HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998/01/20 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES
TUESDAY JANUARY 20, 1998 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Bill Bethel Rich Macias Nancy Fong
Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Dave Barker Larry McNiel
PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS
This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding
their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although
the Committee may open the meeting for public input.
7:00 p.m.
(Steve) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-36- KEISKER AND WIGGLE ARCHITECTS-A request
to construct a 7,581 square foot retail pad building on a portion of a 3.6 acre parcel
within the Terra Vista Promenade Shopping Center, in the Community Commercial
District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located on the east side of Rochester
Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard -APN: 227-151-39.
7:40 p.m.
(Steve) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-33 -
PANATTONI-PHELAN - A request to construct a 172,998 square foot industrial
building on 7.97 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 13) of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Sixth Street and
Rochester Avenue -APN: 229-263-01, 02, 03 and 06.
8:10 P.M.
(Cecilia) DESIGN REVIEW 97-37 - ALPHA SERVICE AND TECHNOLOGY - The design
review of the detailed site plan and building elevations for a previously approved
tentative subdivision map consisting of 37 single family lots on 8.3 acres of land in the
Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) located south of Lemon
Avenue and east of Archibald Avenue -APN: 201-252-04, 40, 41, and 49.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as
plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting.
8:50 p.m.
(Steve) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-29
(MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 91-08) - CAP BROTHERS
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY-A request to construct a 99,750 square foot industrial
building on 6.8 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and
White Oak Avenue -APN: 209-461-01, 06, 07, 08 and 09.
DRC AGENDA
January 20, 1998
Page 2
9:00 P.M.
(Steve) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-38- CHARLES
JOSEPH ASSOCIATES -A request to construct a public storage facility consisting of
5 buildings totaling 76,650 square feet on 2.96 acres of land in the General Industrial
District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the south side of
Arrow Highway, between Utica Avenue and Red Oak Street - APN: 209-491-82.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the
Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may
receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes
per individual.
1, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true,
accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 15, 1998, at least 72 hours prior to
the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Steve Hayes January 20, 1998
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-36 - KEISKER AND WIGGLE ARCHITECTS -A request to construct a
7,581 square foot retail pad building on a portion of a 3.6 acre parcel within the Terra Vista Promenade
Shopping Center, in the Community Commercial District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located
on the east side of Rochester Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard -APN: 227-151-39.
Background:
The Design Review Committee(Bethel, Macias, Fong) reviewed this project at their December 16, 1997
meeting and did not recommend approval of the project as presented. The Committee directed the
applicant to work with staff to address the design issues referenced in the attached Design Review
Committee Action comments (Exhibit "A") and return to the Committee for further review.
Staff Comments:
At the time of comment preparation, staff had just received the first FAX draft of revised building
elevations. Generally, it appears that the revised elevations are consistent with the recommendations
of the Committee. Staff will provide further details with an oral update at the meeting.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee consider the revisions to the development
package and, if acceptable to the Committee, recommend approval of the project with any necessary
conditions to the City Planner.
Attachments: Design Review Committee Action Comments dated December 16, 1997
Revised Building Elevations
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the following conditions:
1. A smaller scale cornice element should be considered for the lower horizontal rooflines on the
building.
2. The Committee reinforced their desire for straight-on parking spaces for the field of parking south
of the building. The Committee recommended that a condition of approval be placed on the
project where the developer should work with the owners of the parcel to the south(Old Spaghetti
Factory) to eliminate the angled parking between the two buildings. Written correspondence
between the two parties should be provided for staff's files.
3. All unaddressed secondary and policy design issues should be recommended as Conditions of
Approval for the project.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Steve Hayes December 16, 1997
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-36 - KEISKER AND WIGGLE ARCHITECTS -A request to construct a
7,581 square foot retail pad building on a portion of a 3.6 acre parcel within the Terra Vista Promenade
Shopping Center, in the Community Commercial District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located
on the east side of Rochester Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 227-151-39.
