Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/04/04 - Agenda PacketDATE: TO: April 11, 1991 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM ACTION Commercial/Industrial Design Review Committee Suzanne Chitiea Wendy Vallette Otto Kroutil John Melcher (Alternate FROM: SUBJECT: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF APRIL 4, 1991 The following is a description of projects which require revlew 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 - 6:00 p.m., Consent Calendar items will be reviewed between 6:00 p.m. 6:30 p.m., with the first design review item being heard at 6:30 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. 6:30 - 7:00 (Tom) 7:00 - 7:30 (Tom) DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 14192 - HIX DEVELOPMENT - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for a previously approved tract map consisting of 64 single family lots on 19.7 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located south of 19th Street between Hellman Avenue and Amethyst Avenue - APN: 202-061-12, 14, 40 and 44. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 89-13 - HWANG The development of a master plan consisting of a four-story hotel totaling 82,492 square feet, two restaurant buildings totaling 11,000 square feet and two office buildings totaling 48,750 square feet on 2.67 acres of land in the Office/Professional District, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-q50-31. DRC AGENDA APRIL 4, 1991 Page 2 7:30 - 8:00 (Steve H.) PRELIMINARY ORAL PRESENTATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-42 VICTORIA COURTYARD - The development of an integrated shopping center including 15 commercial buildings totaling 320,975 square feet and a service station/car wash building totaling 2,300 square feet on 31.13 acres of land with Phase I development consisting of 5 buildings totaling 267,960 square feet on approximately 22 acres in the Regional Related Office/Commercial District of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of the future Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 229-021- 10,15, 19, and 28. Related File: Tentative Parcel Map 13808 8:00 - 9:00 (Scott) pLANNING COF~MISSION WORKSHOP 88-12 - TOWN CENTER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9:00 - 10:00 (Nancy) MULTI-FAMILY STANDARDS STUDY - The review and discussion of various development standards and design guidelines for multi-family projects. SM:mlg Attachments cc: Planning Commission/City Council DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Tom April 4, 1991 DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 14192 - HIX DEVELOPMENT - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for a previously approved tract map consisting of 64 single family lots on 19.7 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located south of 19th Street between Hellman Avenue and Amethyst Avenue - APN: 202-061-12, 14, 40 and 44. Project History: Tentative Tract 14192 was approved by the planning Commission on June 27, 1990. Two unique features of the Tentative Map include the subdivision of property surrounding the Lord House, a historically significant structure, and thru street connections to two established neighborhoods adjacent to the tract (Mignonette Street, Layton Street and Kirkwood Avenue). The Tentative Tract was conditioned to build a garage for the Lord House, which is being reviewed by the Historic preservation Commission tonight. The proposed garage is shown on Sheet No. 15 of the plans. Staff Comments: Staff has identified the following items which should be addressed by the Committee- Site Plan: provide greater variation in the front setback utilizing extremes of the requirement. Within the Low Residential District, the front setback shall average 37 feet plus/minus 5 feet. Provide a minimum of 5 feet between the top or toe of slope, or retaining walls, and the proposed units. Gradually taper all three-car driveway widths down to a minimum of 16 feet at the property line. Architecture: (Plan ~ has two elevations, Plan 2 has three elevations, Plan 3 has three elevations, and Plan 4 has two elevations.) Provide variation in the chimney cap design. Provide a variety of materials on the elevations including, but not limited to, stucco, wood siding, native stone, brick, etc. Utilize a consistent column size throughout the elevations (i.e., Plan 2, Elevation A provides different column sizes at the entryway and adjacent to the garage door). DESIGN REVIEW CO~Z4ENTS T 14192 - HIX DEVELOPMENT APRIL 4, 1991 Page 2 4- Column box-outs on front elevations should be continued to side elevations. Provide a visable "support" element to the columns above the garage door on Plan 2, Elevation B. Plans 3 and 4 provide large areas stucco that should be broken up by windows or other architectural details. 7. Provide multi-paned windows on all sides of some units. Review the proposed garage for consistency with architecture of the Lord House. Pictures Of the existing residence will be available for Committee review and consideration. Landscape Plan: Expand treatment of perimeter, return and corner side yard walls to include decorative cap and pilasters. 2- Identify perimeter wall treatment at Lord House. Design Review Comm{ttee Action: Members Present: John Melcher, Wendy Vallettet Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Tom Grahn The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval with the following modifications: Provide greater variation in the front setback utilizing extremes of the requirement. The front setback should average 37 feet, plus or minus 5 feet. Provide a minimum of 5 feet between the top or toe of slope, or retaining walls, and the proposed units. When retaining walls are proposed on or near the property line, the following should be observed: combination retaining and garden walls are limited to a maximum height of 6 feet, as measured from the midpoint of the retaining wall to top of garden wall (if a 2-foot retaining wall is proposed, the maximum garden wall height permitted above is 5 feet). Because of minimum height needed for a garden wall, if a retaining wall height is greater than 2 feet, it should be separated from the garden wall by a planter strip of approximately 3 feet in width. DESIGN REVIEW CO~ENTS T 14192 APRIL 4, 1991 Page 3 Gradually taper all three driveway widths, greater than 20 feet in length, down to a maximum of 16 feet at the front property line. Revise plotting of units to open up streetscape. This includes plotting units so that garages and driveways are located adjacent to one another on adjacent lots. This essentially opens up the front yard area on adjacent lots and increases variety in the streetscape. Details of architectural features should be provided to ensure there is enough relief to achieve the desired effect. Variation should be provided on the rear of some two-story elevations through the addition of hipped or dutch (spanked) roofs. provide additional windows or other architectural features to the side elevations of Plans 3 and 4 to break up large expanses of stucco. Column box-outs on front elevations should be continued to side elevations. On Plan 2, Elevation B, the column box-out above the garage should be revised to reflect the other box-out/corbel on the same elevation. 10. Provide variation in the chimney cap design. 11. The Committee reviewed design modifications in the Lord House garage and recommended approval. The applicant was directed to work with staff in revising these design issues prior to being scheduled for Planning Commission consideration. DESIGN REVIEW .COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Tom April 4, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE pERMIT 89-13 - HWANG The development of a master plan consisting of a four-story hotel totaling 82,492 square feet, two restaurant buildings totaling 11,000 square feet and two office buildings totaling 48,750 square feet on 2.67 acres of land in the Office/Professional District, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 227-150-31. Design Parameters: The proposed hotel is located along a corridor of Foothill Boulevard co~unonly referred to as the "missing link", as its development was not included within design criteria Of the Foothill Specific Plan. Amendments are currently under review to incorporate this project site, and the entire "missing link", into the specific plan which would include designating this site within the Foothill-Rochester Activity Center. Activity Center design criteria establishes requirements for a pedestrian oriented development in relation to building orientation, formal landscape arrangements, decorative paving, etc. Please Note: Design Review CoM-{ttee comments will concentrate on broad design issues rather than specific architectural features end design elements. Should the Committee approve the design concept, future Design Review Com~{ttee c~ments will focus on specific architectural features and site design issues. Staff ~ents: The following items have been identified for review by the Committee. These comments are based upon buildings proposed for Phase I which includes the hotel and one restaurant pad. Site Plan: In conformance with Activity Center design guidelines, the restaurant and office buildings should be located adjacent to Foothill Boulevard to establish pedestrian oriented development. Activity Center urban streetscape design should extend the full frontage of Foothill Boulevard and along Rochester Avenue up to the project driveway. Expand the use of texturized paving (interlocking pavers) to create a continuous pedestrian circulation path throughout project development. 4. The truck circulation plan should be revised to accurately reflect anticipated truck delivery routes. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 89-13 - HWANG APRIL 4, 1991 Page 2 Provide a strong landscape/pedestrian linkage between restaurant plaza areas and the hotel. Provide a strong visual element unifying the entire site through a continuation of a specific landscape theme. Utilize consistent tree plantings at the project entryways, along the main drive aisle, and adjacent to the office, hotel and restaurant buildings. Redesign the parking layout/site design at the northwest corner of project. The current design is awkward and will create circulation conflicts. Architecture: Hotel Design Issues: The building should be enhanced with some treatment that would provide a "base" to the structure- Elevations do not accurately reflect roof lines from elevation to elevation. Provide a roof plan that accurately identifies where hip and gable roof projections end. Provide an enlarged detail of typical window treatment. Current window design includes an air conditioning unit below each window for each individual room. The air conditioning unit is flush with the exterior finish and covered by metal louvered vents. (Pictures will be available of a similar feature for Committee review.) Metal work at the front entry tower appears awkward and inconsistent with the architectural style. Provide a cross-section through the porte cochere to identify the interior finish. Elements of the elevations require additional detailing, reveal lines, or other acceptable architectural elements to break up large blank expanses of stucco. Several materials are identified in the material list that are not noted on the elevations. (Items No. 7, 9, 11, 12, and 14.) 8. Identify placement of the mechanical equipment. DESIGN REVIEW COFa4ENTS CUP 89-13 - HWANG APRIL 4, 1991 Page 3 Restaurant Design Issues: 4- 6. There needs to be a stronger restaurant and hotel buildings. The building is too symmetrical. Provide greater variation in the elevations. Utilize a consistent column size. The ceramic tile accent at the building entry does not relate to hotel design. Revise the hip roof design above the entryway. The gable roof on the south and west elevations appears to project out from the building, yet elevations do not support this design. architectural tie between the Other: 1. 2- 3- Review the trash enclosure design for architectural conformity with the building design. Provide a detail of the perimeter wall treatment. Review stucco wall/wrought iron fence proposed at all sides of the hotel building. Design Review Comm{ttee Action: Members present: John Melcher, Wendy Vallette, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Tom Grahn The Committee reviewed the project but did not recommend approval due to the following: The location of the Phase I restaurant is acceptable as it complies with current development standards. However, as activity center development standards for the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan "Missing Link" will likely be in place prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant should provide an alternate site design for the restaurant and that shows compliance with possible development standards. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 89-13 - HWANG APRIL 4, 1991 Page 4 The applicant should consider deleting designs of the Phase I restaurant until such time a tenant is determined and specific design elements can be determined. Redesign the internal circulation along the major drive aisle. This should include relocating parking spaces that back up into the drive aisle and relocating the drive aisle further south so that parking spaces to be provided for the office building can be located directly south of them. The location of the hotel is acceptable, however, the building design shall be revised. Provide for changes in building mass through movement in the walls, this can be accomplished by teracing the building plane and through the addition of balconies and architectural projections. Reduce width of drive approaches from 50 feet to 35 feet. Redesign the northwest corner of the site to reduce the amount of paving and minimize circulation conflicts. Parking lot landscape fingers should be provided to break up long uninterrupted rows of parking spaces. As an example, parking lot landscaping should be provided/designed similar to the Terra Vista Town Center. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:00 Steve H. April 4, 1991 PRELIMINARY ORAL PRESENTATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-42 - VICTORIA COURTYARD - The development of an integrated shopping center including 15 co~nnercial buildings totaling 320,975 square feet and a service station/car wash building totaling 2,300 square feet on 31-13 acres of land with Phase I development consisting of 5 buildings totaling 267,960 square feet on approximately 22 acres in the Regional Related Office/Co~nercial District of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of the future Day Creek Boulevard APN: 229-021-10,15, 19, and 28. Related File: Tentative Parcel Map 13808 Abstract: The purpose of tonight's oral presentation is to familiarize the Design Review Committee with the above-referenced project prior to the regular design review hearing on April 18, 1991. The developer (Hughes Investments) plans to use a majority of the allotted time to make an oral presentation. Following t_he presentation, an opportunity to discuss major architectural and site plan design issues may be possible if time permits. Design parameters: The 56 gross acre parcel is inunediately adjacent to and west of the future extension of Day Creek BOulevard, with the southern part of the site bisected by the BOulevard where it curves to terminate at Rochester Avenue. A 300-foot wide Southern California Edison Utility Corridor borders the entire length of the west property line of the project. The site slopes slightly from north to south at approximately 3 percent. No significant native vegetation exists On the property, for it was most recently used as a grape vineyard, but has since been abandoned and is in a state of decay. All driveway locations are in conformance with the minimum standards of the City's driveway policies for spacing and distance from intersections. Staff Comets: The following major design issues should be addressed by the Commission, if time allows: The site plan has been designed to take advantage of the view corridor from the Devore Freeway, Day Creek Boulevard and to a lesser extent, Foothill Boulevard. Consequently, with this design, the rear elevations of the main row of buildings are oriented in view of eastbound traffic on Foothill Boulevard. As mentioned earlier, a Southern California Edison Utility Corridor runs north/south adjacent to and parallel to the west property line of the project. In most situations, Edison has strict limitations DESIGN REVIEW COF~MENTS CUP 90-42 - VICTORIA COURTYARD APRIL 4, 1991 Page 2 as to the landscape screening materials placed in their easements. Therefore, the opportunity for providing a dense landscape buffer to screen the west elevation is substantially limited. The Committee should consider this constraint when reviewing the proposed site plan and the west elevations of Buildings K through N (Home Depot and K-Mart included). 2. Now that the site plan has been designed per the Engineering Division policies for driveway spacing from intersections, no driveways are located on the future service station parcel. Therefore, service station users may short cut through parking areas for other building pads (example: Building "B") and increase the risk for internal circulation conflicts. Therefore, it may be advisable to study the possibility of relocating the service station to a parcel closer to a shopping center ingress/egress point (example: pads "A" and "B") or redesigning the primary circulation routes as to eliminate "short cuts" through parking areas for other buildings. 3- A barrier should be provided between the main vehicular aisle and the loading areas in front of Home Depot to encourage a continuous flow of traffic. Although the parking aisle widths and stall sizes technically meet the minimum requirements specified in the Development Code, the angled parking area east of K-Mart and Shops "L" should be designed to acconunodate two-way traffic through each aisle. Proportionally equal numbers of parking spaces should be within a close distance of all buildings and minimize crossing of primary circulation routes. Please note the deficiency of parking spaces in front of Buildings "D" and "F." If time permits, the Committee should discuss the general architectural concept, with the understanding that architectural details will be discussed at the April 18, 1991 meeting. Design Review Comm{ttee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Steve Hayes PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP 8:00 Scott April 4, 1991 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-12 - WESTERN PROPERTIES - Review of an interim design solution in lieu of the construction of Major 4 and Building M within Phase III. Background: Earlier this year, the applicant submitted and had approved the working drawings for Major 4 and Building M. Prior to obtaining the building permits, however, the prospective tenant for Major 4, Childs' World, encountered financial difficulty and pulled out of Town Center. Western Properties has since been negotiating with another business to occupy Major 4. The building used by this tenant is slightly wider than the proposed design of Major 4. If the applicant is able to obtain this tenant, the design of Major 4 and Building M will have to be modified slightly. As a result, the applicant does not wish to begin construction on the buildings until a tenant is obtained and any building modifications can be addressed. Staff ~ents: In lieu of constructing Major 4 and Building M, the applicant is proposing to construct a temporary barricade around the pad areas. The barricade will be painted to emulate elements characteristic of Town Center. In addition, a temporary sidewalk and tree wells will be provided across the front of the pad area to allow the connection between Montgomery Wards and the TBA building. The applicant prefers this approach because it will maintain pedestrian access between buildings, even during construction of Major 4 and Building M. Staff suggests that the Planning Commission review the interim design solution and determine if it is acceptable or if other options should be pursued. Because of the conditions imposed under the phasing plan, the applicant will also be coming before the Commission requesting a modification to the phasing as it relates to the construction of various buildings (including Building M) and occupancy of Montgomery Wards. Staff Planner: Scott Report received. Refer to Planning Commission minutes for action.