HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/01/17 - Agenda PacketDATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
January 23, 1991
ACTION COMMENTS
1977
Commercial/Industrial
Design Review Committee
Suzanne Chitlea
Peter Tolstoy
Otto Kroutil
John Melcher (Alternate)
Scott Murphy, Associate Planner~/~
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF JANUARY 17, 1991
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 6:00 p.m., Consent Calendar items will be
reviewed between 6:00 p.m. 6:30 p.m., with the first design review
item being heard at 6:30 p.m. Please notify our department i f 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.
6:30 - 7:00
(Jerry)
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-18 -
BOOTH - A request to establish a building contractor's
office and storage yard totaling 6,556 square feet on
1.35 acres of land in the General Industrial District
(Subarea 13) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at
9037 Charles Smith Avenue, north of 6th Street
APN: 229-271-41.
7:00 - 7:30
(Tom)
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-04 -
ARCHITECTURE ONE - The development of a 4,000 square
foot bank building on 0.42 acres of land within an
existing shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial
District, located at the northwest corner of 19th Street
and Carnelian Avenue - APN: 201-311-57 and 58.
DRC AGENDA
JANUARY 17, 1991
Page 2
7:30 -
(Miki)
PLANNING
PLAN
COMMISSION WORKSHOP
- ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC
SM:mlg
Attachments
cc: Planning Commission/City Council
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:30 - 7:00 Jerry
January 17, 1991
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-18 BOOTH A
request to establish a building contractor's office and storage yard
totaling 6,556 square feet on 1.35 acres of land in the General
Industrial District (Subarea 13) of the Industrial Specific Plan,
located at 9037 Charles Smith Avenue, north of 6th Street
APN: 229-271-41.
General:
The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,400 square foot, 2-story
office building and 2 warehouse/storage buildings totaling approximately
6,000 square feet. The site is boarded on the east by the 1-15 freeway,
on the west by Charles Smith Avenue (formerly Old Rochester Avenue), on
the south by vineyards and on the north by a Metropolitan Water District
easement. The site will be enclosed on the north, west and south by an
8 foot high brick and plaster fence. An existing 6 foot chain link
fence is proposed to remain on the east property line, adjacent to the
1-15 right-of-way.
Staff Comments:
1. Provide a material sample board showing type, texture and color of
all exterior materials.
2. The second-story overhangs, balcony and pop-out windows appear to
lack support; corbels or other similar elements should be added
below these projections.
3. A section detail should be provided to show how the rear side of
the mansard roof on the warehouse building will be finished. Some
type of finished inside edge is needed as this may be visible from
the 1-15 freeway.
4. If the applicant intends to place any signage on the site, a
conceptual sign program should be submitted for Design Review
Committee review.
Desiqn Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Peter Tolstoy, Brad Buller
Staff Planner: Jerry Guarracino
The Design Review Committee reviewed the
approval subject to the following conditions:
project
and recommended
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 89-18 - BOOTH
JANUARY 17, 1991
Page 2
Elevations:
1. Extend the brick pop-out on the second floor east elevation down to
the ground and center the doors within this popped-out area.
2. Provide a control screed at the base of the facia to ensure a crisp
break between colors.
3. An alternative facia color should be submitted for Design Review
Committee approval. A more subtle color is suggested.
4 The west elevation of the warehouse building should be revised to
combine the mass of the two pop-outs into one pop-out with a
pedestrian entrance.
Wall Design:
1. A raised column cap should be provided at least at the corners of
the site and on each side of the gated entrance.
2. The metal gate design should be called out on the plans and should
match the gates used on the Coca Cola plant at Haven Avenue and
6th Street or the Edison gates on Archibald Avenue between Hillside
and Wilson.
3. Vines should be planted along the perimeter wall to discourage
graffiti.
4. A lighted address sign should be provided on the entry wall.
Site Design:
1. Provide a cross-section through the warehouse building to the
freeway.