Design Parameters:
The site is located on a rough graded pad within the Terra Vista Promenade Shopping Center,
immediately south of and adjacent to the vehicular access to the center off Rochester Avenue. To the
north is the Home Depot home improvement center and to the south is the Old Spaghetti Factory, which
is currently under construction. East of the building is an existing trail and sidewalk along Rochester
Avenue and to the west is the field of parking for Home Depot. A fairly significant grade difference (4
to 5 feet) occurs between the pad and Rochester Avenue. Generally though, the site slopes gently from
north to south.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding
this project:
1. As currently proposed, the architectural style of the building is not consistent with the Design
Guidelines established for pad buildings within the Terra Vista Promenade shopping center or
other existing pad buildings within the center (i.e. ARCO and Carl's Jr.). The architectural
concept should be revised to be more consistent with the Design Guidelines and existing
buildings by using like exterior materials and colors as other existing pad buildings, modifying
the design of the tower element and incorporating freestanding trellises with precast columns in
addition to or in lieu of the proposed metal awnings around the perimeter of the building.
2. With the original approval of the Master Plan for the Terra Vista Promenade Shopping Center,
no building(s) were shown in the area where the current project is proposed; two similarly sized
building were shown flanking both sides of the on-site Activity Center extension near the corner
of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue (see Exhibit "A"). However, with the processing
of the Old Spaghetti Factory project, it was determined that one building designed in a sensitive
manner to the Activity Center would be acceptable. At that time, the Master Plan was revised
to include the building in question and parking between the two buildings modified accordingly.
Since the two buildings total approximately the same amount of area as the original Master Plan
proposal and the parking area layout is technically acceptable, staff does not have any concerns
with the Site Plan.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Additional landscaped areas (including trees) should be provided wherever possible. Areas of
special concern include areas adjacent to the south and west sides of the building and in the field
of parking south of the building.
2. Large blank wall areas on the side and rear elevations of the building should receive additional
architectural embellishment.
r
DRC COMMENTS
DR 97-36 - KEISKER & WIGGLE ARCHITECTS
December 16, 1997
Page 2
3. A pedestrian connection should be provided between the site and the sidewalk along Rochester
Avenue.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Screening of all transformers and other above ground mechanical equipment should be provided
to the satisfaction of the Planning Division.
2. The proposed metal awnings shall be of a single color and not include any advertisements.
3. Special paving consistent with that used throughout the shopping center should be provided in
key pedestrian areas and in locations such as the vehicular access to the parcel, handicapped
parking stalls, etc.
4. Any retaining walls should be composed of a decorative block material or receive a decorative
exterior treatment.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend that the architectural concept for the
buildings be revised per the above comments and return to the Design Review Committee for further
review.
Attachment: Exhibit "A" - Master Shopping Center Site Plan
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
Revised architectural elevations not previously reviewed by staff or the Design Review Committee were
presented for consideration at the meeting. The Design Review Committee did not recommend
approval of the project or the revised building elevations as presented. The Committee directed the
applicant to work with staff to revise the plans and return to the Committee once revised to the
satisfaction of staff. The following items were recommended to be addressed by the Committee:
1. The tower element should be redesigned to be consistent with the Terra Vista Promenade
Design Guidelines and other existing pad buildings within the shopping center.
2. All wood trellises on the building should receive support columns. Precast concrete columns
consistent with those already used in the center were recommended, but the Committee noted
that they might possibly consider thick wood support columns as a second option.
3. Blank wall areas on the north and east elevations should receive additional architectural
treatment. It was suggested that the applicant consider the treatment used to resolve this
concern at the ARCO service station in this shopping center.
DRC COMMENTS
DR 97-36 - KEISKER & WIGGLE ARCHITECTS
December 16, 1997
Page 3
4. A pedestrian connection to the sidewalk trail along Rochester Avenue should be provided by
extending the walkway on the north side of the building easterly to meet the existing sidewalk,
thereby minimizing slope and grading issues.
5. Additional landscaping, including trees in pots, should be provided on the south side of the
building and in the field of parking south of the building. If the trellis is pursued on the west side
of the building, then the request for trees can be eliminated, but shrubs and vines trained to grow
up the column supports should be provided.
6. The Committee supported the redesign of the parking area south of the building, which
eliminated angled parking.
7. All policy issues should be addressed or will become recommended conditions of approval for
the project.
CL
CO
-— -- - - - - - —- —-
-M N 3 A Y 3 5 H -— -— - - - ->
bii
>
w 0:;
Le
Ltj.
