HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/08/03 - Agenda Packet - (2) DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY AUGUST 3, 2010 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Lou Munoz Ray Wimberly James Troyer Donald Granger
Alternates: Frances Howdyshell Richard Fletcher Francisco Oaxaca
CONSENT CALENDAR
•
NO ITEMS SUBMITTED.
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/Judy) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2010-00385 - AT&T - A request to add a third
carrier to a 61-foot tall multi-carrier wireless facility and increase the size of the
equipment enclosure at an existing retail center at the southeast corner of Base Line
Road and Milliken Avenue in the Neighborhood Commercial District -
APN: 0227-182-17. This action is categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332,
In-Fill Development Projects.
7:20 p.m.
(Steve/Tasha) HILLSIDE REVIEW DRC2009-00805 - DUANE BLISS - A request to add an RV
garage and second dwelling unit on the existing lot within the Very Low Residential
District and Hillside Overlay at 5423 Amethyst Avenue - APN: 1061-551-03. This
project is categorically exempt per Section 15303 (a) (new construction) of the
California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines.
7:40 p.m.
(Mike/Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00493
— GB ARCHITECTS - A request to construct two office/professional buildings of
25,600 square feet on three vacant parcels with a combined area of 2.5 acres in the
Office/Professional (OP) District, located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue
and Arrow Route - APN: 0208-811-58, -59, and -60. Related file: Uniform Sign
Program DRC2010-00092. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
environmental impacts for consideration.
UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2010-00092 - GB ARCHITECTS - A Uniform Sign
Program for a proposed office/professional building of 31,485 square feet on three
vacant parcels with a combined area of 2.5 acres in the Office/Professional (OP)
District, located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route -
APN: 0208-811-58, -59, and -60. Related file: Development Review
DRC2009-00493.
DRC AGENDA
August 3, 2010
Page 2
8:00 p.m.
(Mike/Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2010-00277
- BONALDO ENGINEERING (FOR CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR
VEHICLES (DMV) - A proposal to demolish an existing building of approximately
15,000 square feet that was formerly used as a local office for the California
Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and construct a new building of approximately
18,000 square feet for the same purpose in the General Industrial (GI) District
(Subarea 3), located at 8629 Hellman Avenue - APN: 0209-022-16. Related file:
Development Review DR90-05. This project is categorically exempt per
Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the California Environmental
Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines.
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.
ADJOURNMENT
1, Gall Elwood, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate
copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 22, 2010, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per
Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga.
ihaefitnize(
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Steve Fowler August 3, 2010
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2010-00385 - AT&T - A request to add a third carrier to a 61-foot tall
multi-carrier wireless facility and increase the size of the equipment enclosure at an existing retail center
at the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Milliken Avenue in the Neighborhood Commercial District
- APN: 0227-182-17. This action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, In-Fill Development Projects
Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to add antennas inside a 61-foot tall multi-carrier
wireless facility designed as a clock tower, extend the equipment enclosure by 10 feet, and add an
additional 240 square feet onto the 690 square foot equipment enclosure at the southeast corner of
Base Line Road and Milliken Avenue, The tower will be located within the Central Park Plaza Shopping
Center at the northwest corner of the site.
The clock tower was reviewed and approved at the July 14, 2010, Planning Commission Meeting under
DRC2009-00882. The clock tower will be just over 61 feet tall and was designed to accommodate
(3) wireless carriers. Both Verizon and T-Mobile will be collocating onto this tower with AT&T. The tower
has incorporated elements from the shopping center into its design. The exterior of the tower will not
change. The majority of the tower will be various colors of brown and tan. The roof will consist of the
Mission Clay tile roofing that is used on the existing buildings in the center. The tower is divided into
three sections by trim accents. The lower two-thirds of the tower will be a darker shade than the top
one-third of the tower to break up the height. The face of the clock will be bordered by a trim detail for
articulation. Also, recessed tile accents along with score lines will be installed on all four elevations of
the tower. A decorative wrought iron fence has been proposed at the base of the tower to secure the
interior of the tower.
The addition to the equipment enclosure will extend north towards Base line Road. The enclosure is
between the proposed tower and the existing bank building to the east. The enclosure utilizes the same
materials as the tower but will be constructed from concrete masonry unit and have a stucco finish to
match the surrounding buildings. Included on the elevations of the equipment enclosure are some
arches to tie in the elements of the center. The mansard roof will also have Mission Clay tile roofing.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for the Committee
discussion regarding this project.
Maior Issues: The applicant worked hard with staff to follow the criteria outlined in the Development
Code. There are no major issues regarding this project at this time.
Staff recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of
this application to the Planning Commission.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Steve Fowler
Members Present:
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:20 p.m. Steve Fowler August 3, 2010
HILLSIDE REVIEW DRC2009-00805 - DUANE BLISS - A request to add an RV garage and second
dwelling unit on the existing lot within the Very Low Residential District and Hillside Overlay at
5423 Amethyst Avenue - APN: 1061-551-03. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15303 (a)
(new construction) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines.
Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to construct a 625 square foot second dwelling unit with
a 976 square foot RV garage located at 5423 Amethyst Avenue. This site is on the east side of
Amethyst Avenue in the Very Low (VL) Residential District within the Hillside Overlay District.
The current site contains a single-story 2,298 square foot residence with a 521 square foot attached
garage on a 39,738 square foot lot. The design of the new second dwelling unit and RV garage mimic
the existing residence. The new garage and second dwelling unit will incorporate the S-tile type roofing,
cultured stone as a wainscot, "Hardi board" wood siding and a stucco finish will be used to complete the
exterior. The second dwelling unit is a single-story structure, and the RV garage has the appearance of
a two-story structure because of the addition of windows along the upper portion of the garage that will
lessen the massing and provide natural light to the interior. A wood trim piece has also been added
around the exterior of the garage to break the massing of the garage.
The RV garage is located 12 feet from the north property line, and the finished grade of the garage is
8 feet below the finished grade of the adjacent property. With these grade changes, the neighbor to the
north, where most of the massing exists, will see approximately 10 feet of the structure from his property.
The existing landscape is lush and lessens the view of the garage from the street.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for the Committee
discussion regarding this project.
Major Issues: The applicant worked hard with staff to follow the criteria outlined in the Development
Code. There are no major issues regarding this project at this time.
Staff recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of
this Hillside Design Review to the Planning Commission.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Steve Fowler
Members Present:
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Mike Smith August 3, 2010
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00493 —
GB ARCHITECTS - A request to construct two office/professional buildings of 25,600 square feet on
three vacant parcels with a combined area of 2.5 acres in the Office/Professional (OP) District, located at
the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route - APN: 0208-811-58, -59, and -60. Related
file: Uniform Sign Program DRC2010-00092. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
environmental impacts for consideration.
Background: This application was previously reviewed by the Design Review Committee on
April 6, 2010. The Committee reviewed the proposal and deemed it to be unacceptable. The Committee
stated that the architecture of the buildings is incompatible with the existing development that surrounds
the project site, and in general, with what would be expected in the City. The architecture was
considered to be lacking warmth because of the proposed materials and finishes. The Committee
indicated that the applicant should consider introducing wood as a possible material. The massing and
form of the buildings were unacceptable and stood in contrast to the residential development to the
west Lastly, the Committee recommended against making both buildings identical to each other. The
applicant was directed to substantially revise the proposal and resubmit it for a follow-up review by the
Committee at a later date (Exhibit A).
