Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/11/21 - Agenda PacketDATE: CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM December 3, 1991 ACTION CO~]TS TO: ~ercial/Industrial Design Review Committee Larry McNiel Suzanne Chitiea Otto Kroutil John Melcher (Alternate) FROM: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner ~ SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 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 - 5:45 p.m., Consent Calendar items will be reviewed between 5:45 p.m. 6:30 p.m., with the first design review item being heard at 6:30 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. 6:30 - 7:00 (Scott) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-20 - SHELL OIL - A request to establish a gas station, mini-market, and car wash on a 1.08 acre parcel in the Medium Residential designation (8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151-27. 7:00 - 7:30 (Steve H..) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14405 - HU - A residential subdivision for the future development of 20 single family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential development district (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of San Bernardino Road, east of Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-091-08. Related File: Variance 91-11. DRC AGENDA NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Page 2 7:30 - 8:00 (Anna-Lisa) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 91-08 - CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES - The development of a 51.93 acre industrial master plan consisting of 30 industrial buildings totaling 703,193 square feet, located in the General Industrial and Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial Districts (Subareas 8 and 9), located on the south side of Arrow Route, west of White Oak Avenue - APN: 209-142-06. SM:mlg Attachments cc: Planning Commission/City Council DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Scott November 21, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-20 - SHELL OIL - A request to establish a gas station, mini-market, and car wash on a 1.08 acre parcel in the Medium Residential designation (8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-151- 27. Background: On September 5, 1991, the Design Review Committee (Chitiea, Melcher, Kroutil) reviewed the project and recommended that the plans be revised to address the following comments: Architecture: 1. The canopy columns seem out of proportion. The gable, pop-out, roof elements appear unfinished and should be redesigned to provide a more integrated roof design. The storefront elevation should be redesigned to eliminate the glass at the bottom portion of the elevation to screen merchandise that may be stacked against the window. A sturdier material (i.e. ceramic tile) should be used at the base of the columns to minimize damage. The building should be designed with a sufficient roof overhang to prevent water from running down the building side and staining the walls. Site Plan: The property line at the southeast corner of the site should relate to the driveway location. It does not seem appropriate to cross over property not owned by the applicant to access the project. Some concern was expressed about the 3-car stacking for each pump island. The location Of the parking spaces adjacent to the residential area might create problems with noise, trash, etc. Concern was expressed about the visibility of the air/water stand from the cashier's window. Clear visibility should be maintained for security and safety of the patrons. DESIGN REVIEW CO~Z4ENTS CUP 91-20 - SHELL OIL NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Page 2 In addition to the architecture and site plan con~nents, the Co~unittee expressed serious reservations abut locating the service station at this location because of the proximity for future residential projects. The Committee felt there will be on-going conflicts between the two issues. Because of the concerns expressed by the Design Review Committee about potential land use conflicts, this project was referred to the Planning Commission to discuss the compatibility of the service station with the surrounding residential properties. On October 9, 1991, a majority of the Commission felt that the service station might work at this location provided the following issues were addressed in revised plans: Greater buffering and separation should be provided along the south and west site boundaries. A majority of the buffering should be provided on the service station site. 2. The mini-market should be deleted. The property boundaries/lot lines should be adjusted to include all improvements necessary for the service station operation (i.e. driveway, walls, landscaping, etc.). The Planning Commission hearing was then continued to December 11, 1991 to allow the applicant to revise the plans and have them reviewed by the Design Review Committee. Staff Comments: At the time these comments were prepared, revised plans had not yet been received by staff. The comments are based on verbal communication between staff and the applicant. AS plans are received and reviewed, additional comments will be sent to the Committee (if substantially different) or the Co~unittee will be updated at the meeting. The applicant is proposing to provide berming to increase the wall height along the south and west boundaries. No additional landscape area is being proposed. 2. The applicant wishes to pursue the inclusion of the mini-market. The applicant is working with the property owner on including the Rochester driveway area within the site boundaries. The applicant has not addressed the previous architectural comments because the applicant feels, and staff agrees, that if the use conflict issues can not be resolved, there is no point in revising DESIGN REVIEW CO~4ENTS CUP 91-20 - SHELL OIL NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Page 3 the elevations. If the Planning Commission determines that the service station use has been adequately addressed, the applicant will revise the architectural plans for Design Review Committee Review. Design Review Comm{ttee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Suzanne Chitiea, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Scott Murphy The Committee reviewed the revised plans and recommended that changes be incorporated into the plans to address the following: A minimum 5-foot (free and clear) landscape area should be provided along the south and west boundaries. Additionally, assurances should be provided by the adjacent property owner that additional landscaping will be provided with the