I I I
I I ,
I'L 33v� C30x3323
I�
.. c
'I
i
kin
.F,
4
r
rv:
k Y
F...I
i
i
I
- I / �L
-r
i
I
2
In
-�
`�._--
� �
��:
".t
_ I ,`1`,.
1 `:\
� 3:�J 030r:+� '
I �
M�
..�t I �G:-.:.%i �
.:r.: ,�
"t �>' Y��itj
I. �
I �
•v '..
III
I
�'S 3ba ]3]v31�3
I it I
1
i
Ik
r
I �
I
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Steve Hayes January 20, 1998
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-33 - PANATTONI PHELAN -
A request to construct a 172,998 square foot industrial building on 7.97 acres of land in the General
Industrial District (Subarea 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of
Sixth Street and Rochester Avenue -APN: 229-263-01, 02, 03 and 06.
Design Parameters:
The site has frontage on Sixth Street which is designated by the General Plan as a Special Boulevard
for special landscape treatment. The project site is currently vacant and includes remnants of a grape
vineyard. Buildings exist in close proximity in all directions around the site, but only to the south is a
building developed on a contiguous parcel. Curb and gutter exist along the property frontages. The
site slopes from north to south at approximately 2 percent.
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:
1. A more dramatic architectural statement should be provided at the northeast comer of the
building. Suggested items include stepping the building back from the street and introducing a
more significant focal point, both architectural and pedestrian oriented, such as a water feature,
artwork, etc., near the office entrance.
2. Additional architectural embellishment and variations in the building planes should be provided,
especially for the long stretches exposed to public view along Sixth Street and Rochester
Avenue.
3. Additional architectural treatment should be provided at the southeast corner of the building.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. A more significant parapet wall should be designed for the building now to screen all anticipated
roof-mounted mechanical equipment from public view and to avoid a "tacked-on" screen having
to be added in the future.
2. A second outdoor eating/plaza area should be provided near the secondary office area entrance
because the building may be occupied by two tenants.
3. An architecturally integrated screen wall should be provided along the south property line, as
opposed to the wrought iron fence shown on the plans. Also, the sliding gates at the entrance
to the truck loading/storage area should be of a solid, view obscuring material, painted to match
the screen walls and building.
4. Bicycle parking at the north end of the site should be located closer to the northeast office
entrance.
DRC COMMENTS
DR 97-33 - PANATTONI-PHELAN
January 20, 1998
Page 2
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Additional berming, low walls, shrub hedges, or any combination thereof should be provided to
screen all parking areas from public view.
2. The required screen walls,trash enclosures, and pump house enclosure should be architecturally
integrated with the buildings with a final finish such as painted tilt-up concrete or an exposed
aggregate finish.
3. An overhead shade structure, plaza furniture, and landscaping, including specimen size trees
around the plaza perimeter, should be provided in the outdoor eating/plaza areas.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of the project subject to
the incorporation of the above items into the plans, to the satisfaction of staff.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
The Design Review Committee recommended that the project return as a Consent Calendar item at the
next available Design Review Committee meeting, addressing the following issues:
1. The accentuated exposed aggregate column and panel treatment used on the office entrance
at the northeast corner of the building should wrap around the corner to the east elevation,
similar to the application of this treatment at the office area at the southwest corner of the
building;
2. Additional panels should receive the upgraded exposed aggregate and glass treatment, as
follows:
a. At the southeast comer of the building, the two southernmost panels on the east elevation
and the one easternmost panel on the south elevation; and
b. Verify that all panels adjacent to an angle in the building have this treatment. Of specific
concern were to two locations along the Sixth Street frontage where the building has two
45 degree angles.
3. A dense landscape palette, including evergreen trees and shrub hedges, should be used in
conjunction with the proposed wrought iron fence along the south property line to form an
effective screen in lieu of a solid screen wall;
4. The roof parapet should be raised to a greater extent to assure that all future roof equipment will
be screened from public view. The Committee recommended that a minimum parapet height of
4 feet be provided at the office areas and that the parapet be at least 18 inches higher than the
crown of the roof; and
DRC COMMENTS
DR 97-33 - PANATTONI-PHELAN
January 20, 1998
Page 3
5. The final location and amenities within the secondary office outdoor eating area, as well as the
amenities within the primary plaza area should be reviewed and approved by the City Planner.
