Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985/10/03 - Agenda PacketDATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM October 7, 1985 Commercial/Industrial Design Review Committee ACTION AGENDA 1977 Dennis Stout Suzanne Chitlea Larry McNeil (Alternate) Dan Coleman Nancy Fong, Associate Planner DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 3, 1985 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 (Howard) 6:30 - 7:00 (Howard) DR 85-35 - WESTREND DEVELOPMENT DR 85-34 - TOKAI/SCRIPTO NF:cv Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council Dan Coleman, Planning Division Joe Stofa, Paul Rogeau, Loyd Goolsby, Barrye Hanson COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AGENOA OCTOBER 3, 1985 1. CUP 84-31 - DIVERSIFIED (Dan) Review storefront designs. Committee Action: Continued to October 17, 1985 2. MDR 85-20 - SIZZLER (John) Review of awnings. Committee Action: Canvas not appropriate. Awning should integrate into building theme and design. 3. DR 85-26 - FORECAST (Nancy) Review plaza areas. Committee Action: Continued to full discussion on October 17, 1985, Design Review Committee meeting. 4. IqDR 85-17 - EQUI {Dino) Review of elevations and site plan. Committee Action: Committee stated the revised elevations and site plan is inconsistent with Foothill Corridor Interim Policies. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 - 6:30 Howard October 3, 1985 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-35 - WESTREND DEVELOPMENT - To develop seven industrial buildings of tilt-up concrete comprising 143,207 square feet, on 10.43 acres of land, located at the northeast corner of Rochester and Arrow Route in the Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea 8) - APN 229-021-036. DESIGN PARAMETERS The project proposal under consideration is the Westrend Industrial Park consisting of speculative buildings. The majority of the proposal is situated along Arrow Route (major boulevard), and to a lesser extent along Rochester, both of which are special boulevards. In terms of design statement and visual impact, the project is also in proximity to the Devore Freeway (View shed), which requires screening of outdoor storage and loading areas, and additional architecture and landscaping treatment along any large expanses of building elevations. STAFF COI,~4ENTS Site Plan: The following revisions are suggested to improve the overall site plan. 1. Increase the pedestrian connections from the public streets into the site. 2. Provide more detail for outdoor employee eating areas. Landscaping: Increase landscaping fingers in parking areas which do not conflict with loading and unloading activities. (Suitable ratio - i landscaping finger every 10 spaces.) 2. Increase landscape planter width to 5 feet minimum along the east elevations of Buildings 1, 3, and 4, and also along the north elevation of Building 4. Special landscaping treatment needed along both sides of project frontage (i.e., rockscape, terraced planters, undulating mounding, clustering tree types, and consideration of flowering ground cover in various sections along property frontage). Architecture: Buildings along east property line need additional architectural embellishments. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Dennis Stout Staff Planner: Howard Fields Site Plan: The Committee recommended that the site plan incorporate a greater degree of pedestrian orientation from both the public streets and between buildings and provide greater detail at the employee areas including canopy shade trees. Landscaping: The Committee recommended the following: 1. Special landscape entry statements for Arrow Route and Rochester. 2. Special landscape treatment within building #2 recess. 3. Landscape planter along the east elevation at Building #1. 4. Increase the number of landscaping fingers within parking areas. Elevation: The Committee recommended the following: Recess the windows at the corners (i.e. east elevation building #1). 2. Provide alternative definition in building elevations in lieu of multi-color scheme. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Howard October 3, 1985 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-34 TOKAI/SCRIPTO The construction of a 194,774 square foot Industrial Manufacturing Facility on 11.19 acres of land, located at the northwest corner of Toronto Avenue and 7th Street in Subarea 10 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan - APN 209-401-7, 8, 9. DESIGN PARAMETERS The subject site is immediately east of the existing Tokai/Scripto facility on the northeast corner of 7th and Utica. The project proposal will be fully integrated with the existing facility in terms of reciprocal driveway access, parking and overall site plan. The proposed architecture will be similar to/and compatible with the existing facility. A scaled model will be presented for your review at the meeting. Site Plan: Provide adequate privacy screen around the outdoor/indoor employee area {i.e., landscaping berms in combination with low profile wall 5 feet). Greater degree of pedestrian connections from the public sidewalks along both 7th and Toronto. Landscaping along Toronto does not meet the 25 foot average required by the Industrial Specific Plan. Architecture: Define what type of materials will be used for the architectural panels for the automated warehouse. This is a issue, since concrete tilt-up at the height of 55 feet would be cost prohibitive and aesthetically undersirable. 2. Suggest more detail in architecture elevations such as ribbed concrete, score lines, and painted stripe or scheme. DESIGN REVIEW CO~4Ilr~EE ACTION Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, Dennis Stout Staff Planner: Howard Fields 2. 3. 4. 5. Provide 25 foot landscaping average setback along Toronto Avenue with possibility of a minor exception on parking. Provide special landscaping treatment in driveway entry and the corner of 7th Street and Toronto. Provide additional architectural treatment to the long north elevation (rear portion 55 feet in height). Provide tree wells along new west building addition. This item shall be reviewed by the Committee prior to forwarding to Planning Commission for review.