Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/04/16 - Agenda PacketDATE: April 20, 1992 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM ACTION TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Residential/Institutional Design Review Committee Wendy Vallette Peter Tolstoy Dan Coleman John Melcher (Alternate) Steve Hayes, Associate Planner{~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF APRIL 16, 1992 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 p.m. - 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 6:40 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. 6:40 - 7:30 (Steve R.) MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-42 CARL KARCHER ENTERPRISES - A request to modify a previously approved master plan for a shopping center totaling 318,283 square feet on 31.13 acres of land in the Regional Related Commercial District of the Victoria Community Plan to develop a 3,535 square foot fast food, drive-thru restaurant on a pad previously slated for a speculative retail building, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of the future Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 229-021-10, 15, 19, and 28. 7:30 - 8:00 BREAK DRC AGENDA APRIL 16, 1992 Page 2 8:00 -9:00 (Scott) PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-37 - FOOTHILL MAPa<ETPLACE PARTNERS - Review of architectural details and on-site amenities for a 60-acre commercial retail center in the Regional Related Commercial Designation (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between 1-15 and Etiwanda Avenue. SH:mlg Attachments cc: Planning Commission/City Council DESIGN REVIEW COF~4ENTS 6:40 - 7:30 Steve R. April 16, 1992 MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-42 - CARL KARCHER ENTERPRISES - A request to modify a previously approved master plan for a shopping center totaling 318,283 square feet on 31.13 acres of land in the Regional Related Commercial District of the Victoria Community Plan to develop a 3,535 square foot fast food, drive-thru restaurant on a pad previously slated for a speculative retail building, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of the future Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 229-021-10, 15, 19, and 28. Design Parameters: The parcel is located between the future Day Creek Boulevard and the northerly entrance to the approved Victoria Courtyard shopping center. A service station is planned immediately east of the site at the corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard. The parking lot for the shopping center will exist to the south. Background: The applicant is proposing to construct a 3,535 square foot drive-thru restaurant within the approved Victoria Courtyard shopping center. Because the approved master plan did not indicate a drive-thru on the site, a modification to the original Conditional Use Permit is required to process the proposal. Staff Coments: 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: The building's two towers should differ in terms of their shape because one serves to designate the main entry, while the other is more of a ceremonial entry. It is suggested that one of the other types of tower elements approved throughout the Victoria Courtyard Center be used (an exa~le of the tower elements is attached). The design of the ball crawl structure and the play area enclosure should be considered. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been resolved, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 90-42 - CARL KARCHER ENTERPRISES APPaL 16, 1992 Page 2 The addition of a metal trellis with vining (matching that used around the play enclosure) should be used on the east elevation to screen the vehicles and pick-up windows from adjacent properties. The southerly portion of the drive-thru is higher than the adjacent drive aisle and parking area, and the proposed berming will not adequately screen the cars in the stacking area. A higher berm or a screen wall may be necessary to supplement the proposed landscaping. The planter should be widened between the play area enclosure and the adjacent hardscape to insure the healthy survival of the landscaping. The size, number, and placement of the signage should be discussed. (Note: the Sign Program for Victoria Courtyard will be reviewed by the Committee at a later date). Design Review Co---~ttee Action: Members Present: Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Steve Ross The Committee made the following comments and recommended approval subject to staff's review of the revised plans prior to scheduling for the Planning Con~nission: The ball crawl structure and any other equipment located in the outdoor patio should be painted to match the primary colors of the building. A metal trellis matching that used around the patio should be used on the east side of the drive-thru canopy to screen the vehicles and pick-up windows from adjacent properties and to reduce the amount of wind in the pick-up area. Vines should be densely planted along the base of the trellis. A low wall and/or a higher berm should be provided adjacent to the southern portion of the drive-thru lane to adequately screen the cars. The planter between the patio wall and the adjacent hardscape should be widened to insure the healthy survival of the landscaping and to allow enough width for trees to be planted. If possible, a specimen size tree should be planted in the patio area to provide shade. Additional trees should be planted around the entrance to the building. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 90-42 - CARL KARCHER ENTERPRISES APRIL 16, ~992 Page 3 Enhanced paving should be provided in the parking spaces reserved for the physically challenged because the spaces are often vacant and can double as an extension to the plaza. Although the restaurant's signage will be governed by the sign program for Victoria Courtyard, the Co~unittee stated that the conceptual signage was not in scale with the area between the arch and the cornice. To achieve the correct sense of scale, the letter height should be reduced or the available sign area should be increased. u,J,,sL,r]J~]l~iLflms, j jmn q ~ /f PI AN (~ F VICTORIA COURTYARD HUGHES INV[STMENTS DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 - 9:00 Scott April 16, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-37 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS Review of architectural details and on-site amenities for a 60-acre con~mercial retail center in the Regional Related Commercial Designation (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between 1-15 and Etiwanda Avenue. Background: On June 26, 1991, the Planning Commission approved the master plan for Foothill Marketplace and the site plan and elevations for Price Club. AS part of that approval, the Commission required the applicant to submit architectural details and on-site amenities for the project in order to establish the flavor of the center and to assist future applications in meeting the design intent of the center. On October 17, 1991, the Planning Commission initially reviewed the architectural details and on-site amenity package for the development. At that time, the Commission expressed acceptance of a number of items submitted for review. These ite~ include the following: 1. The pre-cast stone cornice and wainscot. The walkWay treatments utilizing integral color, retardant finish, smooth trowel bands, sandblast finish, etc. 3. The poured in place concrete seat wall. 4. The bicycle rack design. 5. The tree grate and tree guard designs. 6. The trash enclosure design. 7. The overhead trellis design. The Commission also voiced many areas of concern that should be revised and resubmitted for additional review. These areas include: The incorporation of integral public art required by the Historic Preservation condition of approval had not been submitted and the impact of the art on the building designs was not known. Proportions of the tower elements were awkWard. Most of the towers were top-heavy and lacked support columns of sufficient size and mass to balance the upper portion of the tower. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS PC WORKSHOP CUP 90-37 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS APRIL 16, 1992 Page 2 The design of the major building designs did not provide sufficient architectural relief. In that the individual designs will be approved by the Planning Conunission, the Co~unission agreed to co~unent on the designs at the time of the Development Review application. All street furniture shall be consistent in style, including the light standards and bollards. Plan view drawings should be submitted to demonstrate how the tower elements would transition into the building corners. Of special concern were the diagonally placed towers. A comprehensive plan should be submitted to indicate the locations of the various on-site, pedestrian scale amenities. Since that initial review by the Commission, plans for Wal-Mart have been reviewed and approved. These plans incorporate mny of the elements that were previously reviewed by the Commission, including the pre-cast cornice and wainscot, column treatments, and enriched pavement locations- Staff Comments: The applicant has resubmitted the architectural details and site amenities that were not approved during the previous workshop. In considering these revised plans, staff provides the following coments: The proportions of the towers are still of concern and should be reviewed by the Conunission. The use of the pre-cast Or poured in place furniture (i.e., benches, trash cans, ash urns, light bollards, etc.) provides more continuity across the site. The previously approved bicycle rack design should be used instead of the design now proposed. 4. The handrail design should be more substantial and sturdy looking. A comprehensive amenity plan should be submitted for review and approval. The plan should locate the various amenities (i.e., trellises, seating areas, free-standing elements, etc.) across the site. The locations should reinforce logical pedestrian connections across the site. DESIGN REVIEW CO~g4ENTS PC WORKSHOP CUP 90-37 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS APRIL 16, 1992 Page 3 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Scott Murphy Refer to Planning Commission minutes.