6. All other unaddressed secondary and policy issues should be addressed to the satisfaction of
the City Planner.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:20 p.m. Cecilia Gallardo January 20, 1998
DESIGN REVIEW 97-37 -ALPHA SERVICE AND TECHNOLOGY - The design review of the detailed
site plan and building elevations for a previously approved tentative subdivision map consisting of 37
single family lots on 8.3 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per
acre) located south of Lemon Avenue and east of Archibald Avenue - APN: 201-252-04, 40, 41, and
49.
Design Parameters:
The project site is bounded by single family residential development on the north, east, and south sides,
and on the west side by Archibald Avenue. There are three existing single-family homes adjacent to
the project site on the northwest comer. Two palm trees and an oak tree on the site will be preserved.
A previously approved design for this tract was granted by-the Planning Commission on March 28,
1990.
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
the project:
1. Architecture: The applicant is proposing three basic floor plans, each with three model
elevations. The elevations as submitted denote stucco trim around the side and rear elevations
only where the window treatments will be visible to public view. However, the applicant has
stated that they will provide stucco trim around all windows.
Staff reviewed the proposed plans against the previously approved designs and found that the
proposed designs under this new application lack the architectural details and treatment
displayed in the previously approved design for the tract. The previous design review approval
included elevations with significantly more architectural details, including greater variation in roof
lines, and enhanced 360 degree architectural treatment. The previously approved home designs
displayed side and rear facades with balconies, roof dormers, recessed areas and pop-out areas,
wood frames around side and rear doors, multi-pane windows, and window mullions. The
following treatments are recommended to improve the overall designs:
a. The side and rear elevations do not exhibit sufficient front elevation details to satisfy 360
architecture policy. Additional upgrading of the side and rear elevations of all plans should
be discussed and provided to the satisfaction of the Design Review Committee.
b. Pop-outs or variations in the building plane on side and rear elevations. Additional
architectural embellishments, such as additional window shutters, pot shelves, multi-pane
windows, fake attic vents with wood trim, cornices, projecting wall dormers, cupolas, etc.,
should be used to help in providing a complete 360 degree architectural treatment on all
elevations.
C. Vary roof designs along the rear elevations of Plan 2 and Plan 3. The rear elevations of
these two plans appear identical. These plans back on to public viewing areas along
Archibald Avenue and Lemon Avenue. Varying the roof systems to a greater extent will
provide a greater variety of roof lines exposed to public view. Cupolas, roof dormers, and
projecting wall dormers could be added to enhance the visual character of the rear facing
homes along Archibald and Lemon Avenues.
DRC COMMENTS
DR 97-37 -ALPHA SERVICE AND TECHNOLOGY
January 20, 1998
Page 2 '
d. Plan 3 has a side-on garage with a rear garage wall that could be enhanced by adding a
multi-pane window, dormer, etc.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Accent base treatments used on front elevations, such as rock, should be wrapped around on
the garage side elevations to the point where it is anticipated the return wall will be constructed.
2. Continue garage roof along the side of the house in Plan 1 and Plan 2.
3. Flip Lots 10 and 19 to create larger front yard areas.
4. Provide extra deep corner side setbacks for two-story houses on corner lots.
5. One story massing is preferred on comer side yards. Previously approved home design included
a single-story plan with loft element and massing appeared single-story.
6. Avoid identical or similar elevation schemes plotted on adjacent lots. Lots 19 and 20, and 33 and
34 show the same plans side by side.
7. Design chimney stacks with accent materials used on house, such as stone.
8. Provide a variety of garage door treatments with varying window options.
9. Provide return walls between houses.
10. Return walls and corner side walls to be decorative and compatible with the architectural style
of the homes.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Provide decorative perimeter fencing at tract edges and along street. This was a condition of
tract approval agreed to by the applicant.
2. Retaining walls exposed to public view to be decorative masonry.
3. Provide minimum 5 foot setback between fencing on corner side yards and sidewalk.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project subject to the modifications
as recommended above.
Attachments
DRC COMMENTS
DR 97-37 -ALPHA SERVICE AND TECHNOLOGY
January 20, 1998
Page 3
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Cecilia Gallardo
The applicant agreed to address all the major, secondary, and policy issues outlined by staff. The
Committee directed the applicant to work with staff to incorporate the comments into revised plans, and
return to Design Review.
r-
"J
MAYA ✓{.
