Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/07/16 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA c~___~c~ MEMORANDUM DATE: June 30, 1987 ACTION AGENDA TO: Cmmerci al/I ndustri al 1977 Design Review Committee Suzanne Chitlea Larry McNiel Brad Bul 1 er David B1 akesl ey ( A1 ternate FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate P1 anner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF JULY 16, 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 (Chris) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-29 - TOWER PARTNERS The development of a 5,875 square foot structure for small restaurant uses on approximately 0.25 acres of land within the Virginia Dare Winery Business Center at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN: 1077-661-02. 6:30 - 7:00 (Debra ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-26 - BERMANT DEVELOPMENT CO. - The development of twelve industrial building totaling 600,505 square feet on 29.04 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) located on the southeast corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-121-19 and 23, 24, 25, 26. - y DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA July 16, 1987 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Chris) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-16 - GTE - A proposa! to construct a 1,010 square foot remote ~tching station on approximately one half acre of land in the General Industrial Area, Subarea 8, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 1,200 feet north of Arrow Highway - APN: 229-031-18. 7:30 - 8:30 (Dan/Nancy) PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ON TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER AT THE NORTH EAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL AND HAVEN NF:vc Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council Commercial/Industrial C011SENT CALENDAR ITD4S AGEIIDA July 16, 1987 1. DR 87-21 - NALBANDIAN (Cnris) Review of plaza, colors and modifi- cation to the indented sandblasted concrete treatment. Committee Action: The Committee approved the colors as proposed, the modification to the sandbl asted concrete with the inclusion of a 3" x 3/4" reveal, the plaza with the addition of a tree in typical locations, and the screen wall with a modification to the open rail relief. 2. CUP 87-07 - SARKISSIAN (Chris) Review of revised site plan. Committee Action: The Committee recommended that the applicant continue working with staff towards an acceptable site pl an sol uti on. 3. DR 87-22 - MESSENGER (Debra) Review of plaza details and color, Committee Action: Accent color approved. Plaza design to be revised as follows: 1. Provide continuous hedge at planter edge to separate 1 unch court from entry traffic. 2. Provide a change in texture and/or pattern of pavement between the lunch courts and the through entry traffic. 3. E1 iminate one parking stal 1 on each side of the entry plaza and provide a 3'-5' back-up space for vehicles to use when exiting the end stal 1 s. 4. Provide an additional tree for screening purposes adjacent to the end parking stall in front of each 1 unch court. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENDA Commercial/Industrial July 16, 1987 Page 2 All revisions to the plaza design shall be reflected on final landscape plans to be reviewed and approved by City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. 4. !OR 86-08- FRIEDMAN HOMES '(Debra) Review of building colors. Committee Action: Approved. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Chris July 16, 1987 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-29 - TOWER PARTNERS - The development of a 5,875 square foot structure for sma)) restaurant uses on approximately 0.25 acres of land within the Virginia Dare Winery Business Center at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue - APN: 1077- 661-02. Design Para. N~ters: The Virginia Dare Business Center has an established architectural theme that is characteristic of the winery/mission style. All buildings within the center have common architectural elements that carry out the overall program. The first phase of the Food Court is under construction. All pedestrian connections and trellis work to Edwards Cinema and the office building and completion of most of the courtyard area. Staff Comments: Architecture The proposed elevations are in keeping with the existing architectural design. Landscaping 1. Landscape plans approved for Food Court phase one include specimen size Melaleuca Leucadendra, Platanus Racemosa and Podocarpus Gracilior along the south and west perimeter of the Food Court area. This design is to be continued through phase two. 2. The plans of the courtyard is not yet formally approved. The design includes a central fountain framed by palm trees with open air seating arrangements under trellis structures. The entire courtyard will be accented by pots of annual color. To the extent possible, the courtyard will be constructed along with phase one. Site Plan The major elements of the site plan have been established through previous master and site plan approvals. The only suggestion for improvement to the site design at this time is to provide an angle to the northerly corner of the building as shown on the attached exhibit. This orientation provides an effect of drawing people into the court area. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-29 - Tower Partners july 16, 1987 Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Brad Buller, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner Chris Westman The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. The northernmost arched entry should be furred out. 2. Vines should be planted at the northwestern most corner and adjacent west facade area. 3. The building colors are to be the same as those used on phase I. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Debra july 16, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-26 BERMANT DEVELOPMENT CO. - The development of twelve industria! building totaling 600,505 square feet on 29.04 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) located on the southeast corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-121-19 and 23, 24, 25, 26. Design Parameters: This project is intended to be the master plan for the 29.4 acres with development in phases. The property is directly east of the Schlosser Forge facility and a portion of the projects easterly boundary abuts the 1-15 freeway. The freeway is approximately 30 feet above grade of the site. The natural ground of the site slopes southerly at an approximate 2% gradient. There is a Eucalyptus row along Rochester Avenue and a row of Walnut trees along Arrow Route, both rows of trees must be removed in order to improve the streets to their ultimate width. Staff Coaents: Major Issue - View from 1-15 Freeway To preserve and enhance the image of the community, special consideration should be given to quality of design when properties are located adjacent to the 1-15 freeway. A site line analysis will be available at the design review meeting to assist the Committee in determining the most critical vantage points on the site. Two areas are of particular concern: A. ll~e rear of building 2E. Staff suggests that the loading and trailer storage on the rear of building 2E become enclosed areas within the structure and some landscaping be provided along the building face to add some aesthetic dimension to this view of the building. B. ~e loading area between buildings 1F and The view to the loading area of building 2D will be the most critical, and also the most difficult to completely screen. In this case the site line analysis should be used to determine to what extent this area can be screened by buildings or landscaping. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-26 - Beamant Development Co. July 16, 1987 Page 2 C. Screening of roof mounted equipment. Staff suggests that all roof mounted equipment and/or projections for the office areas should be ground mounted or installed inside the building to address the issue of freeway screening, especially for buildings 2A, 2B, 1F, 2D and 2E. Site Plan 1. Five outdoor lunch areas are provided throughout the project. They are located within convenient access to all buildings. Pedestrian pathways (texture, sidewalks, etc.) should be provided to make clear connections between each structure to the appropriate lunch area. Detailed design of the lunch areas should be submitted for City Planner review prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The placement of many of the trailer storage spaces are in locations where truck maneuvering would be difficult, would create traffic conflict, and in reality would probably not be used for those reasons, as shown in attachment "A". Staff suggests that all trailer storage should be provided adjacent to and parallel with dock wells, where access to the trailer storage space is both convenient and easily accessible. 3. The placement of the handicap parking space as shown in attachment "A" would require continuous pedestrian walking for access to office entry way, per Title 24. This requirement would eliminate the 5-6 foot continuous planter area along buildings. Such is the case with buildings 1D, 1E, 2C, 1F and 2E. Therefore, a wider area (10-12 feet) to accommodate both walkways and landscaping should be provided along buildings. 4. Trash enclosure areas should not back up to the freeway subjected to public view. Landscaping 1. Special landscaping treatment such as a wider continuous planter with double row of trees, shrub massing and ground cover should be provided along the entire east property boundary where it abuts the freeway. 2. Additional 6' wide planter fingers should be provided to long continuous row of parking at a rate of 1 planter finger to 10 parking spaces. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-26 - Bermant Development Co. July 16, 1987 Page 3 3. Special landscape treatment such as specimen size trees, increased number of trees, accent trees should be provided to all driveway entrances. Design Review C~ittee Action: Members Present: Brad Bullet, Otto Kroutil, Larry McNiel Staff Planner: Debra Meier Committee recommended approval of the project with the following revisions/conditions: 1. Trees of a tall growing ability (60'-70') shall be planted along the freeway right-of-way. Tree plantings shall be clustered in "pockets" at various locations in addition to the row placement shown on the conceptual landscape plan. 2. Increase the amount of landscaping areas and landscape materials at the trash enclosures between buildings 1E and 2C to help screen the large loading/work area beyond. 3. Lunch parks should become part of the overall landscape/hardscape treatment and can be incorporated into parkway areas and at building frontages (appropriately screened and separated from the main entry traffic). Lunch parks should be clearly accessible and available for use by all employees on-site, and should be screened and protected from loading/work areas and parking lots. It may be necessary to add or relocate lunch parks to better satisfy these objectives, subject to City Planner review and approval. Lunch park details shall be included in final landscape plans for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Eliminate the northerly most drive approach on Arrow Route. 5. Redesign the area around building 1A for the purpose of eliminating one drive approach (either on Arrow or Rochester) and to provide the building architecture closer to the streetscape if possible due to flood protection constraints. 6. All roof mounted equipment (including air conditioners) should be completely screened and preferably interior mounted. The roof tops must look very clean. Site lines with respect to any public right- of-way shall be submitted for any proposed roof mounted equipment for review and approval by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Chris July 16, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-16 - GTE - A proposal to construct a 1,~10 square foot remote switching station on approximately one half acre of land in the General Industrial Area, Subarea 8, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 1,200 feet north of Arrow Highway - APN: 229-031-18. Design P~r~me~ers: The site has a slight slope to the south and there are some existing olive trees and large shrubs. Across the street to the east are apartments under construction. The properties to the north, west and south are vacant without significant vegetation nearby. Staff Coa~ents: Architecture 1. The building facades should continue the vertical groove plaster texture for the height of the building and accents should be provided through reveal and debossed numbers. 2. The down spout on the east elevation should not be relocated so as not to be visible from Etiwanda Avenue. 3. The retaining wall at the south property line should have the same vertical score texture. 4. The block wall, wrought iron with landscape materials along the south side should be continued along the west side and north side (a distance of 150' east) of the properties. Landscaping 1. Landscaping within front yard setback is deficient, additional landscape materials such as specimen size trees, accent trees, shrubs, undulating mound with ground cover should be provided to create visual interest. 2. The setback area along the south property line should be planted with groundcover and irrigated. Design Review Coemeittee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Brad Buller, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Chris Westman DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-16 - GTE July 16, 1987 Page 2 The Committee reviewed the project and discussed the compatibility of the building materials to the new residential project under construction which consist of wood siding, tile roof, brick accent, etc. The Committee determined that the materials are appropriate as proposed and recommended approval of the project with the foll owing conditions: 1. The down spout should be relocated from the center of the east elevation to the north end of the east elevation. 2. A retaining wall at the south side of the project should provide a vertical score treatment consistent with the perimeter screen wall. 3. A vertical score block wall should be provided along the entire length of the west and north property lines. 4. All accent color striping should be removed. 5. Extensive landscaping to include specimen size trees, accent trees, shrubs, undulating mounding and ground cover should be provided to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 6. Trees should be provided on the west side of the eastern most screen wall. 7. Low landscaping should be provided adjacent to the eastern building elevation. 8. The setback area along the south property line should be landscaped at such time when the future street south of the site is to be installed.