Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989/12/07 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: December 8, 1989 PI~TIO~I COMMEI~TS T0: ~ial/Industrial 9esi~n Review Co~jttee 5uzanne Chitjea Peter Tolstoy Dan Coleman Betsy We~nbe~er 7R~: B~ce ~bbott, hssocjate Planner SUBJECT: DESI6N REVIEW C~I~EE ~EETIN6 07 DEC~BER The following is a description of projects which require review and rating by the Design Review Committee. Please review the attached plans, visit the project sites, and write down your comments using the blank space provided under each project on the attached sheets. After the meeting, the consensus of the Committee's concerns will be typed up as the formal action/recommendation of the Committee and distributed to the Commission and Council. As always, feel free to contact the appropriate project manager (noted in parentheses along the left margin), prior to the meeting date, if you have specific questions related to the scheduled projects. Dinner will be provided between 5:00 - 5:30 p.m., Consent Calendar items will be reviewed between 5:30 p.m. 6:00 p.m., with the first design review item being heard at 6:00 p.m. Please notify our department if you will be unable to attend the meeting, or if you will be late, so that the dinner can be properly ordered and the necessary arrangements made. 6:00- 6:30 (Steve R.) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-25 - BURKE COMMERCIAL DEVELOF~IENT - The development of a business park totaling 142,330 square feet on 9.6 acres of land in Sub area 6 of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at the northwest 'corner of Trademark and Center Avenue - APN: 210-072-33. BA:mlg Attachments cc: Planning Commission/City Council COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSENT CALEND/~R ITEMS AGENDA December 7, 1989 I. OR 89-11 - J.A. STEWART CONST. (Tom) Review of revised building elevations and site plan. Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the revised building elevation and site plan and made the following recommendations: 1. Expand the glass area at the office entryway to encompass the area between the sandblasted co lumns. 2. Expand the material size of the metal truss system above the entryway to a mere substantial size. A minimem size should be three {3) inches in diameter. 3. A painted decorative reveal should be added to al 1 elevations. The suggested location is at the elevation midpoint where the sandblasted finish changes to a smooth painted finish. 2. OR 88-44 - BARASCI~ ARCHITECTS (Bruce) Review of building color alternatives. Committee Action: The Design Review Committee (Chitea, Tolstoy and Bullet) appreved the alternate color No. 4032 Indian Bead which is to be used for the accent nullion. It was determined that the accent mullions to be painted with Indian Bead will consist of the two horizontal mullion below the spandrel glass including the vertical nullion between the two horizontal mullions. The Committee also determined that the Indian Bead color shall be used in the band formed by the two reveals below the accent broken band to be painted with 2M40D Jaquar gray. The indian bead colored band shall be continued around the entire building including the roll-up doors. CONSENT CALENDAR Page 2 3. CUP 88-18 - DIVERSIFI~ (Bruce) Review of alternative circulation for McDonald's Fast Food Restaurant. Committee Action: The Design Review Committee (Chitlea, Tolstoy and Bullet} approved the parking lot configuration and circulation at the northeast portion of the McDonald's Restaurant as proposed. This plan was a modification to option "A" as approved by Planning Commission on Nove~er 9,1989, and is subject to approval by Lucky Market representatives. The Committee recommended that Mcdonald's designate the spaces directly to the north of the drive-thru entrance as employee parking. The Planning Division must receive written configuration from Lucky Markets of their approval. 4. DR 88-04- CARNEY ARCHIll~CTS (Bruce) Review of waterscape materials. Committee Action: The Design Review Committee (Chitlea, Tolstoy, Weinberger and McNiel) did not approve the use of the fiberglass reinforced concrete rock for the proposed waterscape at Arrow/Haven Corporate Park. The Committee suggested that the applicant may request a determination from Planning Commission for use of the material. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00- 6:30 Steve R. December 7, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-25 - BURKE COMMERCIA) DEVELOPMENT - The development of a business park totaling 142,330 square feet on 9.6 acres of land in Subarea 6 of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at the northwest corner of Trademark and Center Avenue APN: 210-072-33. Staff Comlents: Access and Circulation: 1. The proposed intersection of Trademark and Center Avenue should be redesigned to provide more functional circulation. 2. Interior circulation should be more clearly defined with increased landscaping throughout the site. Site Plan: 1. The site plan consists of eleven (11) buildings which are surrounded by drive aisles and parking spaces. Landscaping should be increased around the buildings. 2. Special paving across drive aisles should be used to connect the walkways. 3. The two plaza areas should be pedestrian oriented and should be moved towards the interior part of the site. Architecture: 1. Building elevations should incorporate more openings and recesses which create shadow patterns. 2. Buildings at the project entrance should receive enhanced treatment. 3. Building elevations should continue the textured treatment around onto al 1 sides. Design Review Conmittee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tolstoy, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Steve Ross DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-25 - BURKE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Page 2 Site Plan and Landscape 1. The proposed intersection of Trademark and Center Avenues must be redesigned to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department. 2. The circulation system through the site (still) consists of drive aisles with parking on either side, with minimal landscaping, therefore, the Design Review Committee recommended decreased landscape throughout the site. 3. Parking area should be replaced with large landscaped islands, along the main "U"-shaped drive aisle and the extension of Trademark Avenue. Clusters of accent trees should be placed in these areas. 4. The northeast corner of Building 20 should be a continuation of the plaza at the main entry to the site. 5. The arbor concept should be continued around the main loop road. The arbor along the north side of Buildings 17-20 should be moved to the south side of Building 1-6. This will provide a connection between the north and south sides of the project. 6. Pedestrian connections across drive aisles should be emphasized with enhanced paving material, such as interlocking concrete pavers. This same treatment should extend from building entrances to the drive aisles to lead pedestrians into the buildings. 7. Increased landscaping should be used at the project entry. Additional landscaping area should be used at the northeast corner of Building 1. Increased special paving should be used at the main entry. 8. All trash enclosures along the main drive aisle should be moved to less visible areas. 9. Significant landscaped connections to the proposed regional trail along the Deer Creek Channel should be incorporated into the project design. 10. A perimeter fence should be provided along the west property boundary along the Deer Creek Channel. This fence should be decorative wrought iron with significant pilasters designed to compliment the design of the project. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-25 - BURKE CO~ERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Page 3 11. The circular lights on top of the arbor columns should be eliminated. These should be replaced with flush ground uplights at the base of the columns. A decorative cap should be added to the Columns. 12. A qualified landscape architect will be required to certify that the proposed arbor structure will provide a thriving environment for the Wisteria vine. 13. Significant public art should be provided at the corner of Center and Trademark Avenues to the satisfaction of the Design Review Con~nittee. 14. Functional furniture which compliments the design of the project should be provided in the plaza areas. Arc hitec tu re: 1. The architecture of Buildings 1, 20, and 28 should be significantly upgraded to enhance views of the project from Center and Trademark Avenues. Suggestions include increasing the height of the buildings, and increasing the amount of glass. A more three dimensional look should be created. 2. Throughout the project, emphasis should be placed on the vertical and horizontal elements of the buildings. 3. Variety in roof height would help to breakup the strong horizontal feel of the buildings. 4. The west elevations of Buildings 6-10 should have a wide, textured band to provide some visual interest for users of the trail. 5. All roof mounted equipment {present and future) nust be screened from view. Views from future development to the north should also be taken into account when designing the parapet walls.