_ _
r..i :. ,rte.'., ir..1 w Iwo �f cv..es. raR
'w rr:�
L;k;1 =�1;�•1 wl.l i��I i. . 1 u
Pali
/V1//1>
W
a.t R
L i,
n r 11ww r' ,
� r �.rt ;cal"' �?'-��b. _�IrY`i='1 � � 1�.-_ �► /fit t t.�
Project: n2 917-37
Title: S TE !/T(G�2sF7WAI gyp
CITY OF RAt�CEi�C38lJCAMONGA
PLANNIN3-IDJYIS�ON Exhibit: —� Date:
7ammom
_.—_ate `•.•�►��rr...'�'
III IIII III — III!Iljl,l!11 'a�--
� � � �t�■ tltlt ■ tlt■■ �
III Iili_III II'�=�1��
- I - -il _ IIIIII��IIII�11
I
Ranch • u anion �. C�•
-"��IIIIIIIIIIIINI
IIIIIillillllll�'
E i
Tont. Tract 14459
=�: L.A. CMANC07
rr
.Illltl��lll' �r-
�_ II,./�IIIII�I�
-- � '"""'-'� "'Iillllllllilillllll `� -� •,i.'-
■o.■ :
logo
iL..'.
1,►/�. 'wr'yt 'r~� -"`fit/ �_-
-----
,.jam„111!111
1111'111 ,1 - .•111111�Ii1�- � �,
Bonn
,,�': 11101111.. ■ ■ Boom
11111111 i111
Sam
ReSEE
i
.�a1111�11111!j ���n1i11� .
.BB 1809
�•� o. :: .
./111111■,
•�.:• �'•:/11111111111111!;1 �-
■■s■
_3v
. . •
-/rr
:`%:: III►n'•IIijjllljj!!�N _..111 - -- � -
mig11�1 =!� miiimmuuu �
,�Illllllllllllllli'Atl I'i11111N111111 �
.old
IIIII!
' . Ranc o • a. a.
1j11111I111=��'I\�I����...
I AH I
Aa
Ililillllll� ..s■ ;; ::
Iry 'J
■■■■ -�
• � ■ ■ ■ iii■ ■■ ..
_rllll�� ��, euuuUe■� ,
fop 0
- ■u .. ■•
t
ii an ;1-
�
.1
III,����:,�I��I���������������IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I- ..,,VIII
....AW� FUN
. :�n1lUlll �t4.
r _ �
CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS
8:50 p.m. Steve Hayes January 20, 1998
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-29 (MODIFICATION TO
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 91-08) - CAP BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY - A request to
construct a 99,750 square foot industrial building on 6.8 acres of land in the General Industrial District
(Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southeast comer of Arrow Highway and
White Oak Avenue -APN: 209-461-01, 06, 07, 08 and 09.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the revised architectural modifications to the
east elevation, the location of the pedestrian connection from the public sidewalk to the main building
entrance, the revised location of the screen wall along the south side of the property and the increased
areas of special paving treatment as presented.
CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS
9:00 P.M. Steve Hayes January 20, 1998
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-38 - CHARLES JOSEPH
ASSOCIATES -A request to construct a public storage facility consisting of 5 buildings totaling 76,650
square feet on 2.96 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area
Specific Plan, located on the south side of Arrow Highway, between Utica Avenue and Red Oak Street-
APN: 209-491-82.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
The Design Review Committee again acknowledged the significant revisions and upgrades that the
development team has incorporated into the project design since the first review of the Committee on
December 16, 1997. While the Committee generally found the the major design issues addressed, they
did recommend that the item be forwarded to the full Planning Commission with the same
recommendations from the previous meeting on January 6, 1998, reinterating the following issues:
1. An additional step should be incorporated into the pop-out elements on the north elevation of
Building "A," in 2-foot increments. However, the Design Review Committee wanted the record
to specifically reflect that the revisions to the north elevation of Building "A" significantly better
than the original submittal.
2. The color banding on the cornice of the office building area should be removed.
Finally, the Design Review Committee did note that the revised wall signage, now with the white
individual channel letters in an orange recessed background area, was acceptable.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
January 20, 1998
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
Secretary