In the interim period, since that Committee review meeting, the applicant submitted to the Committee for
follow-up "progress reviews" of his draft revisions to the original proposal. The first was on
May 18, 2010, and the second was on July 6, 2010. During the first update, the Committee concluded
that the applicant was generally making progress in the right direction. However, with some of the
revisions made, the buildings look too much like residential structures when they needed to look more
like offices. The Committee emphasized the need for a design that has the appearance of an office
professional building - the architecture should not focus on providing multiple exterior entrances that are
typical of retail projects considering that the underlying land uses that are allowed in the zoning district
are office-intensive and retail opportunities are limited. The Committee directed the applicant to minimize
the number of individual storefront entrances and have the entrance to each tenant space within the
interior of the building with access to the outside through a common lobby. The applicant requested that
the two end units of each building be allowed to have direct access to the outside; this request was
accepted by the Committee. Lastly, the Committee indicated that the area around the lobby entrance of
each building should be significantly enhanced to reflect their importance as the main entrance
(Exhibit B).
During the second update, the Committee reviewed several updated variations of the applicant's revised
proposal and chose a version where the form and massing of this version is generally similar to that of
the proposal that was first submitted for Committee review on April 6, 2010. However, the applicant had
significantly revised the details. The changes included the elimination of most of the vertical elements
that visually interrupted the horizontal elements with the center tower element becoming the only
significant vertical feature and incorporation of conventional parapets in lieu of the angled parapets
Also, the applicant proposed the use of different materials that are warmer including the use of wood
siding and mullions instead of tile and metal mullions. Stackstone veneer would be used principally at
the tower element to establish its significance as the main entrance into the building. The applicant also
removed the majority of the exterior storefront doors and relocated the entrances of each tenant space
DRC AGENDA
DRC2009-00493 — GB ARCHITECTS
August 3, 2010
Page 2
(where this change occurred) to the interior of the building as directed. The applicant requested that both
buildings be allowed to be identical and this request was accepted by the Committee. The Committee
identified several issues that the applicant needed to be aware of: a) the presence of glass on the west
elevation should be minimized to reduce the potential impact of reflected sunlight on the residences to
the west of the project site, and b) the wood siding may impact the location and installation options for
signs on the building. The applicant indicated that he would address both issues accordingly (Exhibit C).
As part of the revisions to the architecture, the applicant has increased the overall floor area for both
buildings from 25,572 square feet to 27,284 square feet and revised each footprint of the buildings at the
north and south ends of each building (Exhibits D and E). He has also adjusted the land uses (and
corresponding parking calculations) to accommodate the potential for two restaurants instead of one
restaurant as previously proposed. This has not resulted in an increase in parking that is required — the
amount required remains at 141 parking stalls. The amount of parking provided also remains at
141 parking stalls.
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. The use of glass on the west elevation, particularly on the second floor, shall be minimized to
ensure that during the late afternoon hours glare from the setting sun does not reflect back towards
the residences located immediately west of the project site. A potential solution is to reduce the
vertical dimension of each window on the second floor.
The windows on the first floors can remain as-is because any light that would be reflected off of the
glass on the first floors would be blocked by an existing perimeter wall. Furthermore, the site is
slightly lower than the properties to the west, which will reduce the potential for adverse glare
reflecting from windows on this floor.
2. The increase in floor area and changes in the footprint of each building has resulted in differences
in the landscaping near the north and south sides of each building from the original proposal. The
original proposal reviewed by the Committee on April 6, 2010, had landscape planters adjacent to
the parking areas that were between 5 feet and 7 feet wide (Exhibit D), while the latest revision has
landscape planters adjacent to the parking areas that are between 1 and 2 feet wide (Exhibit E).
Trees are required to be planted at a rate a) one (1) tree per 30 linear feet of building
Section 17.10.040(C) and one (1) tree per three (3) parking stalls per Section 17.12.030(A)(11).
The Committee may want to discuss this revision with the applicant.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
1. Landscaping shall be intensified along the street frontages to minimize visibility of the parking lot.
Options for discussion include low planter walls with shrubs; undulating berms along the street
frontages within the landscape setback and landscape areas that are at least 3 feet in height (at the
maximum height); dense plantings; or a combination of these.
2. The new block wall at the common property line between the project site and 9649 Calle Vejar and
8378/8398 Archibald Avenue shall be constructed of concrete masonry units with a decorative
DRC AGENDA
DRC2009-00493 — GB ARCHITECTS
August 3, 2010
Page 3
finish such as stucco. The east face of the existing walls, along the common property lines
between the project site and 9648 Calle Vejar and 9648/9649 Friant Street, shall be refinished to
match the new walls.
3. Revise the bus shelter to incorporate rear and side walls that are 5 feet in height and a roof for
weather protection. The support columns of the shelter shall be a minimum of 2 feet by 2 feet in
section. Also, the bus shelter shall have a roof (it is not clear if one is already provided).
4. The new trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standard. The design of the trash
enclosures shall incorporate the materials, finish, color, and trim used on the buildings.
5. The Southern California Edison transformer box shall be located at the northeast corner of the site.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
1. All ground-mounted equipment and utility boxes including transformers, back-flow devices, etc.
shall be screened by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced at a minimum of 18 inches on
center. This equipment shall be painted forest green.
2. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be placed 5 feet
from the right-of-way and shall be screened on the north, south, and east sides behind a 4-foot high
block wall. This wall shall have a stackstone veneer to match the tower elements of the buildings.
3. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or a similarly dark color.
4. Decorative paving shall be provided at all vehicular access points onto the site.
5. All doors (roll-up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the
adjacent wall or glass panel.
6. All downspouts on all elevations of the building shall be routed through the interior of the building.
The downspout on the bus shelter shall be routed through the one of the support columns of the
shelter.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved with the above-noted revisions
to be verified by Staff and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
Members Present:
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:00 p.m. Mike Smith April 6, 2010
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00493 —
GB ARCHITECTS - A request to construct two office/professional buildings of 25,600 square feet on
three vacant parcels with a combined area of 2.5 acres in the Office/Professional (OP) District, located at
the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route - APN: 0208-811-59, -58, and -60. Related
file: Uniform Sign Program DRC2010-00092.
Design Parameters: The subject property is a site comprised of three (3) parcels located at the
northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route, with a combined area of about 108,900 square
feet (2.5 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are about 611 feet (north to south) by about 180 feet
(east to west). The site is undeveloped and until recently was used for agricultural purposes as a
strawberry field. To the west of the site, are single-family residences and to the north, it is vacant. To
the south, across Arrow Route, is an office complex of four (4) buildings. To the east, across
Archibald Avenue, are administrative offices for the San Bernardino County Board of Education and an
inactive gas station. The zoning of the property and the property to the north is Office Professional (OP)
District; the properties to the east and west are zoned Low-Medium (LM) and Low (L) Residential District,
respectively. The zoning of the properties to the south is General Industrial (GI) District (Subarea 3).
The applicant proposes to construct two, two-story office/professional buildings, with a combined floor
area of 25,600 square feet. The two identical buildings will be of wood frame construction. The tenants
are unspecified, but the mix is anticipated to consist mostly of administrative/professional offices. The
buildings will have fourteen (14) tenant spaces each with eight (8) on the first floor and six (6) on the
second floor. The subdivision of the property for condominium purposes is not proposed at this time.
The site layout is arranged with the buildings situated on the west side of the site, while the parking area
will be along the street frontage of Archibald Avenue. Additional parking will be located along the street
frontage at Arrow Route and between the two buildings. This layout is contrary to the general design
goal of the City to have buildings located close to the street with the parking area(s) screened behind the
buildings. However, during a Pre-Application Workshop held on February 27, 2008
(Related File: DRC2008-00045) that was submitted by a different applicant, the Planning Commission
reviewed a proposal for the site that had a similar layout and deemed it acceptable, as the narrow depth
of the project site (measured east to west) limits other building plotting options, and the proposed
building locations will mitigate potential noise and glare disturbances that might be generated in the
parking lot and might affect the residences to the west.
