Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003/08/19 - Agenda PacketDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES TUESDAY AUGUST 19, 2003 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Alternates: Rich Macias Richard Fletcher CONSENT CALENDAR Nancy Fong 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. (Mike) UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2003-00798 -EMPIRE LAKES CORPORATE CENTER 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 (Rick/Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00549 - AMBLING W EST - A request for 36single-family attached town homes on 3.56 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Church Street - APN: 1077-861-01 through 36. 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. Mike Smith August 19, 2003 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2003-00798 -EMPIRE LAKES CORPORATE CENTER Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Christine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Mike Smith The Committee reviewed the proposed Sign Program amendment and approved the following sign criteria: The Committee stated that they typically discourage the use of raceway but would accept it in this case because the building is setback far away from the street and the building face material is not conducive to supporting signs. The raceway (all sides) shall be painted to match the building color. 2. Accepted the directional monument signs. 3. To preserve the campus-like setting, there should be only one color for all signs, which is black, and the illumination for signs should be of backlit or halo effect instead of internally lit. • C DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Rick Fisher August 19, 2003 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00549 - AMBLING W EST - A request for 36single-family attached town homes on 3.56 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Church Street - APN: 1077-861-01 through 36. Design Parameters: The Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract 14875 on January 9, 1991, a residential subdivision and design review of 36 condominiums. Several time extensions were requested and granted throughout the 1990's because of weak market demand for condominiums. The final time extension expired on January 9, 2003. The final map has recorded and construction has begun. The property was sold to a new owner who submitted revised design elevations for the property on June 3, 2003. The Site Plan is nearly identical to the Site Plan that was approved in 1991. Minor changes were made to comply with the current Development Code standards, such as building setbacks. Other changes include the installation of perimeter walls along Archibald Avenue and Church Street, revisions to the building elevations, and a change in the material of the fences between the units. Anew 6-foot high perimeter wall will be constructed along Archibald Avenue and Church Street per the requirements of a noise study to help reduce indoor and outdoor noise levels. The wall along Church Street will be set back 25 to 30 feet from the curb face. The wall along Archibald Avenue will be set back 40 feet from the curb face. Pilasters 2-foot square and 1.5-foot square will be located at all returns to help break up the linear appearance of the wall. A 6-foot high wrought iron • fence will be constructed north of the barbecue area adjacent to Church Street to provide a more open feeling to the common space area. There is an existing 6-foot block wall on the east property line and an 8-foot high combination retaining/garden wall on the south property line. The retaining/garden wall was approved with a Minor Exception (DRC2003-00263). The town homes are duplexes with two elevation treatments. Building elevations have been updated from the original plans that were approved in 1991. The elevations will contain sand finished stucco walls, sloping recessed window sills, arched soffits, wood fascia, wrought iron around specific second floor windows, clay pipe accent roof vents, wood plank shutters, optional garage door windows, and concrete roof tiles. Two floor plans will be available and will range in size from 1,612 square feet to 1,858 square feet. Each unit will be two-stories and will contain three bedrooms and two and a half baths with tuck under parking. The applicant has proposed to construct 6-foot high white PVC fences between the units. The first projects to use PVC fencing for patios Windsor in Terra Vista planned community, were recently constructed on the south side of Mountain View Drive, east of Milliken Avenue. All other walls proposed on-site will be constructed of block. Access to the site will be from a driveway off Church Street. A wrought iron entry gate across the driveway will provide security for the residents and atwo-way private drive aisle will provide access to the units. A total of four amenities have been provided and include a large 50-foot open turf area, a tot lot in the center of the property, and two barbecue facilities. Each unit will have approximately 900 square feet of private open space in the rear yard. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. • DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00549 - AMBLING W EST • August 19, 2003 Page 2 Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The applicant is proposing to construct 6-foot high PVC fences to enclose private yards/patios. Planning Commission policy is that block walls shall be constructed between homes (i.e. along interior side and rear property lines) rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. After visiting the W indsor projects in Terra Vista, staff believes that PVC fencing is not appropriate for the size of private yards/patios of this project. Further, the adjoining Marlborough Villas Town home project has all slump block patio fences/enclosures. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: The windows on the garage doors shall be a standard feature, rather than an optional feature, to assist with parking enforcement by their Homeowners Association. 2. The Holly Oak tree specimen planted within the entry median island shall be of sufficient size to provide a minimum of 14 feet vertical clearance underneath the canopy per Fire District access standards. 3. The perimeter wall pilasters along both street frontages shall be natural river rock veneer • consistent with the City's Archibald Avenue Beautification Master Plan. Change 16-inch to 18-inch pilasters at the following locations: at ends of 45-degree cutoff at intersection, at southwest corner of site, and at both 90-degree returns near BBO area facing Church Street. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to the above revisions. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Christine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Rick Fisher The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. The Committee stated that private yard fence material should provide privacy, be durable and aesthetically pleasing. The Committee did not approve the proposed PVC fence material. The Committee reiterated the recent Planning Commission policy of requiring decorative block material such as slump block, split-face, etc., for yard fending. 2. The windows on the garage shall be a standard feature. 3. In lieu of the Holly Oak, the applicant may choose other tree species that meet the Fire District requirement. The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff on this issue. 4. The pilasters shall be of real river rock. C~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • AUGUST 19, 2003 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~, ------ Bra r Secretary U DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • AUGUST 19, 2003 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bra r Secretary • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY AUGUST 19, 2003 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Alternates: Rich Macias Richard Fletcher CONSENT CALENDAR Nancy Fong 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 (Rick/Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00549 - AMBLING W EST - A request for 36single-family attached town homes on 3.56 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Church Street - APN: 1077-861-01 through 36. 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 August 14, 2003 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic enter D i Rancho Cucamonga. Y~ ~ ~` DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Rick Fisher August 19, 2003 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTAND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00549-AMBLING WEST- A request for 36single-family attached town homes on 3.56 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (5-14 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Church Street - APN: 1077-861-01 through 36. Design Parameters: The Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract 14875 on January 9, 1991, a residential subdivision and design review of 36 condominiums. Several time extensions were requested and granted throughout the 1990's because of weak market demand for condominiums. The final time extension expired on January 9, 2003. The final map has recorded and construction has begun. The property was sold to a new owner who submitted revised design elevations for the property on June 3, 2003. The Site Plan is nearly identical to the Site Plan that was approved in 1991. Minor changes were made to comply with the current Development Code standards, such as building setbacks. Other changes include the installation of perimeter walls along Archibald Avenue and Church Street, revisions to the building elevations, and a change in the material of the fences between the units. Anew 6-foot high perimeter wall will be constructed along Archibald Avenue and Church Street per the requirements of a noise study to help reduce indoor and outdoor noise levels. The wall along Church Street will be set back 25 to 30 feet from the curb face. The wall along Archibald Avenue will be set back 40 feet from the curb face. Pilasters 2-foot square and 1.5-foot square will be located at all returns to help break up the linear appearance of the wall. A 6-foot high wrought iron • fence will be constructed north of the barbecue area adjacent to Church Street to provide a more open feeling to the common space area. There is an existing 6-foot block wall on the east property line and an 8-foot high combination retaining/garden wall on the south property line. The retaining/garden wall was approved with a Minor Exception (DRC2003-00263). The town homes are duplexes with two elevation treatments. Building elevations have been updated from the original plans that were approved in 1991. The elevations will contain sand finished stucco walls, sloping recessed window sills, arched soffits, wood fascia, wrought iron around specific second floor windows, clay pipe accent roof vents, wood plank shutters, optional garage door windows, and concrete roof tiles. Two floor plans will be available and will range in size from 1,612 square feet to 1,858 square feet. Each unit will be two-stories and will contain three bedrooms and two and a half baths with tuck under parking. The applicant has proposed to construct 6-foot high white PVC fences between the units. The first projects to use PVC fencing for patios Windsor in Terra Vista planned community, were recently constructed on the south side of Mountain View Drive, east of Milliken Avenue. All other walls proposed on-site will be constructed of block. Access to the site will be from a driveway off Church Street. A wrought iron entry gate across the driveway will provide security for the residents and atwo-way private drive aisle will provide access to the units. A total of four amenities have been provided and include a large 50-foot open turf area, a tot lot in the center of the property, and two barbecue facilities. Each unit will have approximately 900 square feet of private open space in the rear yard. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. • DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00549 - AMBLING W EST • August 19, 2003 Page 2 Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The applicant is proposing to construct 6-foot high PVC fences to enclose private yards/patios. Planning Commission policy is that block walls shall be constructed between homes (i.e. along interior side and rear property lines) rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. After visiting the W indsor projects in Terra Vista, staff believes that PVC fencing is not appropriate for the size of private yards/patios of this project. Further, the adjoining Marlborough Villas Town home project has all slump block patio fences/enclosures. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: The windows on the garage doors shall be a standard feature, rather than an optional feature, to assist with parking enforcement by their Homeowners Association. 2. The Holly Oak tree specimen planted within the entry median island shall be of sufficient size to provide a minimum of 14 feet vertical clearance underneath the canopy per Fire District access standards. 3. The perimeter wall pilasters along both street frontages shall be natural river rock veneer • consistent with the City's Archibald Avenue Beautification Master Plan. Change 16-inch to 18-inch pilasters at the following locations: at ends of 45-degree cutoff at intersection, at southwest corner of site, and at both 90-degree returns near BBO area facing Church Street. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to the above revisions. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Rick Fisher C~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES TUESDAY AUGUST 5, 2003 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Alternates: Rich Macias Richard Fletcher CONSENT CALENDAR Nancy Fong 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. (Rick/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00319 - EHR 22 LLC - A design review of detailed site plan and building elevations for nine single-family homes on 11.83 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (.1-2 dwelling units per acre), located on Birdsong Place, south of Hidden Farm Road -APN: 1074-071-23-31. Related File: Tentative Tract Map TT15914 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00501. 7:20 p.m. (Emily/Cam) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00302 -WEST ROCK LLC - A request to develop a 17,000 square foot multi tenant auto care center on 1.43 acres of land in the Industrial District (Subarea 3), located at 9199 Arrow Route -APN: 0209-012-10. 7:40 p.m. (Emily/Joe) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00569-CRESTWOOD-Adesignreview of building elevations and detailed site plan for 10 single-family lots within an approved Tentative Tract Map 16253, on 7 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (1 to 2 dwellings per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the north side of Victoria Street Between Etiwanda and Grape Place - APN: 0227-041-18 and 19. Related File: SUBTT 16253. 8:00 p.m. . (Alan/Shelley) HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00218- PETE VOLBEDA-A requestfor a single-family residence at 9026 Laramie Drive in the Very Low Residential District -APN: 1061-811-09. • DRC AGENDA August 5, 2003 Page 2 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 • r 1 U DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Rick Fisher August 5, 2003 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00319 - EHR 22 LLC - A design review of detailed site plan and