Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985/02/21 - Agenda PacketDATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CU'~AMONGA MEMORANDUM January 29, 1985 Design Review Committee 1977 Herman Rempel Rick Gomez Dennis Stout Suzanne Chitlea (Alternate) Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1985 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 appropri ate project manager, 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 Howard DR 85-02 - PEP BOYS 6:30 - 7:00 Curt TT 12544 - LYON 7:00 - 7:30 Curt TT 12673 - LEWIS 7:30 - 8:00 Curt CUP 84-20 - NATIONAL 8:00 - 8:30 Nancy DR 84-46 - FLAHERTY NF:cv Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council Dan Coleman, Planning Division Joe Stofa, Paul Rogeau, Paul Quintana, Barrye Hanson Bob Akridge Y DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CL~MONGA STAFF REPORT February 25, 1985 CO)(4ITTEE ACTION Design Review Committee 1977 Herman Rempel Rick Gomez Dennis Stout Suzanne Chitiea (Alternate) Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1985 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, 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 Howard DR 85-02 - PEP BOYS 6:30 - 7:00 Curt TT 12544 - LYON 7:00 - 7:30 Curt TT 12673 - LEWIS 7:30 - 8:00 Curt CUP 84-20 - NATIONAL 8~00 - 8e~O Naney 9R 84-46 .... FLAH~RT¥ Cancelled NF:cv Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council Dan Coleman, Planning Division Joe Stofa, Paul Rogeau, Paul Quintana, Barrye Hanson Bob Akridge DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Howard February 21, 1985 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DR 85-02 - PEP BOYS - To allow the development of a retail automotive sales/service department of 21,828 square feet located on the north/west corner of Hellman Avenue and Foothill Boulevard on approximately 1.97 acres, within the General Commercial District - APN 208-632-046. Background: In June 1984, project proponents submitted a similar project diagonally across from the new proposed site. Due to site development problems and constraints inherent with the original site (southeast corner of Hellman and Foothill), the proponents withdrew their development request. Design Parameters: The subject site is a vacant corner lot with a slight slope of 2% from north to south. The majority of land to the west is vacant with the exception of Lucas Realty Company, and a single-family residential subdivision is directly adjacent to the north. Since the General Plan identifies Foothill Boulevard as a major arterial/Special Boulevard, special consideration should be given to building form, streetscape/landscaping treatment, and appropriatness with surrounding development. Staff Comments Site Plan: Staff recommends the following revisions to the site plan: Realign proposed driveway approach toward the westerly corner of building allowing for straight and safe ingress/egress. This realignment would also provide access to westerly adjacent lot, (reciprocal easement). Applicant should provide a master plan of the entire site including parcels westerly to Lion Street. This would allow full intergration of any future developments by offering internal circulation easement/solutions, thereby limiting the number of access points off of Foothill Boulevard. Architecture: The following revisions would enhance design elevations: 1. Center proposed front entrance for uniformity. 2. Break-up and adjust roof-lines to create different planes. 3. Eliminate clear glass. Provide view obstructing glass, elevated glass panels or false windows. 4. Need for greater relief on west and east elevations, bring columns out at least 14". Landscaping: Foothill Boulevard needs special landscaping treatment due to its special designation. Therefore, the following changes are recommended: Provide landscaping planter along building frontage adjacent to sidewalk of at least 5'. In addition, increase landscaped area along west and east elevations by 10' or 5' minimum. Provide retaining wall at property line and back-fill and level existing slope, or applicant enters into an agreement to landscape and maintain the slope along northerly property line. Adjust location of proposed monument sign to safer position. The height and area of proposed sign (4' x 9') may cause horizontal sight-distance problems for motorists exiting Hellman Avenue. 4. Special landscaping treatment along Foothill Boulevard frontage. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Howard Fields DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Curt February 21, 1985 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR VICTORIA GROVES VILLAGE The approval of a conceptual area development plan for Victoria Groves Village, a 154 acre portion of the Victoria Planned Community, located on the west side of Milliken Avenue, south of Highland Avenue and north of the Pacific Electric Railroad tracts - APN 202-211-8, 12, 13, 34. Design Parameters: Tentative Tract 12544 - Lyon, was previously submitted on this property in January, 1984. The Planning Commission reviewed the project during regular meetings and had a special workshop in June. At that time the Commission had a number of substantial design comments concerning the trail system, Victoria Park Lane, the street right-of-ways, land use, and grading. Minutes from the Planning Commission workshop are attached for your review. Tract 12544 has been inactive since June and the applicant has agreed to withdraw the Tract Map application, but proceed with the approval of an area development plan for Victoria Groves Village. The area development plan is intended to address major issues such as: variation of lot sizes and product types; location and scale of greenway trails; basic grading concepts; and conceptual street layouts. During review of individual tract maps a greater level of detail will be provided. Staff Comments Land Use: Of the estimated 858 lots, 86 will be a minimum 7,200 square feet, 390 lots will be in the 4,000 to 5,000 square foot range, and 382 lots will have a minimum size of 3,000 square feet. Six various unit types are proposed including: duplex and zero lot line units on the 3,000 square foot lots; zero lot line and center plot units with attached and detached garages on the 4,000 square foot lots; and, center plot units on the 4,500 square foot lots, 5,000 square foot lots, and 7,200 square foot lots. Although a variety of lot sizes are indicated, consider increasing the number of 7,200 square foot lots to provide a better balance of significantly different unit types. The duplex units proposed are intermixed with detached units. The introduction of three-plex and four-plex units similar to the product type currently being processed in Victoria Windrows Village, (Tentative Tracts 12832 and 12833), is suggested. The Victoria Land Use Plan indicates a shopping center within the Groves Village at the southwest corner of Highland and Milliken. The applicant is proposing that the village be moved across the street to the southeast corner of Highland and Milliken. If the land use change occurs, the density range must be established for the site currently designated Commercial. The density proposed by the applicant is Medium-High (14-24 du/ac). In keeping with the Commission's concern for providing a variety of product types and a proper density transition from the adjacent 3,000 and 4,000 square foot lots, the Committee may want to recommend a lower density to accommodate townhouses or condominiums at approximately 12 units per acre. Trails/Victoria Park Lane: At the workshop the Commission indicated the greenways/passeos shall have a dimension of approximately 50 to 60 feet in width, and include jogging trails, bicycle paths, and sidewalks. A greenway should be provided to divide land use densities and product types near the south boundary, between the 5,000 square foot lots and 7,200 square foot lots. 2. The average width of the trails seems adequate, but separated bicycle and pedestrian paths should be provided. A large portion of the east/west greenways are taken up by slopes varying in grade from: 2:1 to 10:1. To maximize the useful area of the trails and reduce maintenance costs flat areas should be expanded with the use of 2:1 slopes and/or low level retaining walls. While the overall right-of-way width of Victoria Park Lane appears adequate, the boundaries must be flared out at the intersection of Milliken Avenue to provide a large open space as required by the Planned Community text, (Page 135). In addition, the configuration of the median should be adjusted as per the design solution between tracts 12832 and 12833 in Victoria Windrows Village. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Curt Johnston DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Curt February 21, 1985 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 12673 - WESTERN PROPERTIES - A development of 406 apartment units on 22 acres of land within the Terra Vista Planned Community, designated Medium Residential (4-14 du/ac), located at the northeast corner of Church Street and Terra Vista Parkway - APN 1077- 091-06, 07 and 1077-421-04, 06. Design Perimeters The subject site is located east of Haven on the north side of the Church Street extension. The project site abutts a future junior high school on the north, and future park to the east. The site plan is divided into two phases; family apartments to the north, and adult apartments to the southeast. The overall density of the project is approximately 18.5 units per acre. Greenway trails abutt the project along Church Street and Elm Avenue. The architectural designs proposed are for the most part identical to previously approved elevations. (Tentative Tracts 12402 and 12365.) Staff Comnents Site Plan: The site plan combines a good mix of consolidated open space areas and smaller recreation areas between buildings which include shade structures and barbecues. To achieve this, buildings are grouped around interior open space areas and located at the 25' minimum setback from the perimeter streets. Consider ways to improve the perimeter streetscape, particularly in Phase A, along Terra Vista Parkway and Church Street, such as increasing the building separation and angling buildings to the street. The pedestrian orientation to the adjacent park and school site should be improved by providing a substantial