Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/11/07 - Agenda PacketDATE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM November 14, 1991 ACTION TO: FROM: Commercial/Industrial Design Review Committee Larry McNiel Suzanne Chitiea Otto Kroutil John Melcher (Alternate Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE.MEETING OF NOVEMBER 7, 1991 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 - 5:45 p.m., Consent Calendar items will be reviewed between 5:45 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 (Scott) UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-18 - LEWIS HOMES - Review of the proposed Uniform Sign Program for the Central Park Plaza shopping center, located in the Neighborhood Commercial designation of the Terra Vista Planned Conununity at the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Milliken Avenue. 7:00 - 7:30 (Bey) DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13565-6 & 7 - STANDARE PACIFIC - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for Phases 6 and 7 of a previously County-approved map consisting of 82 single family lots on 43.1 acres of land, located north of Summit Avenue and east of Wardman Bullock Road - APN: 226-082-16, 17 and 27. DRC AGENDA NOVEMBER 7, 1991 Page 2 7:30 - 8:30 (Tom) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-22 - BAINBRIDGE INVESTMENTS - The development of 4 industrial buildings totaling 41,051 square feet on 2.35 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea l) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 8738 7th Street - APN: 207-262-27. SM:mlg Attachments cc: Planning Commission/City Council COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSENT ~T.'~I~D~IT., ITEMS AG~DA November 7, 1991 CUP 89-08 - VIMMIARDS MARKerPLACE (Steve H. ) Review of A]_bertson's sign logo. Committee Action: The Committee (Chitiea, Melcher, Kroutil) approved the increased logo area as presented. CUF 90-16 - CBM~D (Steve R.) Committee Action: Review of revised elevations and streetscape. The Committee (Chitiea, Melcher, Kroutil) recommended approval subject to the following: Raised planters should be incorporated into the perimeter wall. Vines should be planted along the perimeter wall. The applicant should work with staff to add interest to the corner of 6th Street and Etiwanda. Specimen size trees and raised planters should be added here. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Scott November 7, 1991 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-18 - LEWIS HOMES Review of the proposed Uniform Sign Program for the Central Park Plaza shopping center, located in the Neighborhood Commercial designation of the Terra Vista Planned Community at the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Milliken Avenue. Background: On August 22, 1991, the Design Review Committee (McNiel, Melcher, Kroutil) reviewed the sign program and recommended that the program be revised to address the following concerns: 1. Major Tenants: The signs should be reduced in size to be in proportion with the building elevation and not overwhelm the building. The applicant should explore recessing the can and providing architectural detailing around the sign. The existing Thrifty signs within the City should be considered in evaluating the proposed sign. The monument design presented at the meeting showing inset oval signs was not acceptable. The applicant should explore the elimination of one or both of the ovals in favor of individual letters. 2. Pad Tenants: Provisions for individual monument signs should be eliminated until an amendment to the Sign Ordinance is approved to allow the additional monument signs. The Committee was split on the use of a "logo sign" instead of the names spelled out. The applicant will provide examples of logo signs for additional Co~m~ittee review. 3. Pad and Shop Tenants: The applicant should provide examples of names using upper and lower case letters and establish criteria for its use, such as an upper case letter height of 24 inches including the down strokes. b. For sign copy utilizing two lines, a maximum letter height and dimensions between lines should be established. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 89-18 - LEWIS HOMES NOVEMBER 7, 1991 Page 2 The Committee expressed apprehension about the use of multiple sign colors. The applicant indicated they would provide examples and establish criteria for the limited use of color. Staff ~ents: Staff has reviewed the revised Uniform Sign Program applicant and provides the following comments consideration: submitted by the for Committee 1. Major Tenants: No reduction in sign area is being considered by the tenants. The signs, as depicted in the elevations, appear too large for the building face. In lieu of recessing the can signs, the applicant is proposing to provide a trim element around the sign similar to the cornice used on the building. The trim will cover 8 of the 10-inch depth Of the sign can. The monument sign proposed by the applicant still includes 2 ovals inset in the monument. Based on previous Committee action, alternative designs should be explored. 2. Pad Tenants: Provisions for individual monument signs for pad tenants have been removed from the program. b. The applicant will provide examples of the "logo sign" for Committee review. 3. Pad and Shop Tenants: The applicant has provided language in the sign program that will allow signs with upper and lower case letters to utilize 24-inch letters, including the down strokes, for the upper case letters. The maximum letter height for signs using 2 lines of copy shall not exceed 14 inches, with the space between letters equal to one-third the height of the smaller letter. As proposed by the applicant, the primary color of the signs will be red. The tenants may, however, use accent colors (blue, white, green, and yellow) for up to 10 percent of the sign area. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 89-18 - LEWIS HOMES NOVEMBER 7, 1991 Page 3 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Suzanne Chitlea, John Melcher, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Anna-Lisa Hernandez for Scott Murphy The Committee conceptually approved the Central Park Plaza sign program subject to the following modifications: 1. Major Tenants: a) The Ralphs wall sign should be reduced to a maximum height' of 5' - 8" and length Of 15' - 0". The trim surrounding the can sign should be consistent and even around the entire sign. b) The stucco finish around the Ralphs can sign should be painted to match the building. c) The monument sign exhibit should be revised to show only the Ralphs major anchor and a generic sign area for the second business identity directly below. d) The program should clearly identify the maximum dimensions for the major anchors in the exhibit verbage identifying the maximum 70 percent storefront coverage and 150' sign area should be eliminated. 2. Pad Tenants: a) The sections identifying provisions for individual monument signs for pad tenants should be removed from the program. Proposals will be pursued by those tenants at a later date. b) Additional verbage should be added for the "logo sign", specifying that the logo must be proportionate to the building elevation and shall be subject to landlord and City Planner review and approval. 3. Pad and Shop Tenants: a) The applicant should provide language in the sign program that will allow signs with upper and lower case letters to utilize 24-inch letters including the down strokes for the upper case letters. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CUP 89-18 - LEWIS HOMES NOVEMBER 7, 1991 Page 4 b) c) The maximum letter height for signs using 2 lines of copy should not exceed 14 inches, with the space between letters equal to one-third the height of the smaller letter. As proposed by the applicant, the primary color of the signs will be red. The tenants may, however, use a maximum of 2 of the following accent colors (blue, white, green, and yellow) for up to 10 percent of the sign area. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Bey November 7, 1991 DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13565-6 & 7 - STANDARD PACIFIC - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for Phases 6 and 7 of a previously County-approved map consisting of 82 single family lots on 43.1 acres of land, located north of Sungnit Avenue and east of Wardman Bullock Road - APN: 226-082-16, 17 and 27. Background: The Design Review Committee (McNiel, Chitiea, Kroutil) reviewed the project On September 19, 1991 and did not approve it at that time. The Committee had the following concerns and requested that the applicant modify the project and return for further Committee review: Provide better differentiation between plans, especially the rear and sides. Provide a break up in garage doors to enhance the streetscape and to lend individuality to each style. Consider popping the single door garage door in or out. As presented, the garage doors dominate the streetscape. 3. Roof line of the Plan 1 elevations appear too similar. The project type should meet the intent and spirit of the proposed Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Variations in elevations are needed which are more obvious. The variations provided for each elevation type are too similar. The concept of 360 degree architecture should be utilized. Additional variation is needed for the side and rear elevations. Possibly a change in window shape could accomplish this. 6. Consider varying the chimney details and/or caps for each style. 7. Front yard return walls should be painted a consistent color throughout the tract. Driveway treatment should provide greater variation and additional enhancement. More varied texture and color changes should be provided. Staff Connents: The applicant has revised the project in response to the Design Review Committee's concerns in the following ways: The Monterey elevation has been deleted from Plan 1. The required number of elevations has been maintained, however. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS TT 13565-6 & 7 - STANDARD PACIFIC NOVEMBER 7, 1991 Page 2 The roof lines of the Plan 1 elevations have not been modified and side and rear elevations have not been upgraded. A window has been provided on the side elevation of Plan 2 (Santa Barbara) in an attempt to provide greater differentiation. Roof lines have been changed on the Plan 3 elevations, however, the general outline of the roofs is still very similar. Balconies have been added to the rear elevation of Plan 3 (Monterey) as an Optional item. 6. Rear elevations of Plan 3 have been upgraded somewhat with additional windows. 7. Chimney details/caps have not been substantially varied. Windows have been modified somewhat on side and rear elevations of Plan 4. 9. Driveway treatment has not been modified. Design Review Committee ACtion: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, John Melcher, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Bey Nissen The Committee (Chitiea, Melcher, Kroutil) approved the project with the following conditions: More variety should be provided in the chimney cap details and below the spark arrestor cap. The applicant should consider varying the detail of the chimney itself, which would have to be accomplished in the framing stage. At least One type of chimney cap differentiation per architectural style should be provided (i.e.; minimum of 3). 2. The siding on the 2A and 3A elevations should be eliminated. Mullions should be provided on some first and second story rear and side windows for those elevations which have them on the front windows. These should be plotted on high-visibility streets such as 24th Street and San Sevaine Road and on some corner lots. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS TT 13565-6 & 7 - STANDARD PACIFIC NOVEMBER 7, 1991 Page 3 For those elevations which are provided with optional balconies, at least 2-3 should be plotted along San Sevaine Road to provide greater streetscape variety. Pot ledges (especially on Elevation 4A and 4B) should be more substantial and should be provided with a railing or recess to keep pots from blowing away. A minimum number of bonus room options should be provided for the Plan 2 elevation. This should be worked out by the applicant and staff prior to issuance Of building permits. The arched windows On the upper story of the 3A elevation should be modified, either by changing the proportions or the number. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 - 8:30 Tom November 7, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-22 - BAINBRIDGE INVESTMENTS - The development of 4 industrial buildings totaling 41,051 square feet on 2.35 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 8738 7th Street - APN: 207-262-27. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion: Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The project should be designed to protect those trees recommended for preservation by the arborist report. This will require redesigning the southern third of the project site- The proposed architecture and use repetitive and should be expanded. elements be explored: of building materials is Staff suggests the following Provide variation in the building texture (i.e-, smooth finish, sandblasted, and ribbed concrete). Provide greater variation in the building plane. Utilize spandrel glass on elevations visible to 9th Street. The design Of the office entry should be revised to provide greater visual interest. A combination of design elements, (i.e., spandrel glass, textured concrete, paint, etc.) should be utilized as the current design is not acceptable. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Textured paving across the drive aisles should extend from the employee plaza areas to the sidewalk. The location of these pedestrian connections should be revised so that pedestrians will not have to walk between parking spaces to utilize pedestrian connections. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-22 - BAINBRIDGE INVESTMENTS NOVEMBER 7, 1991 Page 2 Provide landscaping adjacent to parking spaces located at building entrances. Internalize roof drains so that down spouts are not located on the building exterior. Design Review Comm{ttee ACtion: Members Present: Suzanne Chitiea, John Melcher, Otto Kroutil Staff Planner: Tom Grahn The Committee reviewed the project but did not recommend approval due to the following comments: The proposed architecture is not acceptable. The following design modifications were suggested: a) Provide variation in the building texture. b) Provide greater variation in the building plane. c) Utilize spandrel glass at the office areas. d) The design of the office entry should be revised to provide greater visual interest. e) Revise the building proportions at the office area. The applicant should hire a professional architect to design the building, though not necessarily to provide the conceptual drawings. The Jacaranda tree should be transplanted to a landscaped area to allow its continued growth. The Committee suggested expanding the landscape area east of the drive aisle and transplanting the Jacaranda to this location. All trees that are addressed by the arborist report as suitable candidates for preservation that do not conflict with proposed improvements should be preserved in place. All trees addressed by the arborist report as suitable candidates for preservation that do conflict with proposed improvements should be relocated within project boundaries. 5. Relocate the handicapped parking space located adjacent to Units 4 and 5. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS DR 89-22 - BAINBRIDGE INVESTMENTS NO~rE~[BER 7, 1991 Page 3 6. Do not highlight doors and downspouts with accent color. 7. Combine the two employee plazas and relocate to a central location. 8. Provide additional trees at the employee plaza, possibly utilizing some of the trees to be relocated. 9. Provide an overhead trellis at the employee plaza.