The general arrangement of both buildings will have a prominent entrance at the center of each east
elevation of the building that leads to a lobby. The first floor tenants at the east side (or front) of each
building will have their respective primary entrances opening to the exterior of the building on the east
elevation facing Archibald Avenue. The entrances to the tenant spaces located at the west side (or rear)
and on the second floor of each building will be through the lobby.
The contemporary architectural theme of each building will be distinctive and unique as it employs bold
horizontal and vertical elements with a mix of tile, stone, and glass. The buildings are generally
well-proportioned, and the application of materials, finish, and trim are equal on all elevations. The
primary entrance will be defined by a tower element finished with stone veneer and incorporating a glass
storefront that extends up to the full height of the lobby. Storefront glass is generously provided on all
EXHIBIT A
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2009-00493 —GB ARCHITECTS
April 6, 2010
Page 2
elevations. The design of the parapets at the second floor at the east and west elevations incorporates
an unconventional combination of an angled and horizontal top edge. They are finished with a
combination of two different tile veneers. As each building is only one-story at their respective north and
south ends, the parapet steps down so that the general form of each vertical form of the building is
well-articulated. Other features of the buildings include vertical columns finished with stone veneer. The
outside edge of these columns, repeating the theme set by the angled parapets, project diagonally so
that the face of each at the top is projected further from the wall plane of the building than at the bottom.
The bus shelter will have support columns that are similar. •
Access to the site will be via two driveways to be located at the southwest and northeast corners of the
site at Arrow Route and Archibald Avenue, respectively. The building is required to have 141 parking
stalls; 141 parking stalls will be provided. Although there is no minimum requirement for landscape
coverage in this development district, 35 percent of the project site will be landscaped. The applicant
has provided a conceptual master plan showing the potential location of a driveway that will connect the
project site and the adjoining property to the north, thus minimizing the number of driveways on
Archibald Avenue. An easement in favor of the owner of the property to the north to allow access at the
proposed driveway on Archibald Avenue will be a condition of approval.
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. The angled parapets and vertical columns are not typical but do distinguish the buildings from other
office buildings that have been approved and constructed in the City. The Committee may want to
discuss these features with the applicant. Staff believes that these angled features are generally
inconsistent with the other parts of the building. The quality of the architecture will not be
diminished by using conventional straight horizontal parapets and vertical columns. Furthermore,
at the lowest point of the angled parapet, the height of it will only be 2 feet 10 inches, which is
insufficient to screen all roof-mounted equipment.
2. The use of glass on the west elevation, particularly on the second floor, shall be minimized to
ensure that during the late afternoon hours glare from the setting sun does not reflect back towards
the residences located immediately west of the project site. The glass on the first floors can remain
as any light that would be reflected off of the glass on the first floors would be blocked by an
existing perimeter wall. Furthermore, the site is slightly lower than the properties to the west, which
will reduce the potential for adverse glare.
3. The height of the parapet walls at the northernmost and southernmost portions of the second floor
is only 1 foot 6 inches high. Similarly, the height of the parapet walls at the northernmost and
southernmost portions of the first floor is only 2 feet high. In both cases, this will be insufficient to
screen roof-mounted equipment. Therefore, any HVAC or similar equipment for the second floor
tenant spaces at these locations shall be in an enclosed space within the building (with applicable
venting as needed). The Committee should verify with the applicant that the enclosed HVAC
equipment is a viable option, or require that the parapet on both floors be raised to an adequate
height to permit screening.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2009-00493— GB ARCHITECTS
April 6, 2010
Page 3
1. Landscaping shall be intensified along the street frontages to minimize visibility of the parking lot.
Options for discussion include low planter walls with shrubs; undulating berms along the street frontages
within the landscape setback and landscape areas that are at least 3 feet in height (at the maximum
height); dense plantings; or a combination of these.
2. The new block wall at the common property line between the project site and 9649 Calle Vejar and
8378/8398 Archibald Avenue shall be constructed of concrete masonry units with a decorative finish
such as stucco. The east face of the existing walls along the common property lines between the
• project site and 9648 Calle Vejar and 9648/9649 Friant Street shall be refinished to match the new
walls.
3. The new trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standard. The design of the trash enclosures
shall incorporate the materials, finish, color, and trim used on the buildings.
4. The Southern California Edison transformer box shall be located at the northeast corner of the site.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated
into the project design without discussion.
1. All ground-mounted equipment and utility boxes including transformers, back-flow devices, etc. shall be
screened by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced a minimum of 18 inches on center. This
equipment shall be painted forest green.
2. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be placed 5 feet from
the right-of-way and shall be screened on three sides behind a 4-foot high wall designed to match the
building.
3. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or a similarly dark color.
4. Decorative paving shall be provided at all vehicular access points onto the site.
5. All doors (roll-up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent
wall or glass panel.
6. All downspouts on all elevations shall be routed through the interior of the building.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the architecture and provide
additional input and direction as appropriate. Staff also recommends that the project be approved, subject to
the revisions discussed above and any additional comments from the Committee, which can be verified by
staff, and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the proposal and deemed it to be
unacceptable. The Committee stated that the architecture of the buildings is incompatible with the existing
development that surrounds the project site and, in general, with what would be expected in the City. The
architecture is lacking warmth because of the proposed materials and finishes. The Committee indicated that
the applicant should consider introducing wood as a possible material. The massing and form of the buildings
were unacceptable and stood in contrast to the residential development to the west. Lastly, the Committee
recommended against making both buildings identical to each other. The applicant was directed to
substantially revise the proposal and resubmit it for a follow-up review by the Committee at a later date.
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Mike Smith May 18, 2010
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00493 —
GB ARCHITECTS - A request to construct two office/professional buildings of 25,600 square feet on
3 vacant parcels, with a combined area of 2.5 acres in the Office/Professional (OP) District, located at
the northwest comer of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route - APN: 0208-811-59, -58, and -60. Related
file: Uniform Sign Program DRC2010-00092.
Background: This application was previously reviewed by the Design Review Committee on
February 2, 2010. The Committee reviewed the proposal and deemed it to be unacceptable. The
Committee stated that the architecture of the buildings is incompatible with the existing development that
surrounds the project site and, in general, with what would be expected in the City. The architecture is
lacking warmth because of the proposed materials and finishes. The Committee indicated that the
applicant should consider introducing wood as a possible material. The massing and form of the
buildings were unacceptable and stood in contrast to the residential development to the west. Lastly, the
Committee recommended against making both buildings identical to each other. The applicant was
directed to substantially revise the proposal and resubmit it for a follow-up review by the Committee at a
later date.
In the interim period between February 2, 2010, and now, the applicant has been working on the
revisions. The applicant has been making incremental revisions and submitting the preliminary designs
to the Planning Department for discussion. In response, staff has been directing him to further refine the
design by incorporating various trim, features, and other elements. To ensure that the proposal will be
satisfactory to the Committee, staff has concluded that the Committee should review the applicant's
progress and provide comments.
Staff Comments: The following items are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
1. Is the overall design theme acceptable?
2. Is the quality of the design consistent with the Committee's expectations?
3. Is the applicant using and applying appropriate trim, elements, and features to match the design
theme?
4. Is the massing and scale acceptable for the site?
5. Are two identical buildings acceptable, or should there be a clear difference between the two
buildings?
Staff Recommendation: None. This is a review of the applicant's progress.
Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the applicant's revised proposal and
concluded that the applicant was generally making progress in the right direction. The principal concern
was that the revisions made the buildings look too much like residential structures, such as apartments,
when they needed to look more like offices. The Committee instructed the applicant to strive for a high
caliber design that reflects a warm, office professional building. The Committee also indicated that the
architecture should not focus on providing multiple exterior entrances that are typical of retail projects
considering that the underlying land uses that are allowed in the zoning district are office-intensive and
retail opportunities are limited. The number of individual storefront entrances, therefore, should be
EXHIBIT B
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2009-00493 —GB ARCHITECTS
May 18, 2010
Page 2
minimized. In order to reinforce the office professional district, the entrance to each tenant space should
be via the interior of the building with access to the outside through a common lobby. The applicant
requested that the two end units of each building be allowed to have direct access to the outside; this
request was accepted by the Committee. Lastly, the Committee indicated that the area around the lobby
entrance of each building should be significantly enhanced to reflect their importance as the main
entrance.
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:20 p.m. Mike Srnith July 6, 2010
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00493
GB ARCHITECTS - A request to construct two office/professional buildings of 25,600 square feet on
three vacant parcels with a combined area of 2.5 acres in the Office/Professional (OP) District, located at
the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route - APN: 0208-811-59, -58, and -60. Related
file: Uniform Sign Program DRC2010-00092. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
environmental impacts for consideration.
Background: This application was previously reviewed by the Design Review Committee on
February 2, 2010. The Committee reviewed the proposal and deemed it to be unacceptable. The
Committee stated that the architecture of the buildings is incompatible with the existing development that
surrounds the project site and in general with what would be expected in the City. The architecture is
lacking warmth because of the proposed materials and finishes. The Committee indicated that the
applicant should consider introducing wood as a possible material. The massing and form of the
buildings were unacceptable and stood in contrast to the residential development to the west. Lastly, the
Committee recommended against making both buildings identical to each other. The applicant was
directed to substantially revise the proposal and resubmit it for a follow-up review by the Committee at a
later date.
On May 18, 2010, the Committee conducted a "status update" of the applicant's revised proposal and
concluded that the applicant was generally making progress in the right direction. The principal concern
was that the revisions made the buildings look too much like residential structures, such as apartments.
The Committee indicated that the buildings must convey office/professional architecture. The Committee
instructed the applicant to strive for a high caliber design that reflects a warm office professional building.
The Committee also indicated that the architecture should not focus on providing multiple exterior
entrances that are typical of retail projects, considering that the underlying land uses that are allowed in
the zoning district are office-intensive and retail opportunities are limited. The number of individual
storefront entrances, therefore, should be minimized. In order to reinforce the office professional district,
the entrance to each tenant space should be via the interior of the building with access to the outside
through a common lobby. The applicant requested that the two end units of each building be allowed to
have direct access to the outside; this request was accepted by the Committee. Lastly, the Committee
indicated that the area around the lobby entrance of each building should be significantly enhanced to
reflect their importance as the main entrance.
In the interim period between May 18, 2010, and now, the applicant has further refined the proposal to
incorporate the Committee's comments and direction. The applicant's architect has made changes and
submitted the preliminary designs to the Planning Department for discussion. To ensure that the
proposal will be satisfactory to the Committee, staff is requesting that the Committee review the
applicant's progress and provide comments.
Staff Comments: The following items are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
1. Is the overall design theme acceptable?
2. Is the quality of the design consistent with the Committee's expectations?
EXHIBIT C
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2009-00493— GB ARCHITECTS
July 6, 2010
Page 2
3. Is the applicant using and applying appropriate trim, elements, and features to match the design
theme?
4. Is the massing and scale acceptable for the site?
Staff Recommendation: None. This is a review of the applicant's progress.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee reviewed several variations of the applicant's revised proposal for each building and
concluded that the best version was "Idea No. 3." The form and massing of this version is generally
similar to that of the proposal that was first submitted for Committee review on April 6, 2010. However,
the applicant has significantly revised the details. The changes include the elimination of most of the
vertical elements that visually interrupted the horizontal elements with the center_lower' element
becoming the only significant vertical feature and incorporation of conventional parapets in lieu of the
angled parapets. Also, the applicant proposes the use of different materials that are 'warmer' including
the use of wood siding and mullions instead of tile and metal mullions. Stackstone will be used
principally at the tower element to establish its significance as the main entrance into the building. The
applicant also removed the majority of the exterior store front doors and relocated the entrances of each
tenant-space (where the change occurred) to the interior of the building. The applicant requested that
both buildings be allowed to be identical, and this request was accepted by the Committee. The
Committee identified several issues that the applicant needed to be aware of: a) the presence of glass
on the west elevation should be minimized to minimize the potential impact of reflected sunlight on the
residences to the west of the project site, and b) the wood siding may impact the location and installation
options for signs on the building. The applicant indicated that he would address both issues
accordingly. This application will be reviewed at a follow-up Design Review Committee meeting at a later
date for action and recommendation to the Planning Commission.
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Burnett
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
•
6' HIGH y`vy ` •'^"
0 alt,r air - _ ._;eve. Y 7 - le
, Iv \
C-.
MIN SETBACK
— _ 1' ss.—� FOR BUILDING,
i ' o•,■� _ }' LAN. DSCAPING &
'r'
0 1
AR 1' OVERHANG �0 ii
'i
V y 6 ., ii:lo ;1', 1
0
se*fi PARK. SP. 1
.,
_ ,.__�
- - _ -- - -- - = 24'-0" 4:7----- 7-2' n
- o - -LANDS��� i I. i I.
W0ICYPEU
PARKING
I I'6'-c , N
j
i
CAR 1' OVERHANG ®PARK. SP. 1 —_—
1
BE PARK. SP. MIN SETBACK
I—FC R BUILDING,
LANDSCAPING &
1
11__
i
T
METAL MESH
SCREEN 4' HIGH — 1
SCAPE —� - f i
DOUBLE CHECK
DETECTOR (DDC)� 1
IJ
�� ' DRIVEWAY ACCESS ',
116 .
EXHIBIT D - 'rept1 -4.4
EXIST BLOCK WALL _ + \ N /
6' HIGH �/
ur ssLred iv fr
Ars il MIN SETBACK
L�r II -� FCR BUILDING,
�t• LANDSCAPING &
•
o a.. „_o�l
NO 0 ��'
V' 1' OVERHANG
0
1 1
� ° 0 +
�� • PARK. SP.
p ,al
3 D n , I
- - --- �471/1,�/` A' rn
1 --cam ��p \ i•� lir as NDSCA•�� co oc.
1 - The tenant space is shifted west; _
CAR 1' OVERHANG ®PARK. SP. 1
2 - The landscape depth at the north/south sides 1
of each building reduced to about 1-foot to 2 feet; MI SETBACK
TO BE NI am, F.R BUILDING,
3 - The landscape depth at the east sides of • DSCAPING &
each building increased to about 18 feet; 1 IMII
IL 4 - The landscape depth at the west sides of
each building reduced to about 4 feet
� +
— 0 0— — — — — — —KZ II 31'-6" I
FDC 1
METAL MESH /
SCREEN 4' HIGH �_5• 1
1DSCAPE DOUBLE CHECK
DETECTOR (DDC)
1 +
11J.DRIVEWAY ACCESS i ,
�S1 E WALK moo. 'C I 351-1" ` y �.
EXHIBIT E ��,�p� �,,-
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Mike Smith August 3, 2010
UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2010-00092 - GB ARCHITECTS - A Uniform Sign Program for
proposed office/professional building of 31,485 square feet on three vacant parcels with a combined area
of 2.5 acres in the Office/Professional (OP) District, located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue
and Arrow Route - APN: 0208-811-58, -59, and -60. Related file: Development Review
DRC2009-00493.
