Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/01/22 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: January 6, 1987 ACTION AGENDA TO: C~am~rcial/Industrial 1977 Design Review Committee Brad Bullet FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 1987 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 (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-42 - LEFF - The development of 12 industrial multi-tenant ~'DiTdings totaling 136,367 square feet on 9.15 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (subarea 7) located on the north side of Arrow Route between Maple Place and White Oak Avenues - APN: 208-351-30. 6:30 - 7:00 (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-43 - HTI CONSTRUCTION - The development of 8 multi-tenant buildings totaling 41,264 square feet on 2.5 acres of land in the General Industrial District (subarea 1) located on the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - APN: 207-271-1. Design Review Committee Agenda Commercial/Industrial January 22, 1987 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Nancy) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-37 MODIFICATION - MASCARENAS - The request to modify the approved one restaurant pad on 0.84 acres of land within an approved Master Plan for an integrated shopping center, to the development of a 2,100 square foot fast food drive-thru restaurant and a 2,800 square foot retail building, in the General Commercial District, located at the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive - APN: 1077-401-22. NF: Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council Commercial/Industrial CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENDA January 22, 1987 1. CUP 85-05 - PAULEY (Nancy) Review of raised parapet to screen roof equipment. Committee Action: Approved revised parapet with condition that the solar panels and storage tank be moved to align with the AC units. 2. DR 05-40 - BANKS (Debra) Review of stucco color. Committee Action: Revised color approved as submitted. 3. DR 86-14 - RASCARENAS (Debra) Review of revised elevation. Committee Action: The opinion of the Committee was that the revised elevation was not of the same quality and character as the approved elevations. The Committee recommends that the revised elevations be filed as a modification to the previously approved plans. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Debra January 22, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-42 LEFF The development of 12 industrial multi-tenant buildings totaling 136,367 square feet on 9.15 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (subarea 7) located on the north side of Arrow Route between Maple Place and White Oak Avenue - APN: 208-351-30. Design Parameters The site is presently vacant and void of any significant plant materials. Street improvements are in existence along all perimeter streets. All properties around the site are vacant with existing ground sloping from north to south at about a 2% gradient. The site is part of Rancho Cucamonga Business Park. Staff has met with the applicant on two occasions to inform him of and discuss the list of identified technical and design issues of this proposed project, such identified issues as inefficient site planning, access and circulation, and nonfunctional loading areas, to name a few. The applicant has chosen not to address or resolve these issues prior to Committee's review. Staff C0~nts Site Plan 1. The proposed design of the site plan does not meet the intent of the urban design guidelines in providing functional, safe and visually pleasing environment, in the following ways: a. Awkward and ineffective location for loading areas that create traffic conflict as shown on Exhibit "A"; b. Loading areas in front of plaza areas; c. Businesses have to share loading areas as shown on Exhibit "A"; d. Inadequate and inefficient pedestrian walkways including handicap access for all buildings; Design Review Comments DR 86-42 - LEFF January 22, 1987 Page 2 e. Parking spaces are provided in front of a portion of the roll-up doors and counted as part of the required parking count; f. Driveway access width is inconsistent with the required 35 foot standard; and g. Inadequate maneuvering areas for loading and unloading activities 2. The middle driveway could serve as an east-west central circulation spine for the project. However, it should be upgraded with continuous landscaping and pedestrian connections. This could be achieved by "flipping" buildings 3 and 10 so that the roll up doors face north. Architecture 1. Office entries should be provided with architectural treatment that present an entrance statement. 2. Articulation of the building plane should be provided through the use of openings and recesses which create texture and shadow patterns and add variety to the building surface. 3. Colonades or loggias and other covered walkways or structures that provide shade to pedestrian spaces should be utilized whenever possible. 4. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from all sides and such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design. Landscaping 1. The site plan design should create opportunities for landscaped spaces. These areas should be an integral part of the overall site design and should create visual interest and variety, enhance building architecture and define and distinguish the pedestrian area from parking and vehicular circulation. Design Review Comments DR 86-42 - LEFF January 22, 1987 Page 3 Design Review Coaaittee Action Members Present: Brad Buller Staff Planner: Debra Meier The Committee did not make any recommendations regarding this project as there was a lack of quorum. However, the following issues and concerns were discussed at this meeting: 1. Overall pedestrian circulation and linkage, both internally and externally, should connect parking areas with building entries, pedestrian open spaces and public transit facilities. Particular attention should be paid to handicap accessibility to all building units. 2. The harsh edges of building corners throughout the project should be softened by use of landscaping and angling or recessing of the building corner. 3. Provide a "focal point" at the central area of the project (see attached exhibit) by increasing amount of landscaping, providing textured pavement treatment, enhancing building entries and softening building corners. 4. The middle driveway could serve as an east-west central circulation spine for the project. However, it should be upgraded with continuous landscaping and pedestrian connections with a landscaped node or a focal point to enhance the view. 5. The site plan design should create opportunities for landscaped spaces. These areas should be an integral part of the overall site design and should create visual interest and variety, enhance building architecture and define and distinguish the pedestrian area from parking and vehicular circulation. 6. The proposed 4 foot to 5 foot wide planter area around buildings is inadequate in width to provide continuous pedestrian connection, especially for handicap access and the required landscaping along building perimeter. Design Review Coments DR 86-42 - LEFF January 22, 1987 Page 4 7. The northerly driveway of White Oak Avenue opens up a view corridor into the project. Perhaps a smaller landscape node or focal point could be provided to enhance this view. 8. The Committee stated that the project could either be placed on the agenda for another regularly scheduled Design Review Committee meeting, or a special Committee meeting may be scheduled to review the project with any revisions the applicant has made based on the con~ents given above. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Debra January 22, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-43 - HTI CONSTRUCTION - The development of 8 multi-tenant buildings totalinq 41,264 square feet on 2.5 acres of land in the General Industrial District {subarea 1) located on the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - APN: 207-271-1. Design Paraeeters The site runs approximately 1,300 feet from Baker Avenue east and is only 70 to 80 feet in depth along the 8th Street frontage. The AT&SF Railroad right-of-way abutts the project along the north property line. Properties on the south side of 8th Street are within the City of Ontario, uses include Single Family Residential and a school. East of the site is a similar type of project that is under construction. The same developer owned this project and considered it as Phase I. Due to the size and shape of the lot, the developer's requesting for consideation of variances to the following codes: (A) Reduction of the requird 35 feet building setback and average landscape along 8th Street. (B) A deduction of the 5 foot sideyard setback along the rail road right-of-way. Staff Coments Site Plan 1. Areas for outdoor lunch court should be provided as an integral part of every site plan. Possible locations for small scale lunch court would be at the northerly corner of each parking area. Architecture 1. All screen wall s should be of compatible materials, color and texture as the proposed buildings. 2. Complete screening of any roof mounted equipment should be accomplished by use of architectural features as an integral part of building design. Design Review Comments DR 86-43 - HTI CONSTRUCTION January 22, 1987 Page 2 3. The building elevations should be of consistent texture (natural sand blast finish) and accent color as Phase I that is under construction. Landscaping 1. An increased density of landscape materials in areas of number of trees, size of trees and shrubs should be provided along the 8th Street frontage to compensate for the reduced building setback and landscape average. Signs 1. The Uniform Sign Program should be consistent with the Phase I project. Design Review Committee Action Members Present: Brad Bullet Staff Planner: Debra Meier Applicant requested cancellation of this item. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Nancy January 22, 1987 CONDITION/U_ USE PERMIT 85-37 MODIFICATION - MASCARENAS - The request to modify the approved one restaurant pad on 0.84 acres of land within an approved Master Plan for an intergrated shopping center, to the development of a 2,100 square foot fast food drive-thru restaurant and a 2,800 square foot retail building, in the General Commercial District, located at the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive - APN: 1077-401-22. Design Parameters The project site is part of the approved Brunswick Master Plan of an integrated shopping center as shown in Attachment A. Presently, Brunswick Bowling Center is completed while retail Buildings A, B & D are under construction. Retail Building C is still vacant. The approved Master Plan for the shopping center indicates that this pad area is planned for a future restaurant use. The proposed dual pad including a fast food drive-thru restaurant require a modification to this Conditional Use Permit. Staff Q~ment~ 1. Land Use Issue Does the proposed fast food drive-thru restaurant fronting on Haven Avenue meets the intent of the Committee's policy of discouraging drive-thru facilities along Special Boulevard? In reviewing past projects, the Design Review Committee and the Planning Commission have provided direction to staff that drive-thru facilities fronting on Special Boulevards should be discouraged. The concerns with drive-thru facilities is one of visual and aesthetic, that is, the objectional view of long line of cars. Past projects have failed to prove that the building design with adequate screening is sufficient to mitigate and diminish this objectionable and unaesthetic view. The proposed site planning for this E1 Pollo Loco restaurant is very similar to the Del Taco design where the entire drive-thru is exposed to public view even though trellises and screen wall are provided. Further review of the approved Master Plan indicates that the future Retail Building C may be more appropriate and easier to modify as a drive-thru restaurant. The reason being that driveway aisles could be oriented away from the street view. Design Review Comments CUP 86-37 - MASCARENAS January 22, 1987 Page 2 2. Site Plan A. Average 45 foot landscaping along Haven Avenue: At the initial review of the proposed Master Plan, the developer (Brunswick Corporation) chose to comply with the average 45 foot landscaping by providing deeper building setbacks beyond the 45 foot setback for future buildings on Parcels 3 & 4. The reason for the required deeper setback is to make up for the landscaping area encroached by the parking spaces fronting along Haven Avenue. The proposed site plan design with the drive-thru aisle encroaching into the required landscape setback would not comply with this 45 foot average landscaping along Haven Avenue. Staff has informed the applicant of this requirement who disagreed with it, stating that the project site is a separate legal parcel of a different ownership. However staff also stated that the Deer Creek Center is approved as an integrated shopping center where it is independent of number of parcels and ownership. B. The proposed U-shape design of the drive-thru aisle creates two 90 degree turns that could be difficult for autos, vans, or light trucks to maneuver around it. 3. Elevation A. The proposed elevations for E1 Pollo Loco and the retail building have picked up some of the architectural details of the existing center, it could be improved by adding towers and circular arbor as shown in Attachment B. B. The proposed color scheme for the E1 Pollo Loco and retail bull ding consists of: pink, pastel gray and red burgundy accent tiles, pink mullion, copper color metal roof and white plaster. These color schemes are incompatible to the existing center, where it consists of orange color metal roof, beige plaster and pastel green ceramic accent tiles. Color plans for both the project and the existing Deer Creek shopping center will be available at the meeting for comparison. Design Review Comments CUP 85-37 - MASCARENAS January 22, 1987 Page 3 Signs The proposed sign shown on the elevations are inconsistent with the approved sign program in areas of letter style. Oesign Review Cu~.;ttee Action Members Present: Brad Buller Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee did not make any recommendations regarding this project as there was a lack of quorum. However, the following issues and concerns were dicussed at this meeting: 1. The proposed drive-thru fast food restaurant is a land use issue that need to be addressed at the Planning Commission level. The major concerns for drive-thru is visual and aesthetic. 2. The site plan met the required 45 foot average landscaping. However, staff is concerned with the driveway aisle encroaching into this 45 foot landscape setback. The reason being that the left turn lane and this driveway aisle would reduce the area of landscaping along this portion to a minimal of 24 feet. 3. The proposed architecture including color is incompatible to the existing shopping center. 4. The proposed two pads with two buildings of no more than 2,800 square feet do not create sufficient building massing, compared to the shopping center and the retail building B. 5. The Committee stated that this project could either be forwarded to Planning Commission review without Committee's recommendation; or, rescheduled for another regular Design Review Committee meeting; or a special Committee meeting. CITY OF rrm: RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVISION __ ~JF~5,,~T ;~l~r4[,~4/tl'~7' 4""" I o... ~-~-~.T ~-, "' -"~ .: .. . I RETAIL'B' 2 RETAIL'B' 4 RETAIL'A' NORTH e..svA'r',Cxq 3 RETAIL 'A' WEST e_"VA'nON CoetteO ~' ~'- '8 BOWUNG CENTER & RETAIL eoume.ez^'noN 9 RETAIL'D'BOWLING CENTER & RETAIL'A' EAm'e..EVAT~ON ;., I ....... RA~HO CU~MONGA, CA. ~o EL POLLO LOCO CENTER K R C INVEgTMENTS