Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/09/17 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: September 3, 1987 ACTION AGENDA TO: C~mmerci al/Industrial 1977 Design Review Committee Dave Blakesley Suzanne Chitlea Otto Kroutil Larry McNiel (A1 ternate) FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate P1 anner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1987 me following is a description of projects which require review and rating by the Design Review Committee. P1 ease 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) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-42 - EMPIRE PARTNERS - A proposal to construct a 12,188 square foot office building on .64 acres of land in the Industrial Park District, Subarea 7, lot 7 of the Office Tennis Executive Center located on the north side of Civic Center Drive between Red Oak and Utica - APN: 208-062-03. 6:30 - 7:00 (Chris) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS~4ENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-44 - XNTRASTATE FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A proposal to develop a Zl,00O square foot bank building on 1.5 acres of land in the Industrial Park District, Haven Avenue Overlay District, located on the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Civic Center Drive - APN: 208-622-36. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA Con~nercial/Industrial September 17, 1987 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS)4ENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86- 20 - WESTERN PRDPERTIES - The development of a business park consisting of six building totaling 160,155 square feet on 12.9 acres of land in the Office Park District of the Terra Vista Planned Community located at the northeast corner of Elm Street and Town Center Drive - APN: 1077-421-06, 1077-091-17. 7:30 - 8:00 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87- 16 - NUWEST - The development of an 8.2 acre integrated shopping center, consisting of four buildings totaling 87,581 square feet in the General Con~nercial District, located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue - APN: 208-261-58. NF:vc Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council Commercial/Industrial CONSENT CALENDAR ITE)ISAGENDA September 17, 1987 1. DR 87-31 - TURNER DEVELOPf4ENT (cnris) Review of revised elevations and plaza detail, Committee Action: Elevations were approved as submitted. Elements should be provided in the plaza which separates the lunch area from the entryways. 2, CUP 87-29 - WIERICK PROPERTY (Chris) Review of grading and parting. Committee Action: The review of the grading and parking was for general Design Review Committee information, no action was taken. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Chris September 17, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-42 - EMPIRE PARTNERS - A proposal to construct a 12,188 square foot office building on .64 acres of land in the Industrial Park District, Subarea 7, lot 7 of the Office Tennis Executive Center located on the north side of Civic Center Drive between Red Oak and Utica - APN: 208-062-03. Design Parameters: The site is part of a Master Plan development. It is vacant with no significant vegetation. Sites north and east are fully developed while the west is still vacant. Street improvements have been completed except for the westerly shared access driveway. Staff Comments: Landscaping 1. Additional landscaping should be provided on the west and east sides of the building. 2. Tree wells with grates should be provided in the hardscape at the north side of the building. 3. Special landscape treatment should be provided at the project entrance through expanding the landscape area by eliminating one of the parking spaces, adding specimen size and accent trees, annuals, etc. 4. Additional trees including specimen size and shrub massing should be provided within the landscape setback area along Civic Center Drive. 5. Trees and seating benches should be added to the northeast and northwest corner of the building. Site Plan 1. The treatment at the east property line must be coordinated with the existing conditions of lot 6 to the west. 2. The proposed pedestrian connection to the tennis courts with landscaping should be moved to the last pedestrian walkway and the last parking stall at the northwest side of the site. 3. Special hardscape treatment should be provided which reflects the building and building materials. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-42 - Empire Partners September 17, 1987 Page 2 4. A pedestrian connection should be provided from sidewalk to on- site at the project entry area. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Dave Blakesley, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Chris Westman The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. Additional landscaping should be provided to meet I.S.P. requirements and the conceptual master landscape plan for the Office Tennis Executive Center on the east and west sides of the building, and within the landscape setback along Civic Center Drive. 2. The applicant should work with staff in developing an architecturally integrated seat arrangement at the north side of the building. 3. Hardscape treatment should be provided which reflects the building and its materials. 4. The walk on the west side of the building should be extended south to the public sidewalk. 5. The existing pedestrian connection to the tennis courts on the lot north should be linked to the proposed building from the northwest corner of the project site to the northwest corner of the building. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Chris September 17, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-44 - INTRASTATE FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A proposal to develop a 21,000 square foot bank building on 1.5 acres of land in the Industrial Park District, Haven Avenue Overlay District, located on the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Civic Center Drive - APN: 208-622-36. Design Parameters: The site is vacant with no significant vegetation. It is on a prominent corner directly south of the future City Hall property. To the east is an existing office building. Sidewalks and parkway landscaping are existing on Haven and Civic Center. Staff Comments: Site Plan 1. A larger setback on Civic Center Drive is encouraged to give better balance at the Civic Center/Haven entry in relation to the city hall across the street to the north. 2. A pedestrian connection should be provided between the easterly existing office buildings and this project. A condition of approval (DR 84-54 Forecast) for this easterly adjacent office building required that a pedestrian walkway be installed and designed to tie into the future development on Haven Avenue and shall be constructed concurrent with such future development. The developer should then coordinate the design of this pedestrian walkway including landscaping with the easterly adjacent property owner. 3. With the added pedestrian walkway between these two buildings, the trash enclosure area should be relocated. Landscaping 1. Within Haven Overlay District, parking spaces fronting along Haven Avenue is discouraged. The developer should mitigate this visual impact by extensive landscaping through addition of specimen size trees to fill those open gaps from existing mature white alders and adding shrubs massing along the Haven Avenue frontage. 2. The sculptural element should be visible from Haven Avenue. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-44 - Intrastate Financial September 17, 1987 Page 2 3. The detailed design of the pedestrian walkway and landscaping between the proposed project and the easterly existing office buildings should be submitted for City Planner review and approval. Architecture 1. The architecture provides interest in the use of angles and varying planes. 2. The building materials should enhance the building's design and be compatible with surrounding projects. Design ReviewComritteeAction: Members Present: Dave Blakesley, Otto Kroutil, Suzanne Chitlea Staff Planner: Chris Westman The Committee reviewed the proposal and made the following recommendations: 1. The Planning Commission should evaluate the northwest corner of the building on how it relates to the street corner and impacts the overall design of the Civic Center and the Civic Center Drive streetscape. 2. The applicant should work with staff in developing a pedestrian oriented space which links the proposed building to the existing easterly building. 3. The detailed design of the pedestrian walkway and landscaping between the proposed project and the easterly existing office buildings should be submitted for City Planner review and approval. 4. Methods of roof screening should be reviewed by the Design Review Committee prior to bull ding permit issuance. 5. An appropriate infill of specimen size trees and shrub massing along Haven should be provided which will screen the parking area. 6. The sculptural element should be visible from Haven Avenue. 7. The building materials should enhance the building's design and be compatible with surrounding projects. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Nancy September 17, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86-20 - WESTERN PROPERTIES - The development of a business park consisting of six buildings totaling 160,155 square feet on 12.9 acres of land in the Office Park District of the Tetra Vista Planned Community located at the northeast corner of Elm Street and Town Center Drive - APN: 1077-421- 06, 1077-091-17. Design Parameters: The site is vacant, vegetation consisting of decaying vineyards, and it slopes from north to south at approximately 2-3%. The site is surrounded to the northeast and southeast by multi-family development; and, to the southwest and northwest by the future Office Park development (Lewis Homes Headquarters) and the Community Commercial Development (Terra Vista Town Center). Background: This proposed project was submitted in August, 1986 concurrently with the proposed Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment to establish a Business Park Overlay Zone. Although the proposed project was scheduled for Committee review in October, 1986, it did not receive a review as the Committee stated that the land use issue must be considered by the Planning Commission prior to their review of the project. The Planning Commission on July 22, 1987 reviewed the final version of the proposed amendment and recommended for approval to the City Council. The Planning Commission also recommended that the Overlay Zone should be allowed only in the Office Park District located south of Town Center Drive and east of Haven Avenue as shown in attachment "A". On August 19, 1987 the City Council reviewed the proposed amendment and approved it with the change that the Business Park Overlay Zone be allowed only for the Office Park District 1 ocated at the northwest quadrant of Town Center Drive and Elm Street as shown in attachment "A". The developer has resubmitted this project for Committee review. Staff C!nts: Site Plan 1. The proposed project with the roll-up doors and service driveway is still designed to encourage industrial and other type of "incubator" uses. Although the Business Park Overlay District has expanded certain retail and service use including design studios, the number of roll-up doors should be limited and only as an alternative design for those businesses such as design studios, show rooms that require this facility. Further, the rear elevations of all these buildings that face the surface drive should be improved with additional landscaping, glass store front area and perhaps double-man doors. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 86-20 - Western Properties September 17, 1987 Page 2 2. The proposed site plan does not take into consideration the possibility that the service drive may be converted into interior space where additional parking spaces would be required. Also, other retail uses such as eating and drinking establishments have a higher parking ratio of 1:100 square feet which would require additional parking spaces. 3. The site plan arrangement does not take advantage of the major Greenway Trail on Elm Street. Further, the trail is shown with the minimum 30 foot width which appears consistent with the concept illustrated in Figure IV-68 and IV-67 of attachment B & C, where lineal portion of this greenway typically should average 40 feet in width with the minimum width of 30 feet. 4. A node design (flare out) should be provided at both corners of Elm Street and Church Street, and Elm Street and Town Center Drive as shown in attachment. The node should be designed to emulate a smaller scale design of the major entrance for the Town Center project south of Town Center Drive. 5. Pedestrian crossing at the intersection of Elm Street and Church Street should be provided to compliment the local transit route as shown in Figure IV-40. 6. A strong pedestrian connection should be provided from off-site to on-site to the central plaza area. 7. Texture pedestrian connections (expose aggregate, brick pavers, or combination of both) should be provided throughout the site to connect from major entrances to plaza area. Elevations 1. Does the proposed architecture provide for compatibility to the surrounding residential development of the northeast and southeast side? 2. The proposed elevations are designed with tilt up concrete panels, concrete columns and shed roof. The roof line for all the buildings show one continuous horizontal line which could be improved by providing vertical variation. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 86-20 - Western Properties September 17, 1987 Page 3 Landscaping 1. Special landscaping treatment and hardscape should be provided to the trails along Elm Street. It should include such things as specimen size trees, increased number of trees, low deciduous canopy tree for shade and evergreen trees; hardscape such as benches along pedestrian walkway to allow people to rest and visit, etc. 2. A special landscaping treatment shall be provided to all project entrances and to the corners of the project site. Design Review C~ittee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Dave Blakesley, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee reviewed the proposed project and recommended that it be revised for further Committee review as follows: 1. The Committee stated that the service driveway and roll-up doors encourage industrial uses. The Committee directed the applicant to explore alternative back entry elements to improve the service driveway streetscape and to depart from the feeling of an industrial project. 2. The applicant has agreed to provide illustrative design of the greeway trail s withi n the site and the ones adjacent to it in order to show how they interface with one another for Committee review. 3. Pedestrian connections should be provided on one side of the 4 project entries leading to the central plaza area. 4. Textured pedestrian connections should be provided throughout the site and the plaza area. 5. The proposed architecture does not provide for compatibility in building form, materials and colors to the residential development, the Town Center project or the Office Park project. The applicant should explore architectural concepts that have a more residential flavor. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Nancy September 17, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-16 - NUWEST - The development of an 8.2 acre integrated shopping center, consisting of four buildings totaling 87,581 square feet in the General Commercial District, located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue - APN: 208-261-58. Design Parameters: This project was originally reviewed by the Committee on duly 2, 1987 regular meeting, who raised numerous concerns and issues regarding the design of the site plan, elevations and landscaping. The Committee recommended that the proposed project be revised for further Committee review. The developer has resubmitted revised plans which will be further discussed in the "staff comment" section below. Su,m,ary of concerns from the surrounding residents: A neighborhood meeting was held on duly 6, 1987 at Lion's Community Center. The purpose was for the developer to introduce this proposed project to the surrounding residents and to obtain feedback from them early in the review process. Nineteen residents showed up for the meeting. The following are a summary of their concerns: 1. Security and safety hazard - the double wall and landscaping at the south property boundary could create security and safety hazard in that it may not stop people from jumping over the wall into their side or back yard. 2. Noise - increased noise from commercial vehicles, autos and from the collection of trash especially when the trash enclosure areas are abutting at the south property boundary. 3. Trash enclosure area should be oriented away from the rear property line. 4. Traffic - cumulative traffic impact along Helms Avenue. 5. Visual the proposed project would block their view to the mountains. Attached for your review are correspondence with a petition from a group of residents that summarizes their concerns. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 87-16 - Nuwest September 17, 1987 Page 2 Staff toecents: Site Plan 1. The Committee stated that only one driveway will be allowed on Foothill Boulevard. The revised site plan shows that the existing driveway adjacent to Taco Bell is eliminated. 2. The Committee stated that the parking lot should not be the dominant streetscene along Foothill Boulevard. With the elimination of the existing driveway on Foothill Boulevard, an opportunity arises to re-orient pad B in an east/west direction, does reducing the amount of parking area fronting along Foothill Boulevard. Although pad B is still oriented in a north/south direction, the parking spaces are away from the landscape setback area which improves the streetscene. 