Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002/12/31 - Agenda PacketDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY DECEMBER 31.2002 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: John Mannerino Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Dan Coleman Larry McNiel The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. NO ITEMS HAVE BEEN SCHEDULED • PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. NO ITEMS HAVE BEEN SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT 1, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December26, 2002, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic enter Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. (~ Q1,),i DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES TUESDAY DECEMBER 17, 2002 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~J Committee Members: John Mannerino Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Dan Coleman Larry McNiel The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. 7:00 p.m. (Doug) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT N0.15982-RANCHO CUCAMONGA 685, LLC - A residential subdivision of 64 single-family lots on 27.22 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located north of Wilson Avenue and DayCreek Avenue -APN: 225-071-67, and 225-071-66. Related Applications GPA 00-05, ENSPA 00- 02. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:10 p.m. (Brent) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00840 - WLC/PITASSI ARCHITECTS -The design review of detailed site plan, landscape plan, and elevations for a proposed, 74,000 square foot, three level Cultural Arts Center including a Branch Library, Performing Arts Theater, and Events Center on 3 acres of land, located south of the future extension of Church Street and east of the future extension of Day Creek Boulevard in the Mixed Use District of the of the Victoria Community Plan and part of the Victoria Gardens Regional Center-APN: 227-201-35. 7:30 p.m. (Warren) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC 2001- 00718 - BRADSHAW III - A request to construct a 454,087 square foot industrial building on 25.31 acres of land in the Industrial Park and General Industrial Districts (Subarea 12 and Subarea 13, respectively), located on the east side of Buffalo Avenue, approximately 495 feet south of San Marino Drive -APN: 209-263-68. Related Files: PR 00-29, Development Code Amendment DRC2002-00321, Lot Line Adjustment LLA534. n U • DRC AGENDA December 17, 2002 Page 2 7:50 p.m. (Warren) TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16301 -CENTEX HOMES - A residential subdivision of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 600 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. (Warren) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00280 - CENTEX HOMES - The development of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 600 feet south of Base Line Road - APN: 227-171-05 and 07. 8:10 p.m. (Emily) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00899 - MCG ARCHITECTS - A request to remodel the exterior of one existing vacant retail building into four separate tenant spaces located at 10828 Foothill Boulevard in the Community Commercial District of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan -APN: 1077-422-26. PUBLIC COMMENTS • This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT • CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS ~J 7:00 p.m. Doug Fenn December 17, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15982 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA 685, LLC - A residential subdivision of 64single-family lots on 27.22 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located north of Wilson Avenue and Day Creek Avenue - APN: 225-071-67, and 225-071-66. Related Applications GPA 00-05, ENSPA 00-02. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion: This project is an infill project of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area and is covered by the Rancho Etiwanda ((University Planned Development) development agreement. The proposed subdivision is in compliance with pertenant Development Code Regulation and the development agreement. Staff including Engineering Department has worked closely with the applicant; therefore, there are no issues that need to be discussed before the Design Review Committee. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee that the project be approved as proposed. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Pam Stewart, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Doug Fenn The project was approved as presented. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:10 p.m. Brent Le Count December 17, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00840- WLC/PITASSI ARCHITECTS-The design review of detailed site plan, landscape plan, and elevations for a proposed, 74,000 square foot, three level Cultural Arts Center including a Branch Library, Performing Arts Theater, and Events Center on 3 acres of land, located south of the future extension of Church Street and east of the future extension of Day Creek Boulevard in the Mixed Use District of the of the Victoria Community Plan and part of the Victoria Gardens Regional Center-APN: 227-201-35. Design Parameters: The site is located near the northern end of the Victoria Gardens Regional Center and south of the future multi-family development planned along the south side of Church Street. The building is proposed to be 84 feet in height and will be located near the highest ground elevation of the regional center. Therefore, the building will dominate the skyline of the Victoria Gardens. A large display screen is proposed on the south side of the theater fly tower (the tallest portion of the building) that for large scale image projection. The building exhibits extremely visually interesting architectural details and exterior materials ranging from copper roofing, slate veneer, stucco, stone, and glass. There is a large, nautilus shell-shaped outdoor plaza at the southwest side of the building, which will form the northern terminus of the Town Square within the regional center. There is a vehicle court for drop off and short term parking at the northeast corner of the building that will form the southern terminus of Arbor Lane, a highly pedestrian oriented street emanating from the heart of the Victoria Arbors project to the north. The applicant held a workshop with the Planning Commission on September 25, 2002 (see attached • minutes). The primary issue raised by the Commissioners was the inclusion of vehicles in the Arbor Court. It was felt that the area should not include vehicles, even for short-term parking or drop off activity as this would conflict with the pedestrian orientation of Arbor Lane as originally intended per the Victoria Arbors Master Plan. Debbie Clark, City Librarian, informed the Committee that this small, short-term parking lot was important to the library's operation and was a direct response to customer feedback regarding their current location. Ms. Clark also indicated that this area could be used for special activities, such as book sales. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The Committee should discuss the design of Arbor Court as it relates to Arbor Lane to the north and the intent to provide an enhanced pedestrian connection to the regional center from the Victoria Arbors project to the north. The current proposal continues to include parking for 16 vehicles in the Arbor Court. An option might be to provide temporary short- term parking and drop off point to the east of the site where the future parking structure will be located. Once the structure is built (some years down the road) the short-term parking could then be accommodated within the structure. C~ DRC COMMENTS DRC2002-00840 - W LC/PITASSI ARCHITECTS • December 17, 2002 Page 2 2. The northern face of the building is proposed to have a 9.69-foot setback, at its base, from the face of curb in Merlot Street. This is the tallest portion of the building (the fly tower) at 84 feet in height. This is also the portion of the building closest to the future multi-family development on the north side of Merlot Street. Although the height is somewhat diminished by approximately 25 feet setback from Merlot Street due to a stair-step effect from street (see East Elevation), the fly tower would be approximately twice as tall as potential 3-story apartments across Merlot Street. The nominal setback causes the building to dominate the street and residential development to the north as well as leaving insufficient room for landscaping. It is suggested that Palm trees would be an appropriate tree selection given the 6-foot planter width and building height. Consider alarge-scale mural or other public art/source of visual interest on the north elevation of the fly tower to take advantage of the visual prominence of the structure. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. There is a trash enclosure and a cooling tower located at the northwest corner of the building with a 15-foot setback from the face of curb in Merlot Street. Furthermore, the loading/service area for the building is proposed directly south of this. A substantial screen wall is necessary to enclose this service court and buffer these uses/activities from Merlot Street and the residential development to the north both for aesthetics and noise attenuation. 2. Provide a"water feature or other visual focal point of interest at the southern end of the pedestrian pathway leading south from the Arbor Court (northwest corner of Building 37006 of the Regional Center). Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Provide a minimum of one tree per 30 linear feet of building wall plus one tree per 30 linear feet of project perimeter. 2. All roof- and ground-mounted equipment shall be fully screened. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above-mentioned comments. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Pam Stewart, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Brent Le Count The architect presented a revised Site Plan for the short-term parking lot featuring extensive decorative paving and trees (rather than painted stripes) to define parking spaces. The revised plan also includes a wider pedestrian corridor leading south to the mall. W ithin the expanded corridor a new hexagonal plaza connecting the east parking structure to the Cultural Arts Center will provide space for special events, such as book fairs. The applicant explained that the short-term parking was a requirement of the State library grant funding. The Committee recommends approval of the project, subject to staff's comments and suggestions with the following additional comments: DRC COMMENTS DRC2002-00840 - W LC/PITASSI ARCHITECTS • December 17, 2002 Page 3 The "Arbor Court" design, including 11 parking spaces defined by decorative paving and tree planting, is acceptable so long as a minimum 40-foot wide pedestrian pathway is provided leading to the south from the Arbor Court. 2. Consider providing a book drop off service within the eastern parking structure for the convenience of customers. This is intended to be pedestrian/walkup (not auto-oriented) in order to avoid vehicle stacking problems. 3. Provide a substantial architectural screen wall around the mechanical equipment/coolerand loading/service area at the northwest corner of the building. The applicant agreed to these Committee recommendations. • r 1 U DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:30 p.m. Warren Morelion December 17, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC 2001-00718 - BRADSHAW - A request to construct a 454,087 square foot industrial building on 25.31 acres of land in the Industrial Park and General Industrial Districts (Subarea 12 and Subarea 13, respectively), located on the east side of Buffalo Avenue, approximately 495 feet south of San Marino Drive - APN: 209-263-68. Related Files: PR 00-29, Development Code Amendment DRC2002-00321, Lot Line Adjustment LLA534. Design Parameters: The project site is on the south side of the existing Bradshaw building located at 9409 Buffalo Avenue. The site is vacant and slopes southerly at approximately 2 percent.. The site is surrounded by vacant land to the west, industrial development to the north, a Costco warehouse building to the south, and the I-15 Freeway to the east. A flood control channel easement exists at the southeast corner of the site. The project consists of a 454,087 square foot industrial building. The building is rectangular in shape with a 3,800 square foot office area at the northwest corner of the building, and future offices proposed at the southwest and northeast corners of the building. The truck parking/loading areas for the project are on the north and south sides of the building. The truck parking/loading area on the north side of the building has direct accesses into the existing Bradshaw building to the north. Access into the site is from Buffalo Avenue and Charles Smith Avenue. • The building and screen walls are designed with two primary building materials that include painted tilt-up concrete with a sandblasted accent treatment. The building has a 360-degree architectural theme that includes tower elements, glass, and sandblasting used on all elevations. The architectural elements at the office/entrances are accentuated to make them clearly identifiable. Per a request by Costco, the 8-foot screen wall on the south side of the project has been designed with a combination of tilt-up concrete and block to match the design of both buildings. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The project has been proposed with an 8-foot wall at the south property line to screen the truck parking/loading area from Costco. The applicant has provided sight line studies showing that trucks loading/unloading would be screened by the screen wall however, trailers parked against the screen would be visible from the Costco parking area and other properties to the south. To fully screen the truck trailers from view, the screen wall would have to either be extended above the 8-foot maximum height allowed in the district, be built on top of mounding to extend the height, or the loading/parking area would have to be lowered, thereby increasing the inside screen wall height. Typically, the City requires any combination of these techniques that provides an effective screen wall height of 14 feet. The Committee may wish to give the applicant direction to the best alternative for screening at this location. C' I DRC COMMENTS . DRC 2001-00718 - BRADSHAW III December 17, 2002 Page 2 Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Since originally submitting the project, the applicant has acquired a 1.4-acre parcel of land at the east end of the site that will be included as part of the project. The applicant is proposing to plant trees and hydroseed the area for possible future expansion of the parking area. Because of the size of the additional parcel, the Committee may wish to discuss landscape alternatives that would be aesthetically pleasing and water conserving, while also fitting in with the design of the overall site. This is also a rare opportunity to provide a large, active recreation amenity for employees, such as a basketball or volleyball court, baseball or soccer field. etc. 2. Provide decorative paving at the east drive entrance to match the decorative paving shown at the west entrances. 3. Screen wall at South property line -drawing shows portions in block; however, staff believes this is a drafting error because Keynote 22 states this is "free standing patio cover." Regardless, entire wall should be the same material (concrete tilt-up). Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: • 1. Paint roll-up dock doors and service doors to match building. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above-mentioned comments. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Peter Tolstoy, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Warren Morelion The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to the above- mentioned comments as amended below: Major Issue -The Committee asked that the applicant work with staff to develop a screen wall on the south side of the property that would fully screen the truck parking/loading area from public view. Because of the unique location of the site, industrial development backing up to commercial development, the Committee stated that they would be willing to support a Variance for a wall height that exceeds the 8-foot maximum allowed in the district, provided the design and size of the wall is right for the location. The Committee also stated that the wall would only have to be extended along the west and east sides of the property where the project's parking/loading area would not be screened by the Costco building itself. The applicant agreed to work with staff to resolve the issue. • DRC COMMENTS DRC 2001-00718 - BRADSHAW III . December 17, 2002 Page 3 2. Secondary Issue #1 -The applicant expressed to the Committee that it would not be a good idea to construct a sport court on the property because of liability reasons. The Committee concurred. The applicant also asked if it would be possible to leave the 1.4-acre parcel acquired on to the east end of the site as a vineyard instead of fully landscaping the area. The Committee stated they would support the proposal provided the vineyard was a "working" vineyard that would be used by a local winery. The applicant agreed to look into it and get back with staff. 3. Secondary Issue #3 -The Committee stated they would be in support of a combination wall made of tilt-up concrete and split face block that matches the proposed development and the Costco building to the south. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:50 p.m. Warren Morelion December 17, 2002 TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16301 - CENTEX HOMES - A residential subdivision of 46single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 600 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00280 -CENTEX HOMES -The development of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per. acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 600 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. Background: The Tentative Tract and Conditional Use Permit was brought before the Design Review Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Fong) on August 6, 2002. The Committee reviewed the project and directed the applicant to revise the project to address the following major design issue: 1. A number of lots along the southern property boundary have been designed with 2:1 slopes that slope down to a proposed 8-foot high wall. As proposed, the design will create "out-of- sight, out-of-mind" slopes that are hard to maintain, and will allow visibility into the rear yard of lots from adjacent properties to the south, as well as allow visibility from the lots to the adjacent properties. The Committee may wish to discuss the design of the lots and the possible need for fencing to reduce the negative impact. Per Development Code • requirements, all walls that exceed 6 feet in height shall require review and approval of a Minor Exception. Elimination of this slope with retaining wall will result in walls approximately 14 feet high and would require a Variance. The Committee determined that having 2:1 slopes with the property line at the bottom of the slopes would create nuisance problems where the slopes became a "no mans land" at the rear of the lots andlor would lead to unsightly, tall retaining walls. The Committee also felt that the design of as proposed would adversely affect future development of properties to the south in that it would lead to the need for retaining/free standing walls in excess of 10 feet along the property boundary when developed. To resolve the problem, the Committee directed the applicant to work with the adjacent property owners to the south, W illiam Lyon Company, and "The Gardens" banquet facility to jointly resolve site design issues that would benefit all parties and meet City requirements before coming back for further Committee review. The applicant agreed. Attached is a copy of the August 6, 2002, Design Review Agenda for reference. Since the August 6, 2002, Design Review Committee meeting, the property/project has been sold by the original owner, J.D.R. Property, LTD., to Centex Homes for further processing. Centex homes has not changed the IayouUdesign of the tract, they are merely taking over the project as is. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: None -The new applicant has submitted revised plans that address the above-mentioned major design issue. The design of the lots has been changed to protect privacy and eliminate the potential fora "no mans land" by locating all walls at the top of slope. The wall separating the project from "The Gardens" banquet facility to the south has been designed to incorporate a combination retaining/free standing wall. The applicant is proposing a 2-foot separation between the two walls. The 6-foot block wall shown at the east end of the site (Section E-E) is proposed on the property line. DRC COMMENTS SUBTT16301 - CENTEX HOMES • December 17, 2002 Page 2 Outstanding Issues: The 2-foot separation between the retaining wall and freestanding wall along the rear of Lots 43-48 should be increased to a minimum of 3 feet to provide enough room for mature landscaping. See Sheet 4, Section D-D. Staff believes this issue can be conditioned to be addressed during grading plan check. 2. The block wall shown along Etiwanda Avenue (Section E-E) should be revised to meet Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements. To be consistent with the Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District and past development in the area, the lots along Etiwanda Avenue should be designed to front the street, and therefore the minimum front yard setback would be 25 feet (30-foot average) from property line. The wall along Etiwanda Avenue should also be designed to be open with a combination of real river rock and wrought iron fencing. All river rock pilasters should be a minimum of 30 inches by 30 inches in size to match the residential development to the north. Staff believes this issue can be conditioned to be addressed when the Design Review application for homes is submitted. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee approve the project subject to the above-mentioned comments. Design Review Committee Action: . Members Present: Peter Tolstoy, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Warren Morelion The applicant agreed to address all of the above-mentioned comments. The Committee was informed by staff that the average lot size proposed for the tract was 9,703 square feet and did not meet the 10,000 square foot minimum average size required under the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant was informed prior to the meeting and brought an exhibit to show the relationship of the proposed lots to the existing and proposed lots in the area. The applicant felt that the lot sizes proposed were consistent with the area and asked for a Minor Exception to reduce the lot sizes. The Committee recommended the project be approved subject to the above-mentioned comments and asked the applicant to work out the lot size issue with staff, prior to going to the Planning Commission for review and approval. C~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:10 p.m. Emily Wimer December 17, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00899 - MCG ARCHITECTS - A request to remodel the exterior of one existing vacant retail building into four separate tenant spaces located at 10828 Foothill Boulevard in the Community Commercial District of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan - APN: 1077-422-26. Design Parameters: The existing Montgomery Wards building is located in Terra Vista Town Center, located on the south side of Towne Center Drive, just west of Spruce Avenue. The applicant proposes to divide the interior space into separate tenant buildings. The small retail shops at southeast corner of building will be demolished and a new architectural element added. Other exterior modifications include change of roof plane and change of colors to a slightly different color scheme than approved with the master plan. The two colors are darker shades of the same paint palette originally used. The two colors proposed are "Cinnamon Spice" and "Monk's Hood." The colors will be incorporated into the material board presented at the Committee Review. The applicant would like to provide a cleaner, more visually attractive, plaza area for customers. This will include modifications to the planter area, and a "drop off" area at the front of the building. Landscaping will also match existing including trellis features, flowering vines, and columns. The existing planter areas, which are located at the storefronts, will be replaced with raised planters and 12-foot deep planters at the storefront. The existing kiosks will also be moved from the tenant spaces to the food court located further north of the site. • The rear of the building will be modified to accommodate a truck dock area with loading. This will provide access on both the north elevation and west elevation. The applicant is proposing the deletion of 17 parking spaces in the rear of the building. An additional 2 parking spaces will be removed for truck driveway entrance and a modified curb at the north truck entrance. The Terra Vista Town Center parking was tabulated at the time of the Target expansion. The Center is over-parked by 445 parking spaces. The remodel is within the existing building area. The character of the building will still be represented with existing stone medallions, storefront arches to match existing, roofing material, trellises, benches, and wall sconces to match the existing Center. The architectural detail is repeated throughout the elevations, and the proposed colors blend with the existing palette. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: There are no major outstanding issues. The applicant has worked diligently with staff to resolve any issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Provide more concrete planter pots throughout plaza area and near each building entry. • 2. Provide screen wall around trash compactor at northeast corner of building and design to match the existing Center's screen walls, including cornice. DRC COMMENTS DRC2002-00899 - MCG ARCHITECTS • December 17, 2002 Page 2 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: All exterior materials and colors shall match the existing Center. 2. All wall signs shall be consistent with Terra Vista Town Center Uniform Sign Program. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee approve the request for the remodel of four new tenant spaces in the Terra Vista Town Center. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Pam Stewart, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Emily Wimer The project was approved. The applicant agreed to incorporate additional raised planters at the front entry. Location of the planters will be subject to staff level review. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS CJ DECEMBER 17, 2002 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, • Brad Iler Secretary • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY DECEMBER 17, 2002 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA REVISED 12-11-02 • Committee Members: John Manneriho Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Dan Coleman Larry McNiel The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. 7:00 p.m. (Doug) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT N0.15982-RANCHO CUCAMONGA 685, LLC - A residential subdivision of 64 single-family lots on 27.22 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located north of W ilson Avenue and Day Creek Avenue - APN: 225-071-67, and 225-071-66. Related Applications GPA 00-05, ENSPA 00- 02. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:10 p.m. (Brent) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00840 - WLC/PITASSI ARCHITECTS -The design review of detailed site plan, landscape plan, and elevations for a proposed, 74,000 square foot, three level Cultural Arts Center including a Branch Library, Performing Arts Theater, and Events Center on 3 acres of land, located south of the future extension of Church Street and east of the future extension of Day Creek Boulevard in the Mixed Use District of the of the Victoria Community Plan and part of the Victoria Gardens Regional Center-APN: 227-201-35. 7:30 p.m. (Warren) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC 2001- 00718 - BRADSHAW III - A request to construct a 454,087 square foot industrial building on 25.31 acres of land in the Industrial Park and General Industrial Districts (Subarea 12 and Subarea 13, respectively), located on the east side of Buffalo Avenue, approximately 495 feet south of San Marino Drive -APN: 209-263-68. Related Files: PR 00-29, Development Code Amendment DRC2002-00321, Lot Line Adjustment LLA534. • • DRC AGENDA December 17, 2002 Page 2 7:50 p.m. (Warren) TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16301 -CENTEX HOMES - A residential subdivision of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 600 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. (Warren) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00280 - CENTEX HOMES - The development of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 600 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. 8:10 p.m. (Emily) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00899 - MCG ARCHITECTS - A request to remodel the exterior of one existing vacant retail building into four separate tenant spaces located at 10828 Foothill Boulevard in the Community Commercial District of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan -APN: 1077-422-26. PUBLIC COMMENTS • This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT 1, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December 12, 2002, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic nter Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. • CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Doug Fenn December 17, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15982 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA 685, LLC - A residential subdivision of 64single-family lots on 27.22 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located north of Wilson Avenue and Day Creek Avenue - APN: 225-071-67, and 225-071-66. Related Applications GPA 00-05, ENSPA 00-02. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion: This project is an infill project of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area and is covered by the Rancho Etiwanda ((University Planned Development) development agreement. The proposed subdivision is in compliance with pertenant Development Code Regulation and the development agreement. Staff including Engineering Department has worked closely with the applicant; therefore, there are no issues that need to be discussed before the Design Review Committee. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee that the project be approved as proposed. Design Review Committee Action: • Members Present: Staff Planner: Doug Fenn DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:10 p.m. Brent Le Count December 17, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00840-WLC/PITASSIARCHITECTS-The design review of detailed site plan, landscape plan, and elevations for a proposed, 74,000 square foot, three level Cultural Arts Center including a Branch Library, Performing Arts Theater, and Events Center on 3 acres of land, located south of the future extension of Church Street and east of the future extension of Day Creek Boulevard in the Mixed Use District of the of the Victoria Community Plan and part of the Victoria Gardens Regional Center-APN: 227-201-35. Design Parameters: The site is located near the northern end of the Victoria Gardens Regional Center and south of the future multi-family development planned along the south side of Church Street. The building is proposed to be 84 feet in height and will be located near the highest ground elevation of the regional center. Therefore, the building will dominate the skyline of the Victoria Gardens. A large display screen is proposed on the south side of the theater fly tower (the tallest portion of the building) that for large scale image projection. The building exhibits extremely visually interesting architectural details and exterior materials ranging from copper roofing, slate veneer, stucco, stone, and glass. There is a large, nautilus shell-shaped outdoor plaza at the southwest side of the building, which will form the northern terminus of the Town Square within the regional center. There is a vehicle court for drop off and short term parking at the northeast corner of the building that will form the southern terminus of Arbor Lane, a highly pedestrian oriented street emanating from the heart of the Victoria Arbors project to the north. The applicant held a workshop with the Planning Commission on September 25, 2002 (see attached • minutes). The primary issue raised by the Commissioners was the inclusion of vehicles in the Arbor Court. It was felt that the area should not include vehicles, even for short-term parking or drop off activity as this would conflict with the pedestrian orientation of Arbor Lane as originally intended per the Victoria Arbors Master Plan. Debbie Clark, City Librarian, informed the Committee that this small, short-term parking lot was important to the library's operation and was a direct response to customer feedback regarding their current location. Ms. Clark also indicated that this area could be used for special activities, such as book sales. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The Committee should discuss the design of Arbor Court as it relates to Arbor Lane to the north and the intent to provide an enhanced pedestrian connection to the regional center from the Victoria Arbors project to the north. The current proposal continues to include parking for 16 vehicles in the Arbor Court. An option might be to provide temporary short- term parking and drop off point to the east of the site where the future parking structure will be located. Once the structure is built (some years down the road) the short-term parking could then be accommodated within the structure. • DRC COMMENTS DRC2002-00840 - WLC/PITASSI ARCHITECTS . December 17, 2002 Page 2 2. The northern face of the building is proposed to have a 9.69-foot setback, at its base, from the face of curb in Merlot Street. This is the tallest portion of the building (the fly tower) at 84 feet in height. This is also the portion of the building closest to the future multi-family development on the north side of Merlot Street. Although the height is somewhat diminished by approximately 25 feet setback from Merlot Street due to a stair-step effect from street (see East Elevation), the fly tower would be approximately twice as tall as potential 3-story apartments across Merlot Street. The nominal setback causes the building to dominate the street and residential development to the north as well as leaving insufficient room for landscaping. It is suggested that Palm trees would be an appropriate tree selection given the 6-foot planter width and building height. Consider alarge-scale mural or other public art/source of visual interest on the north elevation of the fly tower to take advantage of the visual prominence of the structure. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. There is a trash enclosure and a cooling tower located at the northwest corner of the building with a 15-foot setback from the face of curb in Merlot Street. Furthermore, the loading/service area for the building is proposed directly south of this. A substantial screen wall is necessary to enclose this service court and buffer these uses/activities from Merlot Street and the residential development to the north both for aesthetics and noise • attenuation. 2. Provide a water feature or other visual focal point of interest at the southern end of the pedestrian pathway leading south from the Arbor Court (northwest corner of Building 37006 of the Regional Center). Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Provide a minimum of one tree per 30 linear feet of building wall plus one tree per 30 linear feet of project perimeter. 