residential project to create a substantial buffer between the two projects. A minimum combined landscape area of 35 feet should be explored. The air and water stand should be relocated from the south boundary to the eastern portion of the site to minimize noise nuisances adjacent to the residential area. The Committee was not concerned with the inclusion of the mini-market because these have become standard items with service stations. The plans should be resubmitted for additional Design Review Committee review prior to the Planning Commission meeting of December l~, 1991. DESIGN REVIEW COM~MENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Steve H. November 21, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14405 - HU - A residential subdivision for the future development of 20 single family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential development district (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of San Bernardino Road, east of Vineyard Avenue APN: 208-091-08. Related File: Variance 91-11. Design Parameters: The 4.39 net acre vacant parcel is on the north side of San Bernardino Road directly across from the eastern portion of the Thomas Winery Plaza. Given that this shopping center has two driveways directly across the proposed subdivisions frontage, the tentative tract has been designed to have its access point "line up" as close as possible with one of the driveways for the Thomas Winery. Dubonnet Drive, which is currently a barricaded stub street through Tract 9602 to the east, is proposed to be continued to its intersection with Street "A", to satisfy the Fire District requirement for two points of access through the project. Lots 17 through 20 will have access to Street "A" so that no additional driveways will be required on San Bernardino Road, which is a secondary/collector street. South of lot 1 a remnant piece of property is proposed to be landscaped and dedicated to and maintained by the City. At the time that the adjacent office parcel to the west develops, n~intenance will be the responsibility of the property owner of the office parcel. This project is for the subdivision of land only at this time; a future design review application or custom lot residences will be processed in the future. Lot sizes range from 5,000 to 12,757 square feet with an average lot size of 6,706 square feet. In conjunction with the tentative tract map, a Variance is being processed for a reduction in lot depth for lot 7 from 90 feet to 59 feet, as defined by the method of measurement within the Development Code. The site slopes from northwest to contains no vegetation subject Ordinance. southeast at roughly 6 percent and to the City's Tree Preservation Background: The project application was initially submitted to City staff on July 18, 1989. On May 15, 1990, following several submittals of the subdivision layout, the Planning and Engineering Divisions and Fire District met to determine the necessity for two means of access for this project. The layout (street configuration and access locations) as currently proposed is essentially identical to the configuration generated by staff. DESIGN REVIEW CO~4ENTS TT 14405 - HU NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Page 2 A neighborhood meeting was held On October 28, 1991 to allow adjacent property owners to express their opinion of the proposed tentative tract map. No significant concerns related to the subdivision were raised by the neighbors. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion: Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Site Plan: Again, the proposed circulation pattern and access locations were generated from a joint meeting between the Fire District and the Planning and Engineering Divisions. The Committee should determine if the proposed lot configurations are acceptable given the constraints of the circulation pattern. Grading: The current version of the grading plan indicates a fairly close balance between cut and fill quantities. By doing this, the street and consequently the conceptual pad elevations for lots 9 through 16 are significantly higher (up to 8 feet) than those of adjacent single story residences immediately east of the site. Therefore, the Committee should consider if the grading scheme needs to be modified to lower the street level and conceptual pad elevations. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Perimeter wall and San Bernardino Road and Lot "A" landscape designs are required to be reviewed by the Committee. The wall should be of a decorative material and include plane variations, offsets for planter pockets, pilasters, etc. along the San Bernardino Road frontage. Design Review Committee ACtion: Men~bers Present: Larry McNiel, Suzanne Chitiea, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Steve Hayes DESIGN REVIEW C0~4ENTS TT 14405 - HU NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Page 3 The Committee recommended that the applicant submit a total development package for the project, which will then be processed concurrently with the tentative map. The Committee recommended this action due to a number of concerns created by the site constraints that limit the amount of flexibility for this infill project. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Anna-Lisa November 21, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 91-08 - CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES - The development of a 51.93 acre industrial master plan consisting of 30 industrial buildings totaling 703,193 square feet, located in the General Industrial and Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial Districts (Subareas 8 and 9), located on the south side of Arrow Route, west of White Oak Avenue - APN: 209-142-06. Design Parameters: The project site slopes gently to the south at approximately 2 percent. There are no geologic structures or rock out croppings. There are no special cultural, historical or scenic resources on-site. In addition, there are no existing trees on-site. Background: The applicant is proposing a 52 acre industrial master plan with the development of Phase I of the project as part of this review. Phase I encompasses the development of 8 of the 30 proposed buildings and all public infrastructure for the project. Phases II and III will be submitted at a later date as separate Development Review applications. Staff is processing Conditional Use Permit 91-26, a request to allow a variety of office uses in Buildings 2 and 3 concurrently with Development Review 91-08. The site is identified in the Industrial Specific Plan as a proposed rail service site, with spur lines along its eastern and southern boundary lines. The Design Review Co~unittee reviewed the project on October 3, 1991 and did not recommend approval. The Committee directed the applicant to revise the plans to address those issues identified below and then return to the Committee for further review: Rail Issue: In addition to providing rail service to Parcels 20 and 21 along the south side of the project, Parcel 19, located directly west of Parcel 20, should also be rail served. The applicant should provide an exhibit to demonstrate Parcel 19's ability to accommodate rail service. The following should be considered: 1. Redesign Of the building's footprint. 