2. Provide evidence of fee ownership of the Metropolitan Water
District easement north of the site. If this area is owned by the
applicant, trail improvements consistent with City standards should
be required.
3. Provide the following note on the plans: "No roof-mounted
equipment shall be proposed unless a separate Design Review
approval is obtained and adequate screening is provided to shield
the equipment from view of the freeway or the equipment shall be
ground-mounted and screened to the satisfaction of the City
Planner."
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 - 7:30 Tom
January 17, 1991
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-04 - ARCHITECTURE ONE
- The development of a 4,000 square foot bank building on 0.42 acres of
land within an existing shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial
District, located at the northwest corner of 19th Street and Carnelian
Avenue - APN: 201-311-57 and 58.
Backqround:
The applicant is proposing to remove an existing temporary Pomona First
Federal Savings and Loan facility, including a drive-thru lane and
parking lot, and construct a new two-story banking facility. The new
building would be located on the north half of the 0.42 acre site
fronting Carnelian Avenue. The existing building area on the south
portion of the site would be converted into a parking lot. The
existing, temporary building emulates the surrounding shopping center in
materials, colors and design. The applicant's intent is to repeat this
concept with some upgraded variations in detail and massing for the
proposed architecture.
On November 29, 1990, the Design Review Committee (Chitiea, Tolstoy and
Kroutil) request that the applicant revise and resubmit plans to the
Committee for review addressing the following:
1. Generally, the building elevations need to be modified to fit in
with the existing center yet provide an upgraded appearance from
the center.
2. The concept of using various design elements from other buildings
around town should not be pursued. Certain concepts may be
borrowed, however, they must be used in a way which would unify the
building elements.
3. The proportions of the building need to be studied. For example,
the second-story of the building still appears heavy in relation to
the whole building.
4. Greater unity could be provided to the building facade by using
rafter tails at all the roof eaves.
5. The arched windows should be deleted at the second-story and the
walls should be architecturally upgraded with some other elements
consistent with the overall design.
6. The facade at the automatic teller should be architecturally
upgraded.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 89-04 - ARCHITECTURE ONE
jANUARY 17, 1991
Page 2
7. The blue tile accent should not be used. The Committee considered
the use of rock on the building. It was felt, however, that the
use of rock would not help to unify the building with the center.
8. The tower should appear as a more integral part of the building.
The Committee suggested that the tower could be removed to help the
building better fit in with the center and lighten the mass of the
second-story.
9. The building entrances should be upgraded for pedestrian
orientation with interlocking pavers, raised planters, tree wells
and benches.
10. A strong entry statement should be provided at the driveways
through the use of plant material and other design elements such as
interlocking pavers.
11. Construction details such as the column treatment and recessed
window units should be provided. These elements should be designed
and located on the building in a manner which provides a strong
unifying theme with the center and for the building.
Staff Coa~aents:
Staff's review of the revised plans indicates that the new building
elevations and site plan address the Committee's requests from the
November 29, 1990 meeting. There are, however, several areas that
should be reviewed by the Committee:
The walls of the second-story receive enough architectural detail.
The buildings signs are proportional and fit in with the building.
Interlocking pavers, raised planters, tree wells and benches be
shown on the plans at the building entrances.
4. A strong entry statement be provided at the driveways through the
use of plant material and other design elements such as
interlocking pavers.
Oesiqn Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy, Otto Kroutil
Staff Planner: Tom Grahn
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
DR 89-04 - ARCHITECTURE ONE
JANUARY 17, 1991
Page 3
The Committee reviewed the project and
the following:
recommended approval subject to
To create a strong entry statement, interlocking pavers should be
provided at both driveways off Carnelian. Interlocking pavers
should extend from the Carnelian rights-of-way to the end of
adjacent planter areas. Interlocking paver color should match the
roof tile color and pedestrian circulation interlocking pavers.
The applicant should submit construction details identifying beam
sizes, overhead wall thickness, rafter tails, etc., for staff
review and approval prior to scheduling for Planning Commission
consideration.