3. The Committee stated that three driveways along Helms Avenue is acceptable with conditions that speed bumps be provided along the entire rear service drive. The developer has provided speed bumps along the entire rear service drive. However to address one of the concerns from the surrounding residents, the most southerly driveway on Helms have been changed to an emergency access with turf block. The purpose is to discourage additional traffic from going in and out off Helms Avenue. 4. The Committee stated that pedestrian connection between shop #3 and retail C should be flared out at the southern ends and provided with additional amenities such as benches and special landscape treatment. The developer has provided a tower treatment and continuous trellis between the two buildings. Staff is of the opinion that this pedestrian connection should be further improved to ensure it is safe and convenient for encouraging pedestrian usage. This could be achieved by increasing the width of the pedestrian connection to 15' and flaring out at the northern end adjacent to the main plaza area. Two free-standing trellises should be provided with additional pedestrian amenities such as benches free-standing potted plants and adequate lighting for safety purposes. DESIGN REVIEW COMIIENTS CUP 87-16 - Nuwest September 17, 1987 Page 3 5. The Committee stated that the pedestrian connection is similar between shop #3 and C and as mentioned above should be provided between retail A and shop #2. The developer only provided such connection within the landscape setback area along Hellman Avenue. The purpose for requiring a pedestrian connection between retail A and shop #2 is to encourage usage of the rear parking lot since approximately 1/3 of the required parking spaces are within this area drive. Therefore providing pedestrian amenities and connection within the landscape setback area is defeating such purposes. It is also inconsistent with the Development Code as it encroached into the required landscape setback area. 6. All pedestrian pathways and across circulation aisle should be of textured treatment such as interlocking brick paver, exposed aggregate, or a combination of both. This requirement could be placed as a condition of approval. 7. The Committee stated that terraced decorative wall should be added to trash enclosure areas that back up the street frontages on Helm Avenue and Hellman Avenue. The developer has provided such decorative wall. However, the decorative wall at the southern property boundary of Helms Avenue and Hellman Avenue should be expanded and to be joined with the southerly block wall. The purpose is to block any view into this landscape area along the southern property boundary to discourage loitering. Detailed design of this wall should be subjected to City Planner review and approval. 8. The Committee stated that the existing stamped concrete texture pavement in the existing driveway of Helms Avenue should be replaced with texture material consisting with the shopping center. This requirement could be placed as a condition of approval. Architecture 1. The Committee stated that additional architectural details such as random stacking of roof tile, generous roof overhang in the range of roof tile color should be provided. This requirement could be placed as a condition of approval. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 87-16 - Nuwest September 17, 1987 Page 4 2. The Committee stated that the elevations that abut street frontages should be upgraded with additional architectural elements and details such as adding arched windows at building corners, fake recessed arched wood doors, arcade comic, etc. and with special landscape treatment. Such mentioned detail should be provided to the west elevations pad A, shop #1, retail A including the site elevation in the east and north elevations of retail D. Storefront windows have been added to these mentioned elevations, however, clarification is needed if these added windows are actual storefront windows or spandrel glass. 3. The Committee stated that the rear elevation from retail building A through retail building C does not provide for vertical variation. These rear elevations should also be upgraded with additional architectural detailing such as stucco over pilaster around back exit door, impost molding, etc. Impost molding and additional columns and towers have been added in the rear elevation. 4. The Committee stated that the building pads A and B should orient their public entrance towards Foothill Boulevard with pedestrian spaces created to compliment these public entrances through adding awning, trellis and other work and special landscaping. Building pad A and B public entrances are oriented towards Foothill Boulevard, however, pedestrian amenities have not been provided in front of pad B. 5. Additional trellis work, benches, pedestrian amenities and special landscaping should be provided within plaza areas consistent with the draft Foothill Specific Plan. Such pedestrian amenities have been provided as shown in sheets P and Q of the development plans. 6. The Committee stated at that a variety of storefront design should provided such as arch windows and multi-pane design. The developer has provided such variety of storefront design as shown in sheet R of the development plans. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 87-16 - Nuwest September 17, 1987 Page 5 Landscaping The Committee made the following recommendations at the last meeting as follows: 1. A significantly greater amount of trees as well as increased number of box size trees should be planted along Foothill Boulevard. The reason being that there is a 7-8' grade difference from the top of the curb to the parking area and in a 2:1 slope with a flood wall of 3' high where 15-gallon size trees, groundcover, and shrubs may not be seen if planted within the slope area. 2. According to the draft Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, this stretch of Foothill Boulevard is considered as a suburban parkway where the landscape treatment should be dominated by informal clustering of London Plane tree, California Sycamore, and Purple Plum tree. All the parkway characteristics include rolling turf berms, meandering undulating sidewalk and hardscape to compliment this informal 1 andscape treatment. 3. Increased number of trees and box size trees should also be planted along Hellman Avenue to make up of the landscaping within the public right-of-way consisting of 12' wide sidewalk and a 3' high flood wall. Landscape mound should be provided up to the 3' high flood wall. 4. Within plaza area special landscape treatment such as accent trees, specimen size trees and an increased number of trees should be provided. 5. Dense landscaping should be provided along the entire south property boundary with a double row of shrubs, five gallon size and planted 3' on center and with the appropriate ground cover. 6. All walls such as flood walls, retaining wall, screen walls should be of decorative design consistent with the architectural style. The above recommendations from the Design Review Committee could be placed as a condition of approval. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 87-16 - Nuwest September 17, 1987 Page 6 Signs Taco Bell has an existing monument sign at the corner of Helms Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. This monument sign is considered to be a temporary one based on the purchase agreement between Taco Bell and the previous landowner Lewis Homes, which states that the existing monument sign will be removed at such time when the shopping center monument sign is to be constructed. Developer has been instructed to contact the owner of Taco Bell indicating such requirement. According to the current City Sign Ordinance, a maximum of two monument signs will be allowed per development or shopping center. Should the existing Taco Bell monument sign be allowed to remain in place, the new monument sign for this shopping center would have to be placed at the corner of Foothill and Hellman Avenue rather than at the project entrance off Foothill Boulevard. Design Review Cameltree Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, Dave Blakesley, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee reviewed the project and recommended that all design items and technical issues must be resolved by the applicant through working with staff, prior to scheduling the project for Planning Commission review: 1. The pedestrian connection between shop 3 and retail C should be further improved to ensure it is safe and convenient for encouraging pedestrian usage. This could be achieved by increasing the width of the pedestrian connection to 15' and flaring out at the northern end adjacent to the main plaza area. Two free-standing trellises should be provided with additional pedestrian amenities such as benches, free-stranding potted plants and adequate lighting for safety purposes. 2. A similar pedestrian connection with design as mentioned above should be provided between retail A and shop #2. 3. All pedestrian pathways and across circulation aisle should be of textured treatment such as interlocking brick paver, exposed aggregate, or a combination of both. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 87-16 - Nuwest September 17, 1987 Page 7 4. The existing stamped concrete texture pavement in the existing driveway of Helms Avenue should be replaced with texture material consisting with the shopping center. 5. Pedestrian amenities should be provided in front of pad B. 6. Random stacking of roof tile should be provided. 7. The applicant should work with staff in resolving the design and technical issues for the stretch of Foothill Boulevard between Hellman Avenue and the first driveway to comply with all applicable City Codes. 8. The applicant should work with surrounding residents and staff in developing acceptable solutions along the buffer zone at the south property boundary to mitigate the concerns of noise, view, privacy and security. 9. The Committee stated that the following could be placed as condition of approval: a. A significantly greater amount of trees as well as increased number of box size trees should be planted along Foothill Boulevard. The reason being that there is a 7-8' grade difference from the top of the curb to the parking area and in a 2:1 slope with a flood wall of 3' high where 15-gallon size trees, groundcover, and shrubs may not be seen if planted within the slope area. b. According to the draft Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, this stretch of Foothill Boulevard is considered as a suburban parkway where the landscape treatment should be dominated by informal clustering of London Plane tree, California Sycamore, and Purple Plum tree. All the parkway characteristics include rolling turf berms, meandering undulating sidewalk and hardscape to compliment this informal landscape treatment. c. Increased number of trees and box size trees should also be planted along Hellman Avenue to make up of the landscaping within the public right-of-way consisting of 12' wide sidewalk and a 3' high flood wall. Landscape mound should be provided up to the 3' high flood wall. DESIGN REVIEW COMItENTS CUP 87-16 - Nuwest September 17, 1987 Page 8 d. Within plaza area special landscape treatment such as accent trees, specimen size trees and an increased number of trees should be provided. e. Dense landscaping should be provided along the entire south property boundary with a double row of shrubs, five gallon size and planted 3' on center and with the appropriate ground cover. f. All walls such as flood walls, retaining wall, screen walls should be of decorative design consistent with the architectural style.