Background: The proposed sign program is for a project that will consist of two identical two-story
office/professional buildings, with a combined floor area of 27,525 square feet. The tenants are
unspecified, but the mix is anticipated to consist mostly of administrative/professional offices. The
buildings will have fourteen (14) tenant spaces each. The site layout is arranged with the buildings
situated on the west side of the site, while the parking area will be along the street frontage of
Archibald Avenue. Additional parking will be located along the street frontage at Arrow Route and
between the two buildings. The general arrangement of both buildings will have a prominent entrance at
the center of each east elevation of the building that leads to a lobby. The majority of the entrances to
the tenant spaces on the first floor and all of the tenants on the second floor of each building will be
through the lobby. Some of the first floor tenants of each building will have their respective_primary
entrances opening to the exterior of the building on the east elevation facing Archibald Avenue.
Design Parameters: _..
The program proposes two categories of wall signs — Sign Type A and Sign Type B. .Sign Type A is
reserved for the tenant located at the respective north and south ends of each building. 'Sign Type B is
for all the other tenants on the first floor. The six (6) second floor tenants and the two (2) rear tenants will
not be permitted to have wall signs. Sign Type A has a larger maximum horizontal dimension,(14 feet)
compared to Sign Type B (9 feet). The maximum vertical dimensions for both are the same at 2 feet —
6 inches (30 inches). The logo of each tenant's wall sign is included in the maximum horizontal and
vertical dimensions, i.e. the logo must fit within the sign area as noted. Each category is limited to
illuminated channel letters 5 inches deep.
Each building will have wood siding. As tenants change, there is a significant potential for damage
caused by drilling holes for anchoring the letters and electrical wiring repeatedly through this material.
This construction challenge is not typical as the exterior wall faces to which signs are attached to on
most buildings generally are either finished with stucco or are concrete tilt-up wall panels. Under normal
circumstances, when there is a change in tenant, the sign is removed at the holes left behind are
repaired with no significant damage or evidence of the repair. The applicant's solution is to use an
aluminum backing plate that is 3-inches thick that will be permanently mounted at each sign area. The
channel letters will be attached to the aluminum backing plate.
The applicant also proposes two (2) monument signs — one near the drive entrance at Arrow Route and
a second at the drive entrance at Archibald Avenue. At the time of writing this report, the applicant had
not submitted design or construction information for the monument signs. However, staff can coordinate
with the applicant this information and verify that these signs comply with the City's Sign Ordinance
DRC AGENDA
DRC2010-00092— GB ARCHITECTS
August 3, 2010
Page 2
In general, the proposed sign program complies with the standards and guidelines set forth in the Sign
Ordinance, including the maximum number of signs per tenant, wall sign construction/materials, and the
basic dimensions of each wall sign, including sign area and text height. Each proposed sign location and
area meets the intent of the Sign Ordinance. There are some technical issues to be resolved as the
applicant has excluded information regarding the window signs and the monument signs. The applicant
has proposed three (3) fonts that could be used (Times Roman, Avant Garde, and Helvetica), with the
option to allow for a corporate trademarked font. Staff has no concerns with this font as it is legible and
similar to other fonts used on other office and commercial buildings. Likewise, the option to have
corporate trademarked font is acceptable as it is a department policy to allow them.
With the exception of the wood siding discussed above, the signs will not negatively impact any
significant architectural features, elements, or details. Negative impacts to the surrounding property
owners will be,minimal. The signs will be on the elevations facing Arrow Route, Archibald Avenue, and
on the north and south elevations of each building. Signs on the west elevation facing the residences to
the west are not proposed.
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. Staff requests comment regarding the aluminum backing plate and if necessary, discussion of
other solutions. If the aluminum backing plate is permitted, staff recommends that it should be
painted to match the color of the adjacent wood siding. Also, the dimensions of the backing plate
should be equal to the maximum vertical and horizontal dimensions of each sign area to minimize
its visibility.
2. Staff requests comment regarding the overall vertical dimension of each sign. Typically for
commercial projects with in-line tenants the maximum vertical dimension is 18 inches. A maximum
vertical dimension of 30 inches is usually reserved for large tenants, i.e. anchor tenants or tenants
that occupy the entire floor area of a 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. According to the applicant, there will be restrictions on which tenants will be allowed to have wall
signs. Although there are fourteen (14) potential tenants, the applicant has elected to restrict the
number of signs on each building. Furthermore, there will be no signs on the second floor.
Clarification of which tenant has the "right" to a sign space on each building is required and the
appropriate text and graphic information incorporated into the sign program. The applicant shall
incorporate into the sign program the appropriate text stating, and graphics indicating, this
information.
•
2. There are two (2) sign locations proposed on the north and south elevations of each building — a
total of four (4) per building. However, there is only one tenant at north and south end of each
building. It is the policy of the Design Review Committee and the Planning Department to only
allow signs on the wall plane adjacent to the tenant space entrance where the sign is proposed to
be located. Therefore, the maximum number of sign locations proposed on the north and south
elevations of each building should be one (1) — a total of two (2) per building. The applicant shall
correct this and revise the sign program accordingly.
DRC AGENDA
DRC2010-00092—GB ARCHITECTS
August 3, 2010
Page 3
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
1. The applicant is advised that the addition of any tenants, which will warrant additional sign
locations, any modifications to the location, and physical dimensions of signs will require an
amendment to this Uniform Sign Program for review and approval by the Planning Director and/or
the Design Review Committee.
2. Provide detailed design/construction information for the monument signs.
Staff Recommendation: Provided that the Major Issues identified above are addressed to the
satisfaction of the Committee, staff recommends that the Uniform Sign Program be approved.
Corrections to the text/graphics and design/construction information can be coordinated with staff. The
revised/corrected sign program shall be provided to staff for verification prior to forwarding the document
to the Planning Commission for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
Members Present:
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:00 p.m. Mike Smith April 6, 2010
UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2010-00092 - GB ARCHITECTS - A Uniform Sign Program for
Development Review DRC2009-00493, a proposal to construct two office/professional buildings of
25,600 square feet on three vacant parcels with a combined area of 2.5 acres in the Office/Professional
(OP) District, located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Arrow Route - APN: 0208-811-59,
-58, and -60. Related file: DRC2009-00493.
Background: The proposed sign program is for a project that will consist of two identical two-story
office/professional buildings, with a combined floor area of 25,600 square feet. The tenants are
unspecified, but the mix is anticipated to consist mostly of administrative/professional offices. The
buildings will have eight (8) tenant spaces each. The site layout is arranged with the buildings situated
on the west side of the site, while the parking area will be along the street frontage of Archibald Avenue.
Additional parking will be located along the street frontage at Arrow Route and between the two
buildings. The general arrangement of both buildings will have a prominent entrance at the center of
each east elevation of the building that leads to a lobby. The first floor tenants at the east side (or front)
of each building will have their respective primary entrances opening to the exterior of the building on the
east elevation facing Archibald Avenue. The entrances to the tenant spaces located at the west side (or
rear) and on the second floor of each building will be through the lobby.
Design Parameters:
The program proposes two categories of wall signs — Sign Type A and Sign Type B. The categories are
not specific to a tenant with a specific floor area as is typical. Instead, the categories are applicable to
the location of the tenant space relative to the available sign areas at each tenant space. Hence, Sign
Type A has a larger maximum horizontal dimension (13 feet) compared to Sign Type B (8 feet). The
maximum vertical dimensions for both are the same at 2 feet (24 inches). The logo of each tenant's wall
sign is included in the maximum horizontal and vertical dimensions, i.e. the logo must fit within the sign
area as noted. Each category is limited to illuminated channel letters.
In general, the proposed sign program complies with the standards and guidelines set forth in the Sign
Ordinance, including the maximum number of signs per tenant, wall sign construction/materials, and the
basic dimensions of each wall sign, including sign area and text height. Each proposed sign location and
area meets the intent of the Sign Ordinance. There are some technical issues to be resolved as the
applicant has excluded information regarding window signs. The applicant has proposed three (3) fonts
that could be used (Times Roman, Avant Garde, and Helvetica), with the option to allow for a corporate
trademarked font. Staff has no concerns with this font as it is legible and similar to other fonts used on
other office and commercial buildings. Likewise, the option to have corporate trademarked font is
acceptable as it is a department policy to allow them.
