of more than 200 lineal feet, is not feasible. This building would also have a very high clearance height and would not show .well from Arrow Route For the above reasons we feel we have submitted an excellent plan. If you should disagree with the overall plan we would appreciate a written response stating those areas which you feel should be changed and the reasons why. Thank you for spending the time to consider further our ideas for the project and we look forward to continued high quality development in association with you and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Yt Jo · Aschieris Project Manager JEA/cl MESSENGER INVESTMENT COMPANY DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Dino April 3, 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-02 DARLING The development of a 189,640 square foot warehouse addition to an existing warehouse building on 11.74 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 1) District located on the east side of Baker Avenue and the north side of the AT & SF Railroad right-of-way - APN: 207-27-25. t ni Shoes. The properties to the north and east are vacant industrially zoned lots. South of the project site is the AT & SF Railroad right-of-way, and on the west side of the site, across Baker Avenue, are single-family homes. The northwest corner of the project site abutts two non-conforming single- family residences. It is important that a reasonable buffer be created at the boundary line between the residential uses and the project site. Staff Co~m~ents: Site Plan: 1. Provide for open spaces equiped with benches or other furniture, to create an outdoor eating plaza. 2. Provide a 10 foot landscape buffer along the north/south property lines between the project site (northwest corner) and the adjacent residential lot. Architecture: 1. Provide tJq>ical concrete fin walls along the projects south elevation, similar to the north elevation design, to break-up the long expanses of blank wall. 2. Create a stronger architectural statement along the Baker Avenue and Feron Boulevard building elevations. 3. Provide architectural variation in order to break up the long expanses of blank wall. 4. The proposed orange building accent band color is too intense. A subtle color should be used. 5. Change accent band directions in various locations around the proposed and existing buildings. Landscaping: Provide a continuous and dense landscaping, such as increased number of trees, specimen size trees and hedgerow, along the south property line at the truck parking area with shrubs and ground Cover. Design Review Con~nittee Action: Members Present: Herman Rempel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Dino Putrino Site Plan: 1. Designate a pedestrian plaza area, approximately 600 square feet, near office and provide enlarged detail indicating treatment (i.e., furniture trellis, texturized pavement). Architecture: 1. Strong architectual office entry statement be provided. 2. Reduce architectural lines and treatment along south building elevation to avoid monotony. 3. Tone down the proposed orange color band. 4. Provide alternative colors. Landscaping: 1. Densely plant trees along south property line for the entire length of the proposed and existing building. 2. Create pocket landscape areas along the south building elevation of the proposed addition.