Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/10/08 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: September 25, 1987 ACTION AGENDA TO: Cemnercial/Industrial 1977 Design Review Committee Dave Blakesley Suzanne Chitlea Larry McNiel (~ternate) Otto Kroutil FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 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 (Greg) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSblENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-40 - KESSLER XNU. - The development of an 11,744 square foot industrial building on a 1.54 acre parcel within the General Industrial District (Subarea 5) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on Sharon Circle - APN: 209-261-23. 6:30 - 7:00 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-45 - COOPER - Development of a 6,234 square foot two story ~ and professional office building on 0.68 acres of land in the Office/Professional District, located at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and Base Line Road - APN: 208-593-10. Related File: VA 87-10 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA Commercial/Industrial October 8, 1987 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS~4ENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-47 - LINPRO - The development of a 17.6 acre Industrial ~ Plan consisting of a mixed-use of multi-tenants, manufacturing and research and development projects within a 3 block area of a previously approved Master Plan; and Phase I development consisting of 5 multi- tenant buildings totaling 80,200 square feet in block 1, 8 manufacturing buildings totaling 94,900 square feet in block 2, and 3 research and development buildings totaling 61,816 square feet in block 3, in the Industrial Park District Subarea 16, located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue - APN: 210-062-02, 11, 13, 26, 32 and 33. NF:vc Attachments CO: Planning Commission/City Council Commercial/Industrial CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENOA October 8, 1987 1. )e)R 87-53 - ALPHA BETA (Clndy) Store front revision. Committee Action: The Committee recommended approval. DR 86-21 - HIMES-PETEN (Debra) Color modification. Committee Action: The Coemeittee agreed to the change in accent color, approving the burgundy (bin 8794 Sinclair). The building colors must be those originally approved slate gray (1980) and antimony (198F). 3. CUP 84-37 - KELBERT (Debra) Architectural element revision. Committee Action: The C~ittee agreed to the elimination of the architectural element from atop the trellis canopy structure. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Greg October 8, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-40 - KESSLER INC. The development of an 11,744 square foot industrial building on a 1.54 acre parcel within the General Industrial District (Subarea 5) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the end of Sharon Circle APN: 20g-261-23. Design Parameters: This site is currently vacant, sloping southerly at approximately 1%. Directly east of this site is the improved Deer Creek Flood Control Channel. Properties to the north, south and west are currently vacant, however the adjacent properties to the south and west have been approved for the development of two industrial buildings and one warehouse building (DR 87-20). Street improvements are completed except for driveways. Staff C~nts: Site Plan 1. The two roll-up doors located on the western side of the building are visible from the street right-of-way where additional screening measures in the form of expanded landscaping, or decorative screen walls should be provided. 2. The outdoor lunch/plaza area should include tables, textured hardscape treatments, trash receptacles, a drinking fountain, trellis work and special landscaping consisting of specimen size accent shade trees, shrubs and groundcover. 3. Texturized pavement across the drive entry aisle should be provided, to provide continuity with the adjacent project to the south and west of this site. 4. A pedestrian connection from the parking areas and office entry to the employee plaza area should be provided. Architecture 1. The proposed architectural theme consists of pre-cast concrete panels with a heavy sandblast finish, with a recessed pedestrian entry along the northern elevation articulated by two entry pillars and aluminum storefront and glass. Horizontal and vertical reveals in addition to recessed accent squares and exposed wood glu-lam beams over all entries and doors provide additional architectural interest. However, additional articulation of the building surface should be provided at all building corners, especially those visible DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-40 - Kessler Inc. October 8, 1987 Page 2 from the street right-of-way. This could be accomplished through the use of an angular architectural statement similar to that used for the adjacent structure on the property to the south. The recessed accent squares could also be enlarged to provide consistency with the scale of the building. Landscaping 1. The project and building entries should be further articulated through the use of multi-trunk specimen size accent trees, shrubs, and annual color, in addition to the mounded turf and accent paving shown. 2. The planter adjacent to the northwest corner of the building should be extended westerly to allow for dense landscape screening of the adjacent loading door. Design Review CemmitteeAction: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, David Blakesley, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Textured pavement across the drive entry aisle should be provided consistent with the adjacent project. 2. A pedestrian connection from the office entry area to the employee plaza should be provided. 3. The two handicapped parking spaces should be of the same textured pavement as the office entry area. 4. The landscape area at the southwest corner of the building should be expanded to screen the roll-up door at the easterly side. 5. Additional pedestrian ammenities and hardscape should be provided to the lunch/plaza area subject to City Planner approval. 6. Additional reveals should be provided at all building corners. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Nancy October 8, lg87 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-45 - COOPER Development of a 6,234 square foot two story medical and professional office building on 0.68 acres of land in the Office/Professional District, located at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and Base Line Road - APN: 208-593-10. Related Fil e: VA 87-10 Design Parameters: The site is vacant and vegetation consists of native grass and weeds. Street improvements along Base Line Road and Beryl Street are completed except for driveways. The site is a substandard but legal parcel. At the westerly property boundary is an existing 22 foot wide 2 to 1 slope with a vertica] height ranging from 11 feet to 14 feet and a retaining wail. Concurrent with this proposed project the applicant is requesting for a Variance to allow reduction of the average landscaping and parking setback for the southerly hail of Beryl Street frontage. Staff Comments: Site Plan 1. The existing retaining wall at the westerly and southerly property boundary should be upgraded with materials that provide compatibility to the brick building. Such material could be of stucco with brick cap and/or brick pilaster. 2. The proposed trash enclosure area at the southerly boundary should be relocated to the southwest side of the building to minimize noise impacts to the adjacent single family homes, provide greater convenience for tenants, and improve access for trash trucks. Architecture 1. The proposed architectural design meets the intent of the design guidelines of the Development Code, however it could be improved with the following: a. The columns located at the south elevation should be of heavy duty size. b. The materials for the mechanical screen on the roof should have the same compatible material as the building, or the parapet wall of the building should be raised so that the roof mounted equipment are screened without the screen wall. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-45 - Cooper October 8, 1987 Page 2 Landscaping 1. Eliminate the 2' wide planter in the middle of the parking area and expand the planter finger at the entry drive to 6 feet as required by Code. 2. Additional landscaping such as Sycamore street trees between the sidewalk and curb should be provided along Base Line Road frontage. 3. A combination of berming, hedge row and/or low level wall should be provided within the landscape setback area to screen the parking spaces from Beryl Street. Design ReviewCmm~itteeAction: Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, David Blakesley, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Nancy Fong 1. The existing retaining wall at the westerly and southerly property boundary should be upgraded with materials that provide compatibility to the brick building. Such material could be of stucco with brick cap and/or brick pilaster. 2. The proposed trash enclosure area at the southerly boundary should be relocated to the southwest side of the building to minimize noise impacts to the adjacent single family homes, provide greater convenience for tenants, and improve access for trash trucks. 3. Eliminate the 2' wide planter in the middle of the parking area and expand the planter finger at the entry drive to 4 feet. 4. Additional landscaping such as Sycamore street trees between the sidewalk and curb should be provided along Base Line road frontage. 5. A combination of berming, hedge row and/or low level wall should be provided within the landscape setback area to screen the parking spaces from Beryl Street. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Nancy October 8, 1987 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS(4ENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-47 - LINPRO - The development of a 17.6 acre Industrial Master Plan consisting of a mixed- use of multi-tenants, manufacturing and research and development projects within a 3 block area of a previously approved Master Plan; and Phase I development consisting of 5 multi-tenant buildings totaling 80,200 square feet in block 1, 8 manufacturing buildings totaling 94,900 square feet in block 2, and 3 research and development buildings totaling 61,816 square feet in block 3, in the Industrial Park District Subarea 16, located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue - APN: 210-062-02, 11, 13, 26, 32 and 33. Design Parameters: The proposed project is part of the recently approved 78 acre Master Plan by Lusk Company. The developer, Linpro Company, is taking over this Master Plan and is proposing to development a more refined and precise Master Plan for the 17.6 acres of the 78 acres including Phase I development as described above. With Phase I development, the developer is proposing to install the necessary infrastructures such as streets and drainage facility including perimeter street landscaping for both interior and exterior streets as shown in Sheet 3 of the development package. Attached for your reference is a copy of the letter from the developer indicating his intentions of this Phase I development and a brochure with introductory information regarding the development company. Staff Comment: Master Plan The developer is not proposing any changes to the block of the Master Plan north of Street "B" and west of Street "A". However block I and block 2 which is located north of 4th Street, west of Archibald will consist of integrated development rather than the individual development of lot sales program formerly proposed. Block 3 will have a mixture of lot sales program development and an integrated development. The Master Plan landscaping concept and shared access are in substantial conformance with the approved Master Plan. Block 1 A. Site Plan 1. Any fencing provided along the entire property boundary abutting the creek should be of decorative material. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS OR 87-47 - LINPRO October 8, 1987 Page 2 2. Convenient pedestrian connection should be provided from "A" Street, "B" Street, and 4th Street to on-site. 3. A strong pedestrian connection should be provided along the entire circulation spine in the middle of block 1. 4. Texture pavement such as exposed aggregate with concrete banding or brick pavers should be provided at project entrance as well as across circulation aisle. B. Landscaping 1. Long continuous row of parking spaces should be broken up by adding 6' wide landscape planter fingers at a rate of I planter finger to 10 parking spaces. 2. Special landscaping should be provided along 4th Street that includes increased number of trees, accent trees, specimen size trees and mounding, etc. 3. Additional trees should be provided along the building perimeter that faces street frontage, such is the case for buildings 1.4, 1.1, 1.5, and 1.8. 4. Additional landscaping such as increased number of trees, specimen size trees, appropriate shrubs and groundcover should be provided along the entire frontage of the proposed Street "B". 5. The northwest corner of the site of the ~uture phase development should be landscaped with trees, groundcover and shrubs. 6. The landscaping at the southwest corner of the site in the future phase development should be designed to integrate with the San Bernardino Count7 Flood Control District landscaping. 7. The same accent trees should be utilized at the project entrance of Street "B". 8. Additional palm trees as an accent should provided at the corner of proposed Street "B" and Street "A". DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-47 - Linpro October 8, 1987 Page 3 Block 2 A. Site Plan 1. Plaza/open space area with pedestrian amenities should be provided for between buildings 2.2 and 2.3 and between buildings 2.6 and 2.7. 2. Centralized plaza area/open space with pedestrian amenities should be provided for the future phase development between buildings 2.7 and 2.8. 3. All screen walls and site boundary walls should of the same material as the building material. B. Landscaping 1. The long continuous row of parking spaces for the future phase development should be broken up with 6' wide planter fingers at a rate of I planter finger to 10 parking spaces. 2. Additional trees including specimen size and accent trees should be provided along the street frontage around block 2 which is 4th Street, Street "A", Street "C", Street "F", and Street "B". Block 3 A. Site Plan 1. Convenient and logical pedestrian connection should be provided to connect from street to buildings, parking areas and pedestrian open spaces. B. Landscaping 1. Long continuous row of parking spaces should be broken up by providing 6' wide planter fingers at a rate of I planter finger to 10 parking spaces. 2. The community gateway design shown on Sheet 24 is inconsistent with the City's approved design. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 87-47 - Linpro October 8, 1987 Page 4 Architecture for Blocks 1, 2 and 3 The proposed elevations consist of tilt-up concrete painted including accent paint with grid pattern reveal. To provide for architectural interest, the roof line has been raised in a curved fashion for variation. This gives the buildings an "airplane hanger-like" appearance. Low level wing walls are provided at the ends of building, addition of canopy and/or awnings over typical storefront openings, etc. These types of architectural elements will provide some type of interest; however, all buildings are of one long, linear building plane. The storefront openings have the same building plane and appear to be repetitive in design. Additional articulation of elevation and a variety of building plane should be provided. The style of elevation renderings are difficult to read in understanding how they have provided architectural elements and interest. The applicant will be providing models and 3 dimensional elevations at the meeting for your review. Project Signage and Entry Marker The proposed design of the project entry marker, neighborhood marker and parcel marker does not provide for compatibility to the City approved gateway sign. .Design ReviewCommittee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, David Blakesley, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee reviewed the project and recommended for further review as follows: 1. The applicant should work with staff to resolve the site plan and landscape design issues as mentioned in the above report. The Committee stated that the Master Site Plan concept is generally acceptable. 2. The proposed architecture does not meet the intent of the Design Guidelines. The reasons being that the style is too clean and crisp and does not provide sufficient articulation in building plane and surface. 3. The proposed signage and/or project entry marker does not provide for compatibility to the City's approved gateway sign.