2. Reconfiguration of the underground detention basin, if needed. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 91-08 - CAPELLINO & ASSOCIATES NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Page 2 Appropriate design of the building with kick-out panels and dock high doors along the building's south elevation, adjacent to the rail easement. The applicant should note that unless there is written verification of a physical hardship in providing rail service to Parcel 19, the Design Review Committee cannot support the project. Architecture: The Committee advised that the applicant look at the following: A. Buildings 5A and 5B: Additional texture and architectural articulation should be added to the east elevation of Building 5A and the south elevation of Building 5B. The vertical brick element lines should be carried across the north elevation of Building 5B and wrapped onto the east and west elevations. The sandblasted finish along the east elevation should be carried until the end of the building, similar to the west elevation. B. Building 6: Additional texture and articulation should be added to the north and west elevations. Additional brick detailing should be used to make a significant architectural statement. C. Building 7: The sandblast treatment and brick accent should be carried across the entire west elevation. D. Building 8: Additional architectural detailing is needed along the north elevation. The brick panels above the windows along the west and south elevations appear bulky and awkward. The Committee suggested that some other type of architectural treatment would be appropriate for the entry. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 91-08 - CAPELLINO & ASSOCIATES NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Page 3 E. Building 9: The free-standing brick entry elements should be reconsidered. The elements appear inappropriate and should blend into the building instead of appearing as the remnants Of a pre-existing building in front of a new structure. Additional detailing and articulation is needed to the west and north elevations. F. Building 10: 1. Same as 5A for the south and west elevations. Additional detailing and texture should be added to the north and east elevations. All primary entries to the buildings should feature very bold and grand architectural elements. Employee Plaza Areas: Textured paving, interlocking pavers, etc., should be used to link buildings together to facilitate pedestrian access. A manufacturers brochure should be provided for the streetscape furniture to be used with the plaza areas. Site Plan: Special treatment, i.e. hardscape and building design and orientation, should be considered for the northwest corner of the site at White Oak and Arrow Route. Staff COmments: A majority of the con~nents have been addressed by the applicant. However, the following should be considered: Architecture A. Building 6: Although a sandblast treatment has been added to the north elevation, additional treatment and articulation is needed. The brick and glass/mullion treatment could be carried further along the elevation. DESIGN REVI W COMMENTS DR 91-08 - CAPELLINO & ASSOCIATES NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Page 4 B. Building 8: The Committee should review the brick, sandblast and column structure elements for the building entry. The glass mullions in the middle of the s with elevation do not relate to the entry. They should be either eliminated or tied into the entry element with additional brick detailing. Although the east elevation has additional sandblast treatment, additional'~reatment should be included. C. Buildings 9 and 10: The Committee should review the entry designs: especially the proportion and balance of the brick columns and glass. The left side on the south elevation of Building No. 10 requires additional treatment and articulation. Site Plan: Special treatment, (i.e. landscape and building design and orientation), should be considered for the northwest corner of the site at White Oak and Arrow Route. Staff has received plaza areas. The amenity package. the manufacturer's cut sheet for the proposed Committee should review the proposed plaza A rail easement has been provided along the south side of Parcel 19, as requested by the Co~unittee. The four parking stalls within the rail easement should be removed. In addition, a landscape planter should be provided. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Suzanne Chitiea, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Anna-Lisa Hernandez The Design Review Committee conceptually approved the project and directed the applicant to work with staff on the following items, prior to final project submittal and Planning Commission scheduling: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 91-08 - CAPELLINO & ASSOCIATES NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Page 5 Architecture: A. Building 5A and 5B: The vertical brick soldier course should be extended up to the reveal line, along the front elevation, and wrap onto the side and rear elevations to provide better definition and articulation to the building entrances. B. Building 6: The column elements at the entry should be "tied" together with the use of the brick material to strengthen building articulation. The north elevation should contain more articulation due to its visibility from the street. The columns should contain "depth" and movement instead of appearing as plant-ons. C. Building 7: The glass/brick columns appear awkward within the elevation. The columns should either be all glass or all brick. A brick base should be carried across the bettom as a "structural support element." D. Building 8: The sandblasted column/element should be redesigned to be proportionate to the roof plane directly above it. The plaza area should contain additional brick detailing along the seat wall to break-up the elevation and add articulation to the view from the east. The aluminum window frames should be painted to blend in with the glass color on all buildings.