The signs will not negatively impact any significant architectural features, elements, or details. The signs
will be on the elevations facing Arrow Route, Archibald Avenue, and on the north and south elevations of
each building. A monument sign and signs on the west elevation facing the residences to the west are
not proposed. The applicant has elected to restrict the number of signs on each building to a total of ten
(10). However, there are fourteen (14) potential tenants. Furthermore, there will be no signs on the
second floor. Clarification of which tenant has the "right"to a sign space on each building is required and
the appropriate text and graphic information incorporated into the sign program.
EXHIBIT A
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2010-00092— GB ARCHITECTS
April 6, 2010
Page 2
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. Clarify which tenant has the "right" to a sign space on each building, and incorporate into the sign
program the appropriate text stating, and graphics indicating, this information. If all tenants are
permitted to have signs, then the locations for each sign shall be shown with the corresponding
text/graphic information.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
1. None.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
1. The applicant is advised that the addition of any tenants, which will warrant additional sign
locations, any modifications to the location, and physical dimensions of signs, or the addition of
monument signs will require an amendment to this Uniform Sign Program for review and approval
by the Planning Director and/or the Design Review Committee.
2. Provide detailed construction information and installation instructions for the typical sign.
Staff Recommendation: With the Major Issue identified above satisfied, staff recommends that the
Uniform Sign Program be approved with the corrections to the text and graphics to be verified by staff.
The revised/corrected sign program shall be provided prior to forwarding the document to the Planning
Commission for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action: The Committee took no action on this proposed Uniform Sign
Program as the architecture of the two buildings for the related application, Development Review
DRC2009-00493, was deemed unacceptable. As the applicant must substantially revise the architecture
of the proposed buildings for which the sign program is designed, any changes to the buildings would
alter, and have to be reflected, in the sign program. Therefore, no comments/corrections can be
provided at this time.
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
....
RC TC C T5 PROJECT: OFFICE/PROFF. BUILDING
NORTH WEST CORNER OF
ARCHITECTURE . PLANNING • ENGINEERING ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA
400 N. MOUNTAIN AV. # 208
UPLAND, CA, 91786 OWNER: JAMIL SAMOUTH
(909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 DATE: 07-07-09
www.gbarchitects.org SHEET 1 OF 12 SHEETS
r
UNIFORM SIGN
PROGRAM
OFFICE/FROI-FE5IONAL BUILDING
NORTH WEST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AVE
$ ARROW RTE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA
91730
RELATED FILE: DRC 2009-00493
OWNER:
JAMIL SAMOUTH
4901 SKYLINE ROAD.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 9170 I
909-2 I 0-3002
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
JUL 19 2010
RECEIVED-PLANNING
rN
o
V N
* C-22961
9
,2t'OF CAVN4p
EXHIBIT B j
� 1 RC TC C T5 PROJECT:
NORTH EWESTTFCORNER BUILDING
OF
ARCHITECTURE . PLANNING . ENGINEERING ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
RANCHO CIICAMONGA CA
a00 N. MOUNTAIN OWNER: JAMIL SAMOUTH
UPLAND, CA, 91786
(909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 DATE: 07-07-09
www.gbarchitects.org SHEET 2 OF 12 SHEETS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE COVER
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2
PURPOSE OF PROGRAM 3
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 3-4
ALL COMPANIES BIDDING TO MANUFACTURE 4
CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 5
SIGN SPECIFICATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS 6
TENANT SIGNAGE CRITERIA 7
SIGN DIMENSIONS 8
EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS 9
NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS 10
SITE PLAN 1 1
EXAMPLES OF PERMITTED FONTS 12
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
JUL 19 2010
RECEIVED-PLANNING
6.[.-9 HR _ TC C T5 PROJECT: OFFICE/PROFF BUILDING
NORTH WEST CORNER OF
E)
K- IARCHITECTURE TAIN• PLANNING .2 OWNER:ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
RANCHO CA
400 N. MOUN AV. $ OWNER: UAMIL SAMOU AMOUTH
UPLAND, CA, 91786
(909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 DATE: 07-07-09
www.gbarchitects.org SHEET 3 OF 12 HEEIS—OMGA
I CITY OF RANCHO 0 I AM
JUL 19 2010 \\\
PURPOSE OF PROGRAM: RECENED.PUVOMNG
The Uniform Sign Program has been established for objective of assuring a cohesive
and attractive buildings with effective sign uniformity, yet at the same time giving each
tenant adequate identification. In order to maintaon the integrity of the criteria and
balance among all tenants, deviations from the criteria will not be approved.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:
I - All signs shall conform to the general requirements of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga's Sign Ordinance and this Uniform Sign Program.
2- Prior to sign fabrication, The tenant shall secure Landlord's approval with submittal
three (3) copies of the detailed sign design to the Owner/Landlord or property
Manager. Drawings shall depict the location , size, layout, design and color of the
proposed sign(s) including all letterings and method of construction and installation.
Submittal to the Owner/landlord or property Manager shall be done prior to
submitting to the city of Rancho Cucamonga for review and approval.
3- Tenant shall submit three (3) copies of Property Owner approved drawings of the
proposed signs to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California for review and approval.
4- Permits: The tenant or tenant's sign contaractor shall secure a sign permit from
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA by submitting three (3) copies of fully dimensioned
scaled drawings as follows:
a. A site plan showing the location of the tenant space width, color(s), materials,
dimensions and copy.
b. A detailed elevation of the tenant lease space drawn to scale and showing sign or
sign placement and tenant space width, color(s), materials, dimensions and copy.
c.Fabrication and installation details, including structural and engineering data, U.L
electrical specifications.
d.Any other drawings , detailsand information as required by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, CA.
5- Costs of permits: All permits for signs and the installation thereof shall be
obtained by the tenant's sign contractor and paid for by the tenant.
G- Only after proper review and approval by the city of Rancho Cucamonga, shall
signs be installed by a properly insured licensed sign professional.
7- Compliance Codes: All signs and the installation thereof shall comply with all
current local Zoning, building and elecctrical codes.
C I
�B H RE H TE E T5 PROJECT: OFFICE/PROFF BUILDING
' GD , NORTH WEST CORNER OF
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • ENGINEERING ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
RAN�HL SAMOUTH
CA
\ 400 N. MOUNTAIN AV. 208 OWNER: JAMIL SAMOUTH
UPLAND, CA, 91786
(909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 DATE: 07-07-09
www.gbarchitects.org SHEET 4 OF 12 SHEETS
ALL COMPANIES BIDDING TO MANUFACTURE:
I - All companies bidding to manufacture and install an tenant's sign are advised that
no substitutes will be accepted by the landlord whatsoever, unless so indicated in to
specifications which are approved in writing by the landlord. Signs that deviate from
these criteria without such approval must be removed at the tenant's expense.
2- Sign company shall have C-45 license and be insured by an admitted carrier for
the total aggregate of One Million ( I ,000,000) dollars. The Owner/Landlord and/or
Property manager shall be named as an additional insured and a record of such shall
be produced to all parties prior to the commencement of installation.
3- The tenant's sign company shall completely erect and connect (including all wiring)
the subject sign in accordance with these criteria and all local zoning, building
electrical codes.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
JUL 19 2010
RECEIVED-PLANNING
/ CB RE TE E T5 PROJECT: OFFIH WEST BUILDING
NORTH WEST CORNER OF
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • ENGINEERING ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
RANCHO ( HrAMONGA CA
400 N. MOUNTAIN AV. # 208 OWNER: JAMIL SAMOUTH
UPLAND, CA, 91786
(909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 DATE: 07-07-09
www.gbarchitects.org SHEET 5 OF 12 SHEETS
CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS:
I - fasteners: All exterior signs, bolts, fastenings and clips shall be cadmium plated
steel, aluminium, brass or bronze. No black iron or other rust prone materials of any
type are permitted.
