Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/06/16 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: June 1, 1988 A~TION AGENDA TO: Cmm~ercial/Industrial Design Review Committee Peter Tolstoy Larry McNiel Dan Col eman David Blakesley (Alternate) FROM: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 16, 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 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88- 20 - MOBIL - The development of a self-service gasoline station consisting of a 1,024 square foot retail building and three pump islands covered by a 2,719 square foot canopy on 0.73 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Vineyard Avenue APN: 207-262-48. 6:30 - 7:00 (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-57 - WOLFE/LANG/CHRISTOPHER - The development of a retail building for a cyclesport store totaling 3,000 square foot on 0.37 acres of land in the General Commercial District located at 7810 Haven Avenue - APN: 1077-401- 37. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA Commercial/Industrial June 16, 1988 Page 2 7:00 - 7:30 (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-14 - N-K ARCHITECTS - The development of an automotive and light truck repair center comprised of buildings totaling 34,125 square feet on 2.8 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and 8th Street - APN: 209-031-78. 7:30 - 8:00 {Scott) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-02 - ARCHITECTURE ONE - The development of an industrial complex comprised of seven (7) buildings totaling 58,262 square feet on 3.12 acres of land in the General Industrial Designation (Subarea 5) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of Fifth Street and Lucas Ranch Road - APN: 210-071-37. NF:vc Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council Commercial/Industrial CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENDA June 16, 1988 1. CUP 88-01 - NALBANDIAN (Nancy) Review of conceptual site plan. Committee Action: Recommended Scheme B with the through interior loop driveway texture pavement, speed undulation should be provided. 2. CUP 87-16 - NUWEST (Nancy) Review of trash enclosure design. Committee Action: The Committee recommended that the mini-tower element should be eliminated from the trash enclosure design. The chainlink fence between the wall and the trellis should be replaced by heavy duty lattice. The corner decorative wall should be toned down in design by eliminating some of the mini-tower element. Revised plans should be submitted for Committee review again. 3. DR 87-60 - BARTON (Nancy Review of modification to office entry for Building 10.4-- Committee Action: e ~eversal of col ors was approved as 4. DR 87-22 - MESSENGER --------- ' (Chris) l~rrchan e. Committee Action: The . modification was approved as 5. CUP 85-19 - PARCO (Chris) Review of modification to site plan. Committee Action: The modification was approved as submitted. COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENDA JUNE 16, 1988 PAGE 2 6. DR 87-19 - LENNON (Chris) Review of landscape proposal. Committee Action: The Committee approved either: 1) Setback of 3' with tree planting along the entire north building face. 2) Angle the northwest corner of the building and provide substantial landscaping in lieu of the north building face landscaping. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Nancy June 16, 1988 ENI/IRO~IfrAL A. SSESSMEM~ ANO COli)ITIONAL USE PERt!IT 88-20 - MOBIL - The development of a self-service gasoline station consisting of a 1,024 square foot retail building and three pump islands covered by a 2,719 square foot canopy on 0.73 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-262-48. Oesign Parameters: The site is vacant and rough graded. Street improvements along Arrow Route and Vineyard Avenue are completed. The site is part of a previously approved Master Plan as shown in Attachment "A". Staff Cu.muents: Site Plan The proposed Site Plan is in conformance with the approved Master Plan. However, the low screen wall should not be extended along the landscape area all the way to Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Route. Elevation The proposed elevation for the Mobil Mart building and the canopy differ from the approved elevations (see Attachment "B"). The main issue is to provide compatibility with the existing Industrial Park. 1. Canopy. The applicant is proposing 3 conceptual schemes for the canopy design. Scheme "A" design is typical of most of the newer Mobil gas stations. However the size of the canopy and the columns are too "skinny" compared to the approved elevation. Scheme "B" design has a slightly larger canopy size and column size with added horizontal review lines. Scheme "C" design is a variation of Scheme "B" with larger column size. Staff recommends that the canopy size should be a minimum of 4' and larger columns should be provided to be compatible to the approved plans. 2. ll~e !tobile I~rt Building. The parapet wall of this building should be high enough to screen all roof mounted equipment and projection. The store front design should be consistent with the established business park within this center. 3. All building materials and colors should be consistent and compatible with the established business park. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 88-20 - Mobil June 16, 1988 Page 2 Landscape 1. Special landscaping should be provided at the corner of Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway with increased number of trees, specimen size trees and shrubs. Gas Price Monument Sign A condition of approval for the previous approved Master Plan which includes the subject site requires that no other monument signs for identification will be allowed on Vineyard exclusive of service station pricing monument signs. The proposed gas price monument sign consists of 15 square foot of Mobil identification and 9 square feet of pricing information. Since the Mobil identification sign is more dominant than the gas pricing sign, the entire gas price sign appears to be monument signs for Mobil. The sign area for gas prices should be more dominant than the Mobil identification. The design of the gas price sign should be consistent with the design established for this business park. Colored photographs of existing monument sign will be available at the meeting for your review. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Peter Tolstoy, David Blakesley, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Scheme B design is acceptable. The column size should be increased to 30 inches. 2. All building materials and colors should be consistent with existing Vineyard West Business Park. 3. The columns should be designed in an appearance of structurally supporting the canopy. 4. The gas price sign should be integrated into the decorative screen wall by extending the wall out into the landscape area. The gas price sign should be more dominant in size than the Mobil identification. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Nancy June 16, 1988 ENVIROla4ENTAL ASSESSNEIfF AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-57 - WOLFE/LANG/ CHRISTOPHER - The development of a retail building for a cyclesport store totaling 3,000 square foot on 0.37 acres of land in the General Commercial District located at 7810 Haven Avenue - APN: 1077-401-37. Design Parameters: The site is the last building pad of the Master Plan for the Brunswick/Deer Creek shopping center. The site is rough graded with turf as erosion control. Street improvements and landscaping along Haven Avenue is completed. Staff Comments: Site Plan The proposed site plan is in substantial conformance with the approved Master Plan. According to the applicant, they have obtained verbal agreement from the Flood Control District to allow them to landscape along the Flood Control easement. Elevation The proposed elevation is consistent with the architectural style established in the center and contains subtle variation to some of the architectural elements. Landscaping The existing new windrow along the rear property boundary should be relocated or replaced along the Flood Control District easements. Design Review CxMmittee Action: Members Present: Peter Tolstoy, David Blakesley, Dan Col eman Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee recommended approval of the project. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Debra June 16, 1988 ENVIRO!BqENTAL A. SSESSIqENT FOR DEVELOPNENT REVIEW88-,lq - N-K ARCHITECTS - The development of an automotive and light truck repair center comprised of buildings totaling 34,125 square feet on 2.8 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and 8th Street APN: 209-031-78. Design Parameters: The site is largely vacant with an existing house near the northeast corner of the site. The site bound to the north and west by established industrial uses, to the south by the Railroad right-of-way and easter]y across Archibald by resldentia] and industrial uses. Staff Comments: A. Site Plan 1. The design of the site plan is intended to accommodate automotive and light truck repair services as permitted in Subarea 3 of the Industrial Specific Plan. In general they intend to house vehicle repair services in buildings B, C and D; related retail activities in buildings E and F; and eating and drinking establishments within building A. 2. Various small plazas have been provided on the site. The largest plaza being near the building intended for restaurant type business. The plazas should be complete with seating, shade, trash receptacle, low level lighting, etc. Specific design details should be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of any permits. 3. Building A, C, D, E and F all have approximately 10' along the building frontages, that 10' is composed of a 5' sidewalk and 5' landscape area. However, in many cases the planter area is beneath the building overhang. According to the landscape plan, there is no provision for any plant material with heighth that would serve to break up the length of the building face. Perhaps one solution is to reverse the sidewalk/landscape areas. Allowing the sidewalk to go under the canopy and the landscaping to have more freedom for vertical growth. B. Architecture 1. The architecture is a contemporary low profile design. The finish is stucco with solar grey glass store fronts covered by awnings. The material and installation of the awnings should be clarified. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 88-14 - N-K Architects June 16, 1988 Page 2 2. The north elevation of building F must be architecturally detailed, as this elevation has direct visibility to Archibald Avenue. C. Landscaping: 1. The 20' wide drainage easement along the south property line should be aesthetically landscaped based upon final design of drainage by City Engineer. Oesign Review Committee Action: Members Present: Peter Tolstoy, David Blakesley, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Debra Meier The Committee recommended minor revisions to the site plan prior to scheduling for Planning Commission review. The suggested modifications a re: 1. The Committee suggested that Building E be configured as an "L"- shape to open the middle of the center and create a more cohesive overall project. The parking around Building E should be adjusted accordingly. 2. A secondary plaza should be added near Building A. If Building A is intended for food users this area would most likely be an area where outdoor seats would be used most. 3. A pedestrian connection should be added to link the north and south portions of the site plan. 4. On-site pedestrian connections to the public sidewalk should either be eliminated or expanded using a wider walkway, light bollards, accent plant materials, etc. to create a design statement at the street. The Committee recommended approval of the architectural program with the following comments: 1. Signage would not be permitted along the rear of Building A, except for the first tenant on the easterly end of the building. 2. Awning material should be carefully selected to insure proper wind resistent qualities. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 88-14 - N-K Architects June 16, 1988 Page 3 3. The Committee suggested some use of potted annual/perennial color along pedestrian walkways. The project must return to the Design Review Committee as a consent calendar item prior to Planning Commission review. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Scott June 16, 1988 ENVIRO~AJ_ ASSESSI~E)FrA)II) DE1/ELOPREIFFREVIEW88-02 - ARCHIllECllJRE ONE - me development of an industrial complex comprised of seven (7) buildings totaling 58,262 square feet on 3.12 acres of land in the General Industrial Designation (Subarea 5) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of Fifth Street and Lucas Ranch Road - APN: 210-071-37. Design Parameters: The site is presently developed with two buildings and an area of outdoor storage. The site slopes about 1.5Z from north to south. The project is bounded on the north by Fifth Street, on the west by Lucas Ranch Road, and on the south and east by existing developments. "New Court" wi]] be constructed as part of the development of the site. Staff ~nnents: Site Plan 1. According to the Industrial Area Specific Plan (ISP), there is no required interior rear yard setback. As a result, the applicant has located building 7 abutting the rear property line. The building to the south is located 5 feet off the property line and staff feels that the 5 foot distance between could become a nuisance area. If bull ding 7 was set back 5 feet from the property llne, the ten foot area would be visually open and reduce the changes of a "no man's land". 2. The ISP indicates that the required interior side yard setback shall be 5 feet but the requirement can be waived by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the approval of a Master Plan. With this in mind, the applicant has located building 3 on the east property boundary. Due to the lot abutting Fifth Street, however, staff suggests that a 5 foot setback be maintained to provide landscaping along the building to soften the building elevation from Fifth Street. 3. A design standard and guideline of the ISP requires outdoor eating areas, or plaza, for employees of the complex. To address this item, the applicant has provided small areas adjacent to the entrances of each building. The plaza areas contain a seating bench and table surrounded by landscaping. Staff does not feel, however, that the plazas provided meet the intent of ISP and desires of the Planning Commission. Staff suggests that the areas be enlarged or, possibly, that a few large plaza areas be provided at strategic locations throughout the complex and that pedestrian connections be provided to link the plazas and the buildings. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 88-02 - Architecture One June 16, 1988 Page 2 Landscaping The landscaping requirements of the ISP indicate that trees should be planted in areas of public view at a rate of one tree for every 30 linear foot of building. The trees may be clustered to accommodate specific design goals. The south side of buildings 1, 2 and 3, the east side of buildings 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7, and the west side of building 3, however, cannot meet this objective. As designed, the buildings meet the driveways or parking areas with no landscaping in between. Staff recommends that a minimum 5 foot landscape planter be provided in these areas to accommodate trees, shrubs, and ground cover to soften the building elevations. Architecture In reviewing the architectural program proposed for the complex, the applicant is providing a consistent theme for the project through the use of diamond shaped elements (i.e. windows, accent details). Staff is concerned that the use of these elements may create a somewhat dated appearance. Staff suggests that alternative designs be explored by the applicant to address this concern. Oesign Review )ittee Action: Members Present: David Blakesley, Peter Tolstoy, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Scott Murphy The Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended that the following items be incorporated into revised plans and resubmitted for additional Committee review prior to scheduling for Planning Commission: 1. A five (5) foot building setback should be provided on the east side of Building 3. 2. Additional landscaping should be provided along the east side of Building 2, the west side of Building 3, and at the entries to Buildings 6 and 7. Also, a two (2) foot landscape area should be provided on the south side of Building I to incorporate vine pockets. 3. The zero setback on the south side of Building 7 provided the applicant work with the property owner to the south to secure the five (5) foot area between buildings. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 88-02 - Architecture One June 16, 1988 Page 3 4. The Committee expressed concerns about the interrelations of architectural elements proposed for the project. The Committee recommended that a perspective drawing be prepared to better illustrate the bull ding design. In addition, the Committee suggested that alternative designs may want to be explored by the applicant.