pedestrian link from the major open space areas in each phase. In addition, consider the use of wrought iron versus a block wall along the north and east boundaries of the project. Provide pedestrian trail linkages within the project between the various open space areas and greenway trails along Church Street and Elm Avenue. To help delineate the pathways, texturized crosswalks should be provided at parking lot crossings. In addition, the design of the sidewalks throughout the project should meander through open space areas. Architecture: As mentioned previously, the architecture of this project is identical to elevations previously approved in two Terra Vista projects at the northeast corner and southeast corner of Spruce Avenue and Terra Vista Parkway. Concentration of a large number (830) of units with the same design will appear monotonous and unattractive. Therefore, Staff recommends that the applicant be directed to submit a new architectural program. In the event the committee determines that a new architectural product is unwarranted, Staff has provided the following comments: Provide shake or tile roof material versus composition shingle as proposed, since the roof massing is a dominant feature of the architecture. The detailing on the roof dormers and variation of the eave line is dwarfed by the massive roof structure. Enlarging the dormers, (as on the side elevation of unit D), and providing greater relief to the eaveline is recommended. The window treatment, particularly on the side elevations of units C and D, is minimal and detracts from the architecture. Staff suggests that the exterior wall plane at the windows be inset or popped out and horizontal siding be provided. The front entry treatment on units E and F should be given greater identity with an enhanced porch treatment. Regarding the roof structure, a more symetrical approach to the alternating upper story window treatment on the six unit building is recommended. In addition, exagerating the size of the dutch gable on the side elevations will provide greater relief to the roof structure. Does the Committee feel that the mix of townhouses (Units E and F), and the stacked flats (Units A thru D), detract from the project? Should the building architecture of the two product types be more closely related with the addition of patio walls on the E and F units, and/or horizontal siding on the upper stories of units A thru D. Design Review Committee Action Members Present: Staff Planner: Curt Johnston DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Curt February 21, 1985 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-20 - NATIONAL - The establishment of a 7,135 square foot day care facility for 140 students on 1.4 acres of land in the OP District (Office/Professional), located on the south side of Base Line Road, approximately 200 feet east of Amethyst - APN 208-541- 01. Design Parameters This project was previously reviewed by the Design Review Committee in November 1984. Since that time, the building elevations have been totally revised and the site plan adjusted. Staff Co~nents Site Plan: The Committee was previously concerned with turning the building 90 degress on axis to improve circulation, expanding the playground area, providing a block wall along all interior property lines, and raising the building pad 2 to 3 feet higher in relation to the street. Although the site plan has been revised, only the block wall around the interior of the property has been provided as per the previous Design Review Committee comments. The revised site plan provides significantly better circulation than the previous layout. However, rotating the building 90 degrees would improve parking lot circulation, relationship of the classroom entries to the playground, and enhance the large gable windows on the building with better solar orientation and views to the mountains. In conjunction with this, the floor plan could be reversed so the current front (north) elevation faces the parking lot. This will improve the orientation of the courtyard area to the parking lot. As per the previous Design Review Committee comment, the playground area must still be enlarged. This can be easily accomplished with rotatin9 the buildin9. The building pad should be raised approximately 2 to 3 feet. Again, rotating the building can improve grading, since the longer side of the building will not be working against the existing grade. Should the Committee determine that the site plan as proposed is adequate, additional landscaping and tree wells should be provided between the east side of the building in the parking lot. In addition, to improve circulation entering the site, the curb radius at the southwest corner of the drive approach should be increased. Architecture: 1. Increase the proportion of the roof structure to the overall height of the building. 2. Provide more massive overhead trellis work and extend the beams into the courtyard. The front window treatment on the northerly classroom appears awkward. Consider a full width pop out window with a stucco finish. In addition, a consistent treatment on all windows facing the street or parking lot should be provided with raised planters or pop-outs. 4. The Committee should review the color of the aluminum roofing to be presented at the meeting. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Curt Johnston DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 - 8:30 Nancy February 21, 1985 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-46 FLAHERTY The development of a 6,000 square foot restaurant on 1.1 acres of land in the Commercial District (Subarea 7) of the Industrial Specific Plan and Haven Avenue Overlay District located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Highway. Design Parameters The proposed restaurant is located on Haven Avenue (adjacent to K-Mart) and is subject to the Development Guidelines of Haven Avenue Overlay District. This project had been reviewed by Design Review Committee twice, due to the fact the proposed elevations do not comply with the Haven Avenue Overlay District. The developer has finalized his redesign of the elevations based on the recommendations of the Design Review Committee. Design Review Committee Action of November 1, 1984 The Design Review Committee reviewed this project and stated that the proposed style of architecture is inappropriate based on Interim Development Goals and Policies of Haven Avenue. The Design Review Committee also stated that developments along Haven Avenue should exhibit the highest design quality and should project a more progressive, sophisticated or urban style in architecture. Traditional sytles of architecture with low profile, linear buildings are inappropriate and are discouraged. Design Review Co.m~ittee Action of December 13, 1984 The Design Review Committee tabled this project because of last minute changes to the architecture proposed by the developer. The Design Review Committee stated that the developer should work with staff to develop the final design prior to submitting for Committee review. Staff Comments on the Revised Plans Site Plan: The overall site plan with its building orientation, location of parking areas, and the expanded plaza area comply with the Development Policies of Haven Avenue. However, the design of the plaza area should be enhanced through providing for more pedestrian oriented facilities such as: shaded seating area with attractive landscaping, fountains, public art and/or kiosks, benches, trash receptacles and other street furniture. Also, adequate screening of the storage and loading areas from the public view should be provided. Architecture: The overall elevation for this project could be enhanced to reflect a more sophisticated style of architecture through: 1. Changing the proposed brick veneer to split-face block for providing material compatibility to the entire commerical area. Adding more interest to the space between the two roof lines by providing a focal point such as Kiosks, fountains, etc., at the plaza area. Continuing the same architectural detail that is provided underneath the arch (the one on top of the roof) throughout the elevations. Landscaping: A more unifying theme that ties in with the entire area should be provided through extensive mounding and landscaping along Haven Avenue and Arrow Highway and special landscape treatment with specimen and accent trees around the building to compliment the architecture. Design Review Committee Action Members Present: Staff Planner: Nancy Fong Review Committee Design "~ Review Committee Date: 2-' ~0 -~ ~ ~)~ 2 3 4 5 6 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS Nancy February 21, 1985 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12851 - BOWDEN - A residential subdivision of 8 single family custom lots on 2.38 acres of land in the Low Medium Residential District (4-8 du/ac) located at the south side of Wilson Avenue, east of Mayberry Avenue - APN 201-181-59. Design Parameters The proposed subdivision is an in-fill development. Both the project site and the adjacent three sides are vacant and slopes southwesterly at approximately 6%. The net density is 4 du/ac and therefore the subdivision is designed under the basic standards. Staff Co~ents Site Plan: The proposed design of the subdivision complies with the basic development standards. The proposed density complies with the intent of neighborhood compatibility in proper transition of density. Circulation: The project site and the surrounding area are within the Master Plan Overlay District. Since some of the parcels are large with existing single family homes as well as parcels that are landlocked, the Engineering Division has developed a conceptual master plan on circulation for the entire area as shown on attachment "A". The proposed subdivision complies with the City's conceptual Master Plan on circulation. Architecture: Any proposed future elevations for this development would require Design Review Committee review and approval prior to recordation of the tract map. The reasons are: to ensure neighborhood compatibility in areas of architecture, color, materials and roof line; to ensure the grading of each lot compliments the projects orientation, scale, height and design, and to blend in with the existing terrain. Design Review Co~mnittee Action Members Present: Staff Planner: Nancy Fong