2- Conduit Opening: All penetrations of the building structure required for sign
installation and which have been approved in writing by the property owner of the
tenant's premises, shall be neatly sealed in water tight condition.
3- Labels: A.U.L. lable must be placed on every separate electrical sign element
each channel letter and/or sign cabinet). All required labels must be placed in a
conspicious location. No other labels are permitted.
4- Exposed raceways, lamps, or tubing is not permitted.
5- Concealement of Mechanical Equipment: Raceways, crossovers, conductors,
transformers and other equipment shall be concealed behind the wall fascia or parapet
of the building.
G- Electrical service to all signs shall be the tenant's meter and shall be part of the
tenant's operational costs.
7- Tenant shall be responsible for the installation, removal and maintenance of his/her
sign. Should tenant's sign requires maintenanceor repair, the Landlord or Property
Manager shall give tenant thirty (30) days written notice to perform repairs and/or
said maintenance.
Should tenant fail to do so within thirty (30) days, the Property Manager on behalf of
the Landlord may undertake repaires and invoice for charges incurred plus twenty(20)
percent. Tenant shall reimburse within ten ( I 0) days from receipt off invoice. If
reimbursement is not forthcoming other methods of collection shall be taken including
legal avenues of which all costs associated with the reimbursement collection shall
also be paid by tenant.
8- The Landlord has the right to change, amend, or waive portions of or all of these
criteria at any time and without prior notice to the tenants. Such changes shall be
subject to review and approvalby the city of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Departement
and will require amendment of this sign program.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
JUL 19 2010
RECD-PLANNING
G� RC TC C T5 PROJECT: OFFICE/PROFF. BUILDING
NORTH WEST CORNER OF
ARCHITECTURE . PLANNING . ENGINEERING ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
\ RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA
\ 400 N. MOUNTAIN AV. # 208
UPLAND, CA, 91786 OWNER: JAMIL SAMOUTH
(909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 DATE: 07-07-09
www.gbarchitects.org SHEET 6 OF 12 SHEETS
SIGN SPECIFICATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS:
I - All signs shall be attached to the building only at a location approved by the
landlord and the City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
2- flours of Business and Telephone numbers: Limited to no more than I bo sq.in. or
I 0% of window area, whichever Is less, for each business frontage with a costumer
entrance.
3- Suite Number Sign: The suite number or address of the lease space shall be
centered above the door 4" high with white venile film.
4- Flashing Signs: Animated, flashing or audible signs will NOT be permitted.
5- Signs shall be hinted to the name of the business. Logos may be used in
conjunction with the name of the business lettering.
G- No projections above, below or outside the sign area will be permitted.
7- Fainted lettering will not be permitted. Channel letters only.
8- No box or cabinet type signs allowed except for logo type cabinets.
9- There are three font options for tenant use:
a. Helvetica
b. Avant Garde
c. Times Roman
10- Trademarked signs, logos, colors and font styles shall be permitted; provided
that the design, color and spacing of letters have been approved in writing by the
landlord and by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
I I - Two monument signs are permitted at the two primary access points at the North
East corner and the South West corner of the project, having The main building ID
sign and address on each.(see sheet I I for location)
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
JUL 19 2010
RECEIVED-PLANNING
• C B RC T:ENGINEERING PROJECT: NORTHEWESTFCORNERDIOF
ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
�� ARCHITECTURE . PLANNING RANCHO CUCAMONCA CA
400 N. MOUNTAIN AV. 208 OWNER: JAMIL SAMOUTH
UPLAND, CA, 91786
(909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 DATE: 07-07-09
www.gbarchitects.org SHEET 7 OF 12 SHEETS
TENANT SIGNAGE CRITERIA:
I - for easy maintanance, All signs are to be mounted on permenant Aluminium back
panel, color coated with same color of wood siding background paint.
2-One main sign as depicted for each tenant in the east elevation facing the parking
lot within this sign program.
3- Businesses occupying more than one unit are still limited to one main sign.
4- Total single row sign shall not exceed 30" in height.
5- Signs are allowed on North and South elevations of each building with same
slgnage criteria.
G- Multiple row signs are NOT allowed.
7- Materials and colors:
a. Sign Face: Acrylic sheet. Landlord must approve colors prior to sign permit
submittal.
b. Letter return material: Aluminium, painted in dark bronze colors.
c. Letter return depth: 5" from the face of the building.
d. Trim cap size: 4"
e. Trademarked colores are permitted.Logos are permitted to be any color.
7- Lighting:
a. All signs shall be LED illumination with no exposed tubing.
b. All signs to be U.L. listed.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
JUL 19 2010
RECEIVED-PUNNING
C B RC TC C T5 PROJECT: OFFICE WEST C. BUILDING
NORTH WEST CORNER OF
, \Ea ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING . ENGINEERING ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
0
RANCHO IL SAMOUTH
CA
400 N. MOUNTAIN AV. # 208 OWNER: JAMIL SAMOUTH
UPLAND, CA, 91786
(909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 DATE: 07-07-09
www.gbarchitects.org SHEET 8 OF 12 SHEETS
SIGN BACK PANEI DIMENSIONS
Two sign Types will be used:
o 14'-0" Max 4'
(Sign Type A)
I N
N
o• k 9 —° k
(Sign Type D)
co
I s,
N
NOTE:
- All signs type (A) shall aligne verticaly with the extension line of the the glass
windows, and horizontaly centered and aligned with rest of signs.
-All signs type (5) on the East elevation to be horizontally I '6" away from the north #
south ends of wood sided background, and to be centered vertically.see sheet 9
- All signs (5) on the north and south elevations for both buildings shall aligne
verticaly with the line extension of the the wood post, and horizontaly with the signs
at the east elevation.
- Sign space in criteria listed above is applicable to all logos and letters.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
JUL 19 2010
RECEIVED'PLANNING
I
LE
1 K
I '
a)
(D O D
s -I
to MI
. ..
N
c-
3 II
CD* I I
CO I I
rr 11 -
N
E. LE
Z CO N Ihjill
O 9.
5- II
to Z < m
Co
II
(.11 n
rn
O
7: c9 ' I I I b -
Z
0
a
ni
(1t
z
z ci II
N
N II - I
to H R
5- -rt rn N II
r
rn tr
D 3 i II II
3 I
i /
Z I
N � $
N —
5-
O . 11
EL I I ii-t.
v III
co
� I
N
9
Ic:
II - LE
73
a
X>
CB RC T( C T5 PROJECT:OFFICE/ EST BUILDING
GB NORTH WEST CORNER OF
ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
ARCHITECTURE . PLANNING . ENGINEERING y....----- N RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA
/ 'g JAMIL SAMOUTH
400 N. MOUNTAIN 208 °• o , ' x OWNER:
UPLAND, CA, 91786 DATE: 07-07-09
h.
\N-.- (909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 •or SHEET T 9 OF 12 SHEETS
www.gbarchitects.org - -- - -
iii I"II os
tLt 1�1EI .� .
€th
n 3
St ri
il UII.'
iU1�U11.
(U) NOG� RC TE C TS PROJECT: OFFICE WEST . BUILDING
RTH WEST CORNER OF
ADRE55: ARCHIBALD AVE. 8c ARROW RTE.
ARCHITECTURE • • J " \� RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA
400 N. MOUNTAIN AV. 208 * c-aee�
-` OWNER: TAMIL SAMOUTH
UPLAND, CA, 91786 DATE: 07-07-09
_ h'y.