2. All roof- and ground-mounted equipment shall be fully screened. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above-mentioned comments. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Brent Le Count • project has a courtyard surrounded on all sides by building walls, staff felt that the widths and geometric proportions of the courtyard are adequate. • Commissioner Macias liked the project and felt the design was upscale. He supported the proposal. Commissioner Mannerino expressed approval of the architectural concept and noted that he was comfortable with stucco as a material for this project. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the design was innovative and indicated that he particularly liked the idea of maximizing the amount of window exposure. Chairman McNiel echoed the comments of the other Commissioners. He stated that he wanted to make sure the site has adequate parking and landscaping. He complimented the developer on the project design. ..... B. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2002-00730 - WLC/PITASSI ARCHITECTS - A request to review the design of a proposed, 68,000 square foot, three level Cultural Center including a Branch Library, Performing Arts Theater, and Events Center on 3 acres of land located south of the future extension of Church Street and east of the future extension of Day Creek Boulevard and part of the Victoria Gardens Regional Center APN: 227.201-35. Brad Buller, City Planner, introduced the project as part of the Victoria Gardens Regional Center. He described the Pre-Application Review process and introduced Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director and Debra Clark, Library Director. Mr. Buller mentioned that the focus of discussion should be on the Arbor Way issue as the design of the connection from Merlot Street along the east side of the Cultural Arts Center has changed since the inception of the Arbors Master Plan. Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director, stated that he is coordinating the project between the City and Forest City Development (the developer of the Victoria Gardens project). It was decided to align the main plaza area of the Cultural Arts Center (CAC) with the "Town Green" within the mall. Mr. McArdle introduced Larry Wolfe and George Weins with Wolfe Lang Christopher Architects, the designers of the CAC. Larry Wolfe, Wolfe Lang Christopher Architects, reviewed the design process for the CAC. He said that it has been a challenge to coordinate the different design ideas and expert opinions into one cohesive design. He gave an overview of the project design including an area at the northeast comer of the site he referred to as "Arbor Court. He said this is intended to act as the southern terminus for Arbor Way, the northern terminus of which contains a turning circle with a gazebo. He indicated the Arbor Court will include short-term parking and drop off for books. He noted there is a water feature planned on the south side of the court and the CAC building will have a large glass area/bay window on the northeast comer where a reading room is located to enhance the terminus of the way. Mr. Wolfe stated Arbor Court is intended to function as a transition from Arbor Way into the site for the CAC and the remainder of Victoria Gardens. He commented that the court will also be an area of activity accommodating art shows, book sales, and parade termination point - a multi- functional space. He noted special paving and continuance of the octagonal shapes established for Arbor Way to the north will be utilized. He described the anticipated pedestrian circulation routes through the site and the use of the "Golden Mean" as a design inspiration for the CAC plaza area. He observed the building will contain a 500-seat theater, with 370 of those seats on the first level and the remainder in a mezzanine, banquet facility, and library. There is a major hallway connecting the building components referred to as the "main street." Mr. Wolfe explained that classical books • and imagination inspired the architectural design and a definite intent was made to establish a timeless quality to the building. He stated there will be slate veneer, copper roofing, terra cotta roofing, and use of real plaster (as opposed to some of the newer commercial applications such as PC Adjourned Minutes -2- September 25, 2002 EfS). He said a large screen is proposed on the south side of the fly tower upon which various video and still images can be projected. He noted a bridge will connect the building to the parking • structure to the west. Mr. Wolfe explained the intent to show off the building at night with the use of transparent building materials in areas such as the tower at the southwest comer of the site to allow the building to light up. Commissioner Tolstoy asked about the grade relationship between the CAC site and the remainder of the regional center. Mr. Wolfe said that the site sits about 5 feet above North Main Street. Mr. Buller noted that at the regional center workshop held on September 23, it was mentioned that the site is actually 8 feet above North Main. Mr. Wolfe stated he will resolve the matter. Commissioner Tolstoy cautioned about impacts associated with strong seasonal winds, especially under the bridge linking to the parking structure. Mr. Wolfe indicated that every effort is being made to mitigate effects of strong northeasterly winds. He indicated a double doorvestibuleentry system is proposed on the northeast comer ofthe building and the main courtyard is located on the southwest comer of the building so as to be protected from high winds. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned whether the term "children's theater" is really appropriate for the project given the full fly tower. Mr. McArdle clarified that in actuality the theater is meant to be a "theater for youth" with professional performances. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested working with the Candle Light Theater in Claremont. He suggested consideration be given io adding a lookout of some sort to the fly tower so that visitors can enjoy the breathtaking view of the regional center. He liked the architectural design of the CAC. Mr. Buller intery'ected that he wished to hear any special concerns the Commissioners may have in how the CAC relates to the rest of the regional center, especially the Arbor Way/Arbor Court connection to the Town Square. Commissioner Mannerino said that he considers the architectural design to be magnificent. He thought it is full of interesting rich themes with the appearance of having grown over time. He felt there is an interesting mix of different design philosophies expressed. However, Commissioner Mannerino objected to including parking in the Arbor Court area. He referenced the Ontario Library temporary parking/drop off area that seems constantly congested with cars and people. If parking were to be allowed in the Arbor Court, he believed it should be entirely for the handicapped. He suggested relocating the drop off activity to the bus bay turnout area. He noted there are only 18 parking spaces contained in the Arbor Court, and he thought those could be relocated. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed that it would be inappropriate to include vehicles in the Arbor Court. He noted that allowing the area to be a parking lot would mean all of the grease and oil and car exhaust associated with the parking of vehicles and he felt that is inconsistent with the intent of Arbor Way to function as a strong pedestrian linkage. He did not believe it made sense to use a parking lot for multi-purpose activities such as the book sales, etc., that were mentioned. • Commissioner Macias said that he is impressed with the overall architecture; the design of the children's reading room, and the application of slate and copper roofing. PC Adjourned Minutes -3- September 25, 2002 Chairman McNiel said that the building tends to appear overly busy but he recognized that the large size of the structure justifies the level of articulation. He believed it sets an excellent example of architectural quality for the rest of the regional center to follow. He felt confident that such issues as wind protection can be resolved. However, he thought the Arbor Court should be either a parking lot or an interesting pedestrian courtyard acting as the terminus of Arbor Way. He did not believe it makes sense to introduce vehicles into a pedestrian themed court. Chairman McNiel agreed with Commissioner Mannenno that drop-off activity could be relocated to the bus bay turn out area on Merlot Street. He asked about the potential for asemi-subterranean parking design where a parking area is set below grade and the pedestrian oriented plaza area above. He believed that Arbor Way will indeed convey a large number of pedestrians from the neighborhoods to the north down into the CAC and the regional center and that Arbor Court must be designed to be a pedestrian friendly plaza free from vehicular conflict. Mr. Buller indicated that the design team had been wrestling with the design of Arbor Court for several months. He observed the City Council will ultimately decide how the court is designed. He suggested that the design team assemble a number of various alternative designs for review by the Design Review Committee and/or Planning Commission once the project is formally submitted. Mr. Buller also suggested that one of the alternatives may be to locate parking in a temporary fashion on the site of the future parking structure on the east side of the CAC site. He noted that when the structure eventually develops, it could accommodate the temporary parking for the CAC leaving the Arbor Court free from the demand for parking. ...., ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bra er Secretary PC Adjourned Minutes -4 September 25, 2002 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:30 p.m. Warren Morelion December 17, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC 2001-00718 - BRADSHAW - A request to construct a 454,087 square foot industrial building on 25.31 acres of land in the Industrial Park and General Industrial Districts (Subarea 12 and Subarea 13, respectively), located on the east side of Buffalo Avenue, approximately 495 feet south of San Marino Drive - APN: 209-263-68. Related Files: PR 00-29, Development Code Amendment DRC2002-00321, Lot Line Adjustment LLA534. Design Parameters: The project site is on the south side of the existing Bradshaw building located at 9409 Buffalo Avenue. The site is vacant and slopes southerly at approximately 2 percent. The site is surrounded by vacant land to the west, industrial development to the north, a Costco warehouse building to the south, and the I-15 Freeway to the east. A flood control channel easement exists at the southeast corner of the site. The project consists of a 454,087 square foot industrial building. The building is rectangular in shape with a 3,800 square foot office area at the northwest corner of the building, and future offices proposed at the southwest and northeast corners of the building. The truck parking/loading areas for the project are on the north and south sides of the building. The truck parking/loading area on the north side of the building has direct accesses into the existing Bradshaw building to the north. Access into the site is from Buffalo Avenue and Charles Smith Avenue. • The building and screen walls are designed with two primary building materials that include painted tilt-up concrete with a sandblasted accent treatment. The building has a 360-degree architectural theme that includes tower elements, glass, and sandblasting used on all elevations. The architectural elements at the office/entrances are accentuated to make them clearly identifiable. Per a request by Costco, the 8-foot screen wall on the south side of the project has been designed with a combination of tilt-up concrete and block to match the design of both buildings. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The project has been proposed with an 8-foot wall at the south property line to screen the truck parking/loading area from Costco. The applicant has provided sight line studies showing that trucks loading/unloading would be screened by the screen wall however, trailers parked against the screen would be visible from the Costco parking area and other properties to the south. To fully screen the truck trailers from view, the screen wall would have to either be extended above the 8-foot maximum height allowed in the district, be built on top of mounding to extend the height, or the loading/parking area would have to be lowered, thereby increasing the inside screen wall height. Typically, the City requires any combination of these techniques that provides an effective screen wall height of 14 feet. The Committee may wish to give the applicant direction to the best alternative for screening at this location. DRC COMMENTS DRC 2001-00718 - BRADSHAW III . December 17, 2002 Page 2 Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Since originally submitting the project, the applicant has acquired a 1.4-acre parcel of land at the east end of the site that will be included as part of the project. The applicant is proposing to plant trees and hydroseed the area for possible future expansion of the parking area. Because of the size of the additional parcel, the Committee may wish to discuss landscape alternatives that would be aesthetically pleasing and water conserving, while also fitting in with the design of the overall site. This is also a rare opportunity to provide a large, active recreation amenity for employees, such as a basketball or volleyball court, baseball or soccer field. etc. 2. Provide decorative paving at the east drive entrance to match the decorative paving shown at the west entrances. 3. Screen wall at South property line -drawing shows portions in block; however, staff believes this is a drafting error because Keynote 22 states this is "free standing patio cover." Regardless, entire wall should be the same material (concrete tilt-up). Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: • 1. Paint roll-up dock doors and service doors to match building. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above-mentioned comments. I Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Warren Morelion DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:50 p.m. Warren Morelion December 17, 2002 TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16301 - CENTEX HOMES - A residential subdivision of 46single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 600 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00280 -CENTEX HOMES -The development of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 600 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. Background: The Tentative Tract and Conditional Use Permit was brought before the Design Review Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Fong) on August 6, 2002. The Committee reviewed the project and directed the applicant to revise the project to address the following major design issue: 1. A number of lots along the southern property boundary have been designed with 2:1 slopes that slope down to a proposed 8-foot high wall. As proposed, the design will create "out-of- sight, out-of-mind" slopes that are hard to maintain, and will allow visibility into the rear yard of lots from adjacent properties to the south, as well as allow visibility from the lots to the adjacent properties. The Committee may wish to discuss the design of the lots and the possible need for fencing to reduce the negative impact. Per Development Code • requirements, all walls that exceed 6 feet in height shall require review and approval of a Minor Exception. Elimination of this slope with retaining wall will result in walls approximately 14 feet high and would require a Variance. The Committee determined that having 2:1 slopes with the property line at the bottom of the slopes would create nuisance problems where the slopes became a "no mans land" at the rear of the lots and/or would lead to unsightly, tall retaining walls. The Committee also felt that the design of as proposed would adversely affect future development of properties to the south in that it would lead to the need for retaining/free standing walls in excess of 10 feet along the property boundary when developed. To resolve the problem, the Committee directed the applicant to work with the adjacent property owners to the south, W illiam Lyon Company, and "The Gardens" banquet facility to jointly resolve site design issues that would benefit all parties and meet City requirements before coming back for further Committee review. The applicant agreed. Attached is a copy of the August 6, 2002, Design Review Agenda for reference. Since the August 6, 2002, Design Review Committee meeting, the property/project has been sold by the original owner, J.D.R. Property, LTD., to Centex Homes for further processing. Centex homes has not changed the IayouUdesign of the tract, they are merely taking over the project as is. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues None -The new applicant has submitted revised plans that address the above-mentioned major design issue. The design of the lots has been changed to protect privacy and eliminate the potential • fora "no mans land" by locating all walls at the top of slope. The wall separating the project from "The Gardens" banquet facility to the south has been designed to incorporate a combination retaining/free standing wall. The applicant is proposing a 2-foot separation between the two walls. The 6-foot block wall shown at the east end of the site (Section E-E) is proposed on the property line. DRC COMMENTS . SUBTT16301 - CENTEX HOMES December 17, 2002 Page 2 Outstanding Issues: The 2-foot separation between the retaining wall and freestanding wall along the rear of Lots 43-48 should be increased to a minimum of 3 feet to provide enough room for mature landscaping. See Sheet 4, Section D-D. Staff believes this issue can be conditioned to be addressed during grading plan check. 2. The block wall shown along Etiwanda Avenue (Section E-E) should be revised to meet Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements. To be consistent with the Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District and past development in the area, the lots along Etiwanda Avenue should be designed to front the street, and therefore the minimum front yard setback would be 25 feet (30-foot average) from property line. The wall along Etiwanda Avenue should also be designed to be open with a combination of real river rock and wrought iron fencing. All river rock pilasters should be a minimum of 30 inches by 30 inches in size to match the residential development to the north. Staff believes this issue can be conditioned to be addressed when the Design Review application for homes is submitted. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee approve the project subject to the above-mentioned comments. Attachment • Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Warren Morelion • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS •1 8;P0 p.rn; Warren Morelion August 6, 2002 TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16301 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD. - A residential subdivision of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00280 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD. -The development of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. Design Parameters: The site is vacant and slopes southerly at approximately 3 percent. The site is surrounded by residential development to the north, the Gardens banquet facility to the south, and vacant land to the east and west. The property to the west has been approved for future Victoria Arbors (American Beauty) single-family development. One 25-foot Palm tree and two Eucalyptus trees exist at the east end of the site in the Etiwanda Avenue right-of-way. A Eucalyptus windrow, with a Walnut tree at the west end, runs just south of the property boundary. An arborist report has be prepared that shows 11 trees in the Etiwanda Avenue and "B" Street right-of-ways that will have to be removed or relocated as part of development of the site; however, the report does not make a recommendation for removal or relocation of the trees. The frontage along Etiwanda Avenue is under the special development criteria of the Etiwanda Overlay District that requires a Conditional Use Permit (see attached). •~ Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maor Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. A number of lots along the southern property boundary have been designed with 2:1 slopes that slope down to a proposed 8-foot high wall. As proposed, the design will create "out-of-sight, out-of-mind" slopes that are hard to maintain, and will allow visibility into the rear yard of lots from adjacent properties to the south, as well as allow visibility from the lots to the adjacent properties. The Committee may wish to discuss the design of the lots and the possible need for fencing to reduce the negative impact. Per Development Code requirements, all walls that exceed 6 feet in height shall require review and approval of a Minor Exception. Elimination of this slope with a retaining wall will result in walls approximately 14 feet high and would require a Variance. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: To be consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements and past development in the area, the lots along Etiwanda Avenue should be designed to have homes that front the street with garage access from the rear or side. This comment is provided to assist future developer in designing their home product for these lots. No homes are proposed at this time. ~ 2. To further enhance community character and flavor, the perimeter wall along Etiwanda ~ Avenue should be designed to be open with a combination of real river rock and wrought iron fencing. All rive"r rock pilasters should be a minimum of 30 inches by 30 inches in size to match the residential development to the north. DRC COMMENTS TT SUBTT16301 & CUP DRC2002-00280 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD • August 6, 2002 l Page 2 3. Enhanced landscaping should be provided for lots with street frontage along Etiwanda Avenue to further enhance the character of the community. 4. The construction of perimeter block walUretaining wall along south properly line may remove portions of root system of Eucalyptus windrow located approximately 10 feet to the south. Arborist Report should be revised to address this issue and make appropriate recommendations. If removal of roots would damage or undermine stability of this windrow, then it should be removed and replaced subject to permission of property owner. If property owner will not give permission, then project must be redesigned to save trees. 5. The south and east perimeter walls should be made of a decorative material. If the project is developed prior to the °Victoria Arbors° development to the west, the perimeter wall along the west property boundary should also be made of a decorative material. The decorative wall along the south side of Lot 41 through 46 should incorporate river rock pilasters with a cap. The pilasters should be a minimum of 30 inches by 30 inches in size. 6. The 25-foot Palm tree located at the northeast end of the site in the Etiwanda Avenue right-of-way should be preserved and relocated on-site along Etiwanda Avenue. The exact location of the tree shall be to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: •~ 1. River rock curbing is required along Etiwanda Avenue per Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project subject to the above-recommended modifications. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Warren Morelion The Design Review Committee reviewed the project and directed the applicant to revise the project to address the above mentioned major design issue. The Committee determined that having 2 to 1 slopes with the property line at the bottom of the slopes would create nuisance problems where the slopes become "no mans land" at the rear of the lots and/or would lead to unsightly, tall retaining walls. The Committee also felt that the design as proposed would adversely affect the future development of properties to the south in that it would lead to the need for retaining/free standing walls in excess of 10 feet along the property boundary when developed. To resolve the problems, the Committee directed the applicant to work with the adjacent property owners to the south, W illiam Lyon Company, and "The Gardens" banquet facility to jointly resolve any site design issue that would benefit all parties and meet City requirements before coming back for further Committee . review. The applicant agreed. 1 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:10 p.m. Emily W imer December 17, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00899 - MCG ARCHITECTS - A request to remodel the exterior of one existing vacant retail building into four separate tenant spaces located at 10828 Foothill Boulevard in the Community Commercial District of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan - APN: 1077-422-26. Design Parameters: The existing Montgomery Wards building is located in Terra Vista Town Center, located on the south side of Towne Center Drive, just west of Spruce Avenue. The applicant proposes to divide the interior space into separate tenant buildings. The small retail shops at southeast corner of building will be demolished and a new architectural element added. Other exterior modifications include change of roof plane and change of colors to a slightly different color scheme than approved with the master plan. The two colors are darker shades of the same paint palette originally used. The two colors proposed are "Cinnamon Spice" and "Monk's Hood." The colors will be incorporated into the material board presented at the Committee Review. The applicant would like to provide a cleaner, more visually attractive, plaza area for customers. This will include modifications to the planter area, and a "drop off" area at the front of the building. Landscaping will also match existing including trellis features, flowering vines, and columns. The existing planter areas, which are located at the storefronts, will be'replaced with raised planters and 12-foot deep planters at the storefront. The existing kiosks will also be moved from the tenant spaces to the food court located further north of the site. • The rear of the building will be modified to accommodate a truck dock area with loading. This will provide access on both the north elevation and west elevation. The applicant is proposing the deletion of 17 parking spaces in the rear of the building. An additional 2 parking spaces will be removed for truck driveway entrance and a modified curb at the north truck entrance. The Terra Vista Town Center parking was tabulated at the time of the Target expansion. The Center is over-parked by 445 parking spaces. The remodel is within the existing building area. The character of the building will still be represented with existing stone medallions, store-front arches to match existing, roofing material, trellises, benches, and wall sconces to match the existing Center. The architectural detail is repeated throughout the elevations, and the proposed colors blend with the existing palette. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: There are no major outstanding issues. The applicant has worked diligently with staff to resolve any issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Provide more concrete planter pots throughout plaza area and near each building entry. • 2. Provide screen wall around trash compactor at northeast corner of building and design to match the existing Center's screen walls, including cornice. DRC COMMENTS • DRC2002-00899 - MCG ARCHITECTS December 17, 2002 Page 2 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: All exterior materials and colors shall match the existing Center. 2. All wall signs shall be consistent with Terra Vista Town Center Uniform Sign Program. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee approve the request for the remodel of four new tenant spaces in the Terra Vista Town Center. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Emily Wimer L~ r~ L • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES TUESDAY DECEMBER 3, 2002 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: John Mannerino Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Dan Coleman Larry McNiel The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. NO ITEMS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED • PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:00 p.m. (Donald) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002- 00292 - CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES - A request to construct four industrial buildings totaling 30,482 square feet on 1.85 acres of land, in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and W hite Oak Avenue -APN: 209-461-01. Related File: SUBTPM16044. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 16044 - CAPELLINOAND ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide 3.66 acres into 5 parcels for industrial purposes, in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and White Oak Avenue -APN: 209-461-01. Related File: DRC2002-00292. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Donald Granger December 3, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00292 - CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES - A request to construct four industrial buildings totaling 30,482 square feet on 1.85 acres of land, in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and White Oak Avenue -APN: 209-461-01. Related File: SUBTPM16044. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 16044 - CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide 3.66 acres into 5 parcels for industrial purposes, in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and W hite Oak Avenue -APN: 209-461-01. Related File: DRC2002-00292. Design Parameters: The project site is part of a master planned industrial park originally approved by the Planning Commission in 1992. This site is the final parcel to be developed in the master plan, and will be the "signature building" due to its prominent location at the corner of White Oak Avenue and Arrow Route. The applicant has designed the building using a wide variety of materials, including concrete, sandblasted concrete, brick veneer and reflective glass. All elevations exhibit 360-degree architecture, and the entryway of all buildings makes a formal statement, incorporating a decorative cornice and a painted steel canopy. The site has been previously rough graded and contains no significant vegetation, and is void of any buildings or structures. Street improvements, including curb and gutter, street trees and meandering sidewalks have been installed on both the Arrow Route and W hite Oak Avenue frontages. • Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: There are no major issues. The applicant has worked diligently to resolve all major issues, and Staff is pleased with the overall architectural concept. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. Textured pavement should be added to the driveway along the W hite Oak frontage, thereby creating a strong entry statement. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: All roll-up doors shall be painted to match the building. 2. Undulating berms in the frontage landscaped setback areas shall be provided to create visual interest and to screen parking areas. 3. Tables, chairs and shade shall be provided in the outdoor employee eating area. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project in light of the • above-identified Secondary Issues and recommend review and approval by the Planning Commission. DRC COMMENTS DRC2002-00292 & TPM16044 - CAPELLINO & ASSOCIATES December 3, 2002 • Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Pam Steward, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Donald Granger The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to the above Secondary and Policy Issues as conditions of approval. The applicant agreed. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • DECEMBER 3, 2002 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Res ully sub fitted Brad Buller Secretary • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY DECEMBER 3, 2002 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: John Mannerino Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Dan Coleman Larry McNiel The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. NO ITEMS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public • testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:00 p.m. (Donald) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002- 00292 - CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES - A request to construct four industrial buildings totaling 30,482 square feet on 1.85 acres of land, in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and W hite Oak Avenue -APN: 209-461-01. Related File: SUBTPM16044. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 16044 - CAPELLINOAND ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide 3.66 acres into 5 parcels for industrial purposes, in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and White Oak Avenue -APN: 209-461-01. Related File: DRC2002-00292. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT 1, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, . accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on November27, 2002, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 1 00 Civic C nter Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Donald Granger December 3, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00292 - CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES - A request to construct four industrial buildings totaling 30,482 square feet on 1.85 acres of land, in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and White Oak Avenue -APN: 209:461-01. Related File: SUBTPM16044. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 16044 - CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide 3.66 acres into 5 parcels for industrial purposes, in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and W hite Oak Avenue -APN: 209-461-01. Related File: DRC2002-00292. Desion Parameters: The project site is part of a master planned industrial park originally approved by the Planning Commission in 1992. This site is the final parcel to be developed in the master plan, and will be the "signature building" due to its prominent location at the corner of W hite Oak Avenue and Arrow Route..The applicant has designed the building using a wide variety of materials, including concrete, sandblasted concrete, brick veneer and reflective glass. All elevations exhibit 360-degree architecture, and the entryway of all buildings makes a formal statement, incorporating a decorative cornice and a painted steel canopy. The site has been previously rough graded and contains no significant vegetation, and is void of any buildings or structures. Street improvements, including curb and gutter, street trees and meandering sidewalks have been installed on both the Arrow Route and W hite Oak Avenue frontages. • Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: There are no major issues. The applicant has worked diligently to resolve all major issues, and Staff is pleased with the overall architectural concept. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. Textured pavement should be added to the driveway along the W hite Oak frontage, thereby creating a strong entry statement. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All roll-up doors shall be painted to match the building. 2. Undulating berms in the frontage landscaped setback areas shall be provided to create visual interest and to screen parking areas. 3. Tables, chairs and shade shall be provided in the outdoor employee eating area. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project in light of the • above-identified Secondary Issues and recommend review and approval by the Planning Commission. • C~ DRC COMMENTS DRC2002-00292 & December 3, 2002 Page 2 TPM16044 - CAPELLINO & ASSOCIATES Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Donald Granger C~