Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/06/02 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: May 26, 1988 ACTION AGENDA TO: Cmm~ercial/Zndustrial Design Review Committee Larry McNiel Peter Tolstoy Dan Coleman David Blakesley (Alternate) FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 2, 1988 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 (Brett) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-48 - FILPI - The development of two industrial buildings ~ing 44,867 square feet on a 2.84 acre site in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) located at 9467/9495 gth Street - APN: 209-031-72. 6:30 - 7:00 (Chris) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88- 13 - CRHO, INC. The development of a five story office building totaling 74,697 square feet on 2 acres of land in the Haven Avenue Overlay District (Subarea 6) located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Route - APN: 209-142-16. June 2, 1988 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-35 - MAURY MICROWAVE CORPDRATION - The development of a 33,556 square foot addition to an existing 9,920 square foot industrial building, for a total square footage of 43,476 on 2.0 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Specific Plan located at 8610 Helms Avenue - APN: 209-022-10 and 11. 7:30 - 8:00 (Chris) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-15 - DESIGN COOPERATIVE - The development of a 1,700 square foot restaurant on .38 acres of land within the Office/ Professional District located at the northwest corner of Arrow Route and Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-811-58. 8:00 - 8:30 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88- 01 - NALBANDIAN/CHIAO - The development of a mixed use project consisting of a 40 unit condominium on 5 acres of land; a 40,000 square foot commercial center for a market/drug store, bank, and retail use on 3.7 acres of land; and a future preschool, all in the Community Service District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the northwest corner of Base Line Road and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 227-522-01, 02, 03, 04, and 227-521-65. Associated with this project is Tree Removal Permit 88- 11, requesting the removal of two (2) mature trees along Etiwanda Avenue. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13886 NALBANDIAN/CHIAO - The development of a 40 unit condominium on 5 acres of land in the Community Service District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the northwest corner of Base Line Road and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 227-522-01, 02, 03, 04, and 227-521-65. (Continued from May 19, 1988 meeting). NF:te Attachments cc: Planning Commission/City Council DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Brett June 2, 1988 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-48 - FILPI - The development of two industrial buildings totaling 44,867 square feet on a 2.84 acre site in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) located at 9467/9495 gth Street - APN: 209-031-72. Oesign Parameters: The site is presently vacant, sloping southerly at approximately 1 percent with no significant vegetation. Properties to the north and east are developed with industrial uses; property to the south is vacant. A citrus grove and single family home exist to the west of the proposed project. Background: The Committee (Chitiea, Kroutil) originally reviewed this project on December 17, 1987. At that time, the Committee felt that the project should be revised and then reviewed again prior to Planning Commission scheduling. The applicant has addressed many of the concerns raised at the December 17 meeting, which are listed below. 1. Additional articulation to the building planes should be provided through the use of openings, recesses, enhanced entries, etc. 2. Variety to the building footprints should be provided through the use of recessed loading doors, extended building entries, and other elements to enhance the architectural interest of the project. 3. Additional treatment to building corners should be provided in the form of texture treatments, columnar elements, etc. 4. Enhanced pavement treatments should be provided to all project and building entries, as well as to patio areas, such as exposed aggregate, brick or tile pavers. 5. Additional canopy trees should be provided within and adjacent to plaza areas. 6. Shrub massing should be provided at all project and building entries, and within the plaza areas. 7. Landscape planters adjacent to the building entries should be of sufficient width to accommodate tree plantings. June 2, 1988 Page 2 With the exception of Items 4 and 5 above, staff believes the applicant has fully addressed the Committee's concerns. Staff only recommends that additional shrub massing be provided at all building entries and that the exposed aggregate sidewalk treatment be used at all building entries. Design P~view Cea~ittee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Brett Horner The Committee recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Tables should be provided in the plaza areas. 2. Additional trees should be provided at the southern boundary of the project between Buildings "A" and "B" to enhance the view from 9th Street. 3. Tree planters should be provided between the loading doors along the west elevation of Building "A" and the east elevation of Building "B". 4. Exposed aggregate or similar paving treatment to that used in the lunch/plaza areas should be provided at all building entries. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Chris June 2, 1988 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-13 - CRHO, INC. - The development of a five story office building totaling 74,697 square feet on 2 acres of land in the Industrial Park District, Subarea 6, and the Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Route - APN: 209-142-16. Design Parameters: The two acre site is part of an approximately 28 acre Master Plan which encompasses land from Arrow Route to Jersey Boulevard and Haven Avenue to Utica Avenue. Special setbacks are required along Haven and Arrow and special design criteria is required under the Haven Avenue Overlay District. The site is generally vacant with some mature trees that were planted in conjunction with a previous use, the temporary trailer for Empire Bank. The site has an approximate 1.5 percent slope to the south. Street improvements have not been completed on Arrow Route. Staff Comaents: Site Plan 1. Subterranean Parking Level - Due to the high intensity of office use, a subterranean parking level is needed to comply with the City's parking requirements. However, staff is concerned with the locations of ingress/egress and the emergency exits, as they are so close to each other which could create traffic conflict during emergency. 2. Upper Level Site Plan - a. Side planter fingers should be provided within the parking lot at the ends of parking rows. b. Additional space should be provided adjacent to the building along the south and east facades. This may be achieved by stepping the building face back at the first floor. c. An area must be provided in front of the trash enclosure to allow for dumpster movement. June 2, 1988 Page 2 Architecture The architecture is appropriate for the Haven Avenue Overlay District, however, a more harmonious design should be created for the mechanical roof screen. The materials proposed should be of the highest quality. Staff has a direct concern with the treatment of the columns, plaza hardscape, granite tile, pipe railing, and pedestrian level window mullion, glazin9 door and lighting. Landscape 1. Canopy trees should be provided within the deck parking area to meet the intent of the Development Code. 2. The overall landscape design should accentuate the northwest corner and work with the mass of the building to provide scale. 3. There are existing mature trees along Haven Avenue and Arrow Route. The developer should preserve these trees either by maintaining them at place, or relocating them to a suitable place. 4. Due to the five story building and the size of the site area, all trees should be of box size to break up the building mass. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Peter Tolstoy, Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Chris Westman The Committee reviewed the project and made the following recommendations: 1. The ingress/egress lane to the lower parking area should be expanded to three lanes. 2. Planter fingers should be provided within the parking lot at the ends of parking rows. 3. Additional pedestrian space should be provided at ground level adjacent to the building on the south and east sides of the building by recessing the glazing enough to accommodate a pedestrian colonade. 4. The position of the trash enclosure should be adjusted to provide for better trash bin access and maneuvering. 5. Canopy trees should be provided within the deck parking area and plaza access. 6. All trees for the project should be box sized specimens to accommodate the building mass. 7. Landscaping at the southeast corner of the parking deck should take sight lines into consideration. 8. The Committee strongly encourages public art to be provided at the northwest corner of the building. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Debra June 2, 1988 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-35 - MAURY MICROWAVE CORPORATION - The development of a 33,556 square foot addition to an existing 9,920 square foot industrial bull ding, for a total square footage of 43,476 on 2.0 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Specific Plan located at 8610 Helms Avenue - APN: 209-022-10 and 11. Oesign Parameters: The site contains a 9,920 square foot tilt-up industrial building. At this time, both asphalt and gravel areas are utilized by employees for parking. Curb and gutter and some parkway landscaping exist on the Helms Avenue frontage. Background: You meky recall that we processed a Conditional Use Permit for the Maury Microwave facility about 2 years ago. That Conditional Use Permit allowed them to use five temporary trailers for offices until such time as their facility could be enlarged to suit their needs. We are currently processing a modification to the original Conditional Use Permit to request a 2 year time extension for the use of the trailers, which will be discussed at the May 25 Planning Commission meeting. Staff Coements: Architecture The existing ~10,000 square foot structure will become an integral part of the final product. The expansion wraps the west and south sides of the existing structure and also includes an exterior facelift, to tie into the newer, more modern addition. Site Plan 1. The plan includes a private outdoor employee patio of 1,125 square feet at the front of the building. The patio screen wall does not encroach into required landscape setback along Helms Avenue. June 2, 1988 Page 2 2. The perimeter of the site will be adequately buffered with landscaping within six (6) foot planters on all site boundaries. However, the north and west faces of the building do not include areas for landscaping which would enhance the expanse of blank building wall. The south building face includes a series of tree wells that will at least provide the vertical growth to break up the length of the building face. Design Review Coam~ittee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Col eman Staff Planner: Debra Meier The recommended approval of the project based upon the following conditions: 1. A landscape planter shall be added to the north building elevation. The planter should be about 2' wide along the existing structure and about 4' wide along the elevation of the addition. The planter should include vines, shrubs and small trees within the wider planter. 2. The planting area along the west property line should include shrubs and trees that will provide a complete screen to the rear building elevation. The tree planting should be double the normal requirement for trees along property boundaries. 3. All roll-up doors, man doors, etc. should be painted to match the building wall and not used as accent elements. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits the applicant should submit a revised color sample board. The Committee encouraged the colors to be brightened. The earth tone range of color is acceptable if that is what the applicant prefers. 5. The raised portion of the building parapet containing the company logo should be eliminated. The parapet should continue at the same level along that portion of the building. The company logo can be down scaled and placed in approximately the same location on the building, between top of parapet and window. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Chris June 2, 1988 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-15 DESIGN COOPERATIVE - The development of a 1,700 square foot restaurant on .38 acres of land within the Office/Professional District located at the northwest corner of Arrow Route and Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-811-58. Oesign Parameters: The site is essentially flat with no significant vegetation. Two special boulevards intersect at the southeast corner which require that buildings be set back at 45 feet and parking at 30 feet. The site is a legal non-conforming lot with a width of gO feet versus the 200 feet required and minimum lot area of 16,200 square feet versus the 40,000 square feet required. The site has an established residential neighborhood to the west. To the north is a single family residence in an Office/Professional district. Access to the site is limited to Arrow Route. Staff Comments: Issues: Site Constraints and Opportunities The substandard lot size and lot width, together with the special setback requirements (45 feet measured from the ultimate curb) on Arrow Route and Archibald Avenue, limit the amount of buildable area for the project site. Variances are being requested for building setback and average landscaping along the two street frontages. Basic site design will be dependent on the consideration and approval of those variance requests. The two parcels to the north are approximately 2 acres in size. They contain a single family home with the remaining area being vacant. Both the project site and these two parcels are zoned as Office/Professional (see Attachment "A"). Therefore, an opportunity exists in designing an integrated development for these three parcels. Master planning of this block would be appropriate, especially in areas of access and circulation. Both Arrow Route and Archibald Avenue are special boulevards where access will be limited. The development of this site without a master planning of access and circulation may preclude the opportunity for designing an integrated project. June 2, 1988 Page 2 Specific Site Comments 1. The loading zone should incorporate the trash enclosure and should be screened as well as possible from public view. 2. Consideration should be given to future possible vehicular access to the property north of the subject site. Architecture The proposed architecture provides good height and building plane variation. However, staff has concerns regarding the use of the materials, white stucco and wood siding, and how they relate to the surrounding projects. Staff recommends the use of brick in place of stucco. Landscaping 1. A landscape statement should be provided at the southeast corner through intensification of groundcover, shrubs, and box sized accent trees. 2. A dense planting of evergreen trees should be provided along the west property boundary to serve as a buffer to the residential district. Design Review Co~ittee A~tion: Members Present: Peter Tolstoy, Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Chris Westman The Committee reviewed the project and made the following recommendations: 1. The loading zone should incorporate the trash enclosure and should be screened from public view. 2. A provision should be made for future reciprocal vehicular access and parking between the site and the property to the north. 3. Special landscape treatment should be given to the southeast corner of the site. 4. Dense planting of evergreen trees and other appropriate materials should be provided as a buffer at the west and north property lines 5. Parapet detailing, similar to that used elsewhere on the building, should be provided as a "cap" for stuccoed areas. 6. The accent lighting on the west elevation should be a rUSt COlor. 7. Specific attention should be given to the outdoor patio area. Canopy trees and hardscape details should be reviewed and receive approval of the City Planner. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:30 Nancy June 2, 1988 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-01 - NALBANDIAN/ CHIAO - The development of a mixed use project consistin9 of a 40 unit ~minium on 5 acres of land; a 40,000 square foot commercial center for a market/dru9 store, bank, and retail use on 3.7 acres of land; and a future preschool, in the Community Service District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the northwest corner of Base Line Road and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 227-522-01, 02, 03, 04, and 227-521-65. Associated with this project is Tree Removal Permit 88-11, requesting the removal of two (2) mature trees along Etiwanda Avenue. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13886 - NALBANDIAN/CHIAO - The development of a 40 unit condominium on 5 acres of land in the Community Service District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the northwest corner of Base Line Road and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 227-522- 01, 02, 03, 04, and 227-521-65. Background: The Planning Commission, on March 17, 1988, conducted a workshop regarding this project. The Commission identified numerous design issues and concerns. They are as stated in the minutes of the March 17, 1988 Planning Commission Workshop meeting. A copy has been attached for your reference (see Attachment "A"). Since then, the applicant has met with staff several times to review and discuss those concerns as identified by the Commission and to work towards acceptable solutions. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was held on April 28, lg88. Staff, the developer, and 14 residents attended this meeting. Six of the residents live in homes immediately abutting the north and west sides of the project. Representatives from The William Lyon Company and For Kids Only also attended this meeting. The developer and architect presented this project to the residents. Colored plans and a model of the proposed project were also available at the meeting for the residents to examine. The following are some of the concerns the residents have regarding this project: 1. Buffering is needed along the north and west property boundaries. Private open space should be designed as private yards for transition and buffering purposes. 2. Loss of privacy with the second story balcony of the units. PLANNING COMMISSI,O~ORKSHOP CUP 88-01/TT 13886 - NALBANDIAN/CHIAO June 2, 1988 Page 2 3. The existing wood fence on the property does not provide adequate security. 4. During construction of the project, signs should be posted to prohibit alcohol and loud music. The developer stated that they could address these concerns in the revised plans by providing dense landscaping along the north and west property boundaries to provide buffering between the two land uses and to preserve privacy. With regard to the wood fence, staff interjected at the meeting that perhaps the developer of this project and The William Lyon Company could look into jointly developing a common wall between the two projects. However, this concept would require cooperation from every one of the residences that abut the north and west property boundaries. Staff Coagents: A. Traffic/Circulation Zssues: One of the concerns raised by the Planning Commission is the traffic conflict created by the different land uses - the preschool, the residential project, and the commercial center. The developer has provided a traffic study. The parameters of this study is to determine the extent of the conflict and the impact to the site and the surrounding area and provide mitigation measures if needed. The City Traffic Engineer is in the process of reviewing this traffic study (see Attachment "B"). Comments will be available at the Design Review Committee meeting. B. Site Plan: Residential Project: 1. The two driveway entrances to the project should have an entry statement that includes wider pavement with a planter median, and wider open landscape area. This is especially so with the end units of Numbers 8 and 9. 2. One of the residents' concern was the existing wood fence along their property boundary which does not provide for adequate privacy and sound attenuation. Should the developer contact The William Lyon Company to work towards installing a common wall? PLANNING COMMISSI~QOORKSHOp CUP 88-01/TT 13886 - NALBANDIAN/CHIAO June 2, 1988 Page 3 Commercial Project: 1. The loading area behind Building "A" should be redesigned as shown in Alternative "B" (see Attachment "C"). This alternative provides a flip bridge for loading. In other words, trucks could enter the loading zone on either side without backing into it. The Traffic Division has reviewed this alternative and determined it to be acceptable provided that there is a 65 foot truck stacking distance. This alternative design minimizes the conflict created by the loading and unloading activity with the main private drive. C. Elevations: Residential Project: The developer has not proposed any changes to the elevations. It is still of victorian architectural style which meets the design guidelines of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. However, the Planning Commission at the March 17, 1988 workshop recommended that authentic materials should be used such as wood clapboard siding, fieldstone, and concrete tile (calshake would be an acceptable roof material). In addition to the above, the applicant should provide the following items: 1. A standard patio cover that is consistent with the design theme of this architectural style. 2. The gazebo and all other related buildings or structures in the common open space area should also be designed to be consistent with this architectural style. 3. Signage should be sandblasted wood signs rather than individual channelized letters. Further, the signage should hang underneath the colonade instead of forced into the space below the fascia as shown. Commercial Project: 1. Authentic wood siding and fieldstone materials should be used rather than the fieldstone veneer and simulated wood siding. The roof material should be of tile instead of asphalt shingles. 2. The developer has provided details of the pedestrian amenities such as benches, bike racks, and trash receptacles (see attached brochure). PLANNING COMMISSI~O~ORKSHOP CUP 88-01/TT 13886 - NALBANDIAN/CHIAO June 2, 1988 Page 4 D. Landscaping: Residential Project: 1. Windrows should be provided along the north and west property boundaries per the requirements of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and to provide a buffer between the single family homes and the duplexes (50 linear feet per acre, approximately 250 feet). 2. The applicant still has not provided fence and walls to delineate the 600 square foot required open space. 3. The entrance into the project should have special landscape treatment with specimen-size trees, pedestrian walkways, accent trees, etc. Commercial Project: 1. Trees should be provided along the storefront which has not been addressed by the developer. E. Future Preschool Located at Base Line Road: The applicant is proposing a future preschool to be located along Base Line Road. The prospective tenant for this preschool is For Kids Only. However, the applicant stated that For Kids Only has not formalized the lease for this site area. Therefore, the applicant is only requesting for conceptual approval at this time. Future development will require a separate Development Review process. Staff's review of this future preschool site is limited to overall circulation and site planning. The number of parking spaces required for a preschool can not be reviewed at this time as it is based on the student capacity for this preschool and the number of staff members. Such information has not been provided to staff. PLANNING COMMISSI?~ORKSHOP CUP 88-01/TT 13886 - NALBANDIAN/CHIAO June 2, 1988 Page 5 Minutes of Planning Cmmaission Workshop: Attendants: Planning Commission Larry McNiel Suzanne Chitlea Bruce Emerick Peter Tolstoy Planning Staff Brad Bullet Otto Kroutil Dan Coleman Nancy Fong Applicant Philip Chiao Mark Elliott Andrew Barmakian The Planning Commission reviewed the revised plans and determined that the underlying issue of this mix use project is that of over-built and too dense. It creates problems in areas of tremendous grade differential between the existing S.F. homes and the townhouse project, lack of open space, truck and auto traffic conflict, etc. The Planning Commission provides directions to the applicant so that he could revise the project to best meet the Commission's concerns. They are as follows: A. Residential Project: 1. The two driveway entrances to the project should have an entry statement that includes wider pavement with a planter median, and wider open landscape area. This is especially so with the end units on Numbers 8 and 9. 2. One of the residents' concern was the existing wood fence along their property boundary which does not provide for adequate privacy and sound attenuation. The developer should contact The William Lyon Company and the adjacent property owner/residents in order to work towards installing a common wall. This issue should be resolved prior to scheduling the project for Planning Commission consideration. 3. The grade differential between the existing S.F. homes to the north and west, and the townhouse project creates a "basement" and "tunnel" effect. The applicant should reduce the grade difference to no greater than 8 feet. The building setback from the north and west property line should be increased so as to provide transition to the existing S.F. homes and to allow room for taking up the grades differential. June 2, 1988 Page 6 4. The applicant should explore the feasibility of eliminating the middle section of the main loop road so as to increase area for open space and to take up grade differential. 5. Variation to the proposed elevations should be provided. This could be achieved by providing changes to the architectural details of the building, creating asymmetry to the elevation (typical of Victorian style). 6. The applicant should provide examples of projects that have used simulated wood siding and calshake roof material for Commission to consider (this includes the commercial project). 7. The applicant should provide additional color shades for Commission to consider. B. COMMERCIAL PROJECT 1. Alternative design of the loading area for the market and drug store should be explored. 2. All trash enclosure areas should be relocated away from driveway entry and away from buildings. 3. The parking spaces along the main loop road should be eliminated. C. FUTURE PRESCHOOL LOCATED AT BASE LINE ROAD During the workshop, the applicant indicated that he has decided not to pursue this project and preferred to expand the townhouse project into this site area. D. The Con~nission stated that another workshop would be needed to review the revised plans.