K (909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 \q�cwr SHEET 10 OF 12 SHEETS
\ www.gbarchitects.org
. r ----\
__ t
L. El
a,.J .
ARROW RTE.
- - __
z 1, I 1 1 7 I I T I I ' I I I
14 II .k
Ailmimi 1
it I - :,.�I
--Oil
r
l=i
•• : 1 i r:. Y l
<I
1 k -
' _ �h / z
a 1 - ,�.� III 1 I _ E; _-
b I
7luimu I fi
a I —
j `I
4. I
_J 1 _,
3inoa noaav •n _ 7
T
y _ 91 _ /
r ' p CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONO
ElJUL 19 2010
RECEIVED•PLANNING
%5fjjZ\ C TE C T_ _G / DATE: ARCHIBALD FF. U ARROW RTE.
4:13 RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CA
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • ENGINEERING L ":\'`a
/ OWNER: JAMIL SAMOUTH
/ 400 N. MOUNTAIN AV. # 208 * `- '
UPLAND, CA, 91786 :/ DATE: 07-07-09
\ (909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 oP csS SHEET 11 OF 12 SHEETS
\\ www.gbarchitects.org ..
i
• GB H RE — TE E T5 PROJECT: OFFICE/PROFF. BUILDING
GB NORTH WEST CORNER O
ARCHITECTURE . PLANNING . ENGINEERING ADRESS: ARCHIBALD AVE. & ARROW RTE.
\ RANCHO AMOUT NGA. CA
\\ 400 N. MOUNTAIN AV. # 208 OWNER: JAMIL SAMOUTH
UPLAND, CA, 91786
(909) 949-6999 FAX (909) 949-2928 DATE: 07-07-09
www.gbarchitects.org SHEET 12 OF 12 SHEETS
PERMITTED FONT STYLES EXAMPLES
ABCDEFGHIJKLMN ABCDEFGHIJKLMN
OPQRSTUVWXYZA OPQRSTUVWXYZAA
AElooabcdefghijklm Elabcdefghijklmno
nopgrstuvwxyzaaeiopu pgrstuvwxyzaaei&
&1234567890($£.,!?) 1234567890($£.,!?)
Times romans font style Avant Garde font style
ABCDEFGHIJKLMN
OPQRSTUVWXYZA
AElOabcdefghijklmn
opgrstuvwxyzaaeio&
1234567890($£.,!?)
helvetica font style
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
JUL 19 2010
RECEIVED-PLANNING
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:00 p.m. Mike Smith August 3, 2010
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2010-00277 —
BONALDO ENGINEERING (FOR CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES (DMV) - A
proposal to demolish an existing building of approximately 15,000 square feet that was formerly used as
a local office for the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and construct a new building of
approximately 18,000 square feet for the same purpose in the General Industrial (GI) District
(Subarea 3), located at 8629 Hellman Avenue - APN: 0209-022-16. Related file: Development Review
DR90-05. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of
•
the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines.
Design Parameters: The subject property is 3.2-acre parcel located at the east side of Hellman Avenue
approximately 215 feet north of 9th Street. The parcel is generally square in shape; the primary street
frontage is along Hellman Avenue. There is a relatively narrow strip that measures 215 feet (north
to south) and approximately 50 feet (east to west) that links the parcel with 9th Street to the south. The
overall dimensions of the parcel, not including the narrow strip, are approximately 413 feet (north to
south) by approximately 316 feet (east to west). The site is presently improved with a one-story vacant
office building of approximately 15,000 square feet and associated improvements including a parking lot
and on-site and perimeter landscaping. There is vehicle access to the site via two driveways - one on
the Hellman Avenue frontage at the southwest corner of the site and another on the 9th Street frontage
at the end of the above-noted strip. The California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) previously used
this building for their offices but vacated it several years ago and relocated to their current location at the
northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and 9th Street. The site is bound on all four sides by industrial
buildings. The zoning of the property and the properties to the north, east, and south is General
•
Industrial (GI) District (Subarea 3), while the properties to the west are zoned General Industrial (GI)
District (Subarea 2.)
The applicant, on behalf of the DMV, proposes to demolish the existing building, and at the same
location within the site, construct a new one-story office building of approximately 18,000 square feet.
One of the applicant's design goals is Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
certification. To achieve this goal, the building will be of wood-frame construction with a synthetic
stucco/plaster finish (otherwise known as Exterior Insulation Finishing System - EIFS). The design of the
roof will be a blend of a pitched and a flat roof system. The pitched parts of the roof will have a standing
seam metal cladding, while the flat roof will be finished with a conventional built-up roofing (or
equivalent). Both the flat sections and the roof-mounted mechanical equipment will be adequately
screened from view by the pitched portions of the roof. Included in the design of the building will be an
array of roof-mounted solar panels on an angled roof deck. Additional architectural features include two
metal-clad canopies — one over the main entrance at the west side of the building and another over the
secondary entrance/carport at the north side of the building. A third metal-clad open trellis is proposed
over the employee break area located at the east side of the building.
The existing parking lot will generally remain unchanged. A new slurry coat will be applied, new parking
stall striping will be painted, and the existing landscape planters will be modified slightly or removed to
accommodate additional parking stalls. Additionally, new raised landscape planters will be installed near
the main entrance, and new tree diamond wells will be constructed along the south side of the building.
The required landscape coverage for this development district is 12 percent; the proposed landscape
DRC AGENDA
DRC2010-00277— BONALDO ENGINEERING (FOR CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES)
August 3, 2010
Page 2
coverage is 14.9 percent. A new wrought iron fence with pilasters will be installed along the perimeter of
the site for security purposes. Rolling wrought iron gates will be installed across the drive aisles; these
gates will open during operating hours. A new driveway, for right-turn exits only, will be constructed at
the northwest corner of the site at Hellman Avenue. The other two driveway access points will remain in
place.
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.
None.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
1. Provide short low-growth trees in the raised planters proposed near the main entrance of the
building at the southwest corner, and in the landscape planter in the parking lot the at east side of
the building to comply with Section 17.10.040(C)(2) and (3) of the Development Code which
requires trees to be planted at a rate of one tree for every three parking stalls and in areas of public
view adjacent to and along structures at an rate of one tree for every 30 linear feet of building face.
2. The landscape plan shall comply with Ordinance No. 823, a new Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance adopted by the Rancho Cucamonga City Council On December 2, 2009.
3. The combined maximum height of the retaining wall along the north property line and the wrought
iron fence above it shall not exceed 8 feet.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
1. All ground-mounted equipment and utility boxes, including transformers, back-flow devices, etc.,
shall be screened by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced a minimum of 18 inches on center.
This equipment shall be painted forest green.
2. All Double Detector Checks (DDCs) and Fire Department Connections (FDCs) shall be screened
on three sides behind the 4-foot high walls. The walls shall incorporate the design and materials
used on the building.
3. All doors (roll-up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the
adjacent wall or glass panel.
4. All trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standard. The design of the trash enclosures
shall incorporate the materials, finish, color, and trim used on the buildings.
5. Submit an Arborist Report that discusses the trees on the subject property. A Tree Removal Permit
and fee of $694 are required prior to the removal of any trees subject to the City's Tree
Preservation Ordinance. If these trees can be protected in place or relocated, that option must be
considered first. Include with the report a site plan that shows the location of all trees. A
corresponding table shall be provided listing which trees are to remain and which are to be
removed. The report and application shall be submitted prior to issuance of grading and/or building
permits.
DRC AGENDA
DRC2010-00277— BONALDO ENGINEERING (FOR CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES)
August 3, 2010
Page 3
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning
Director for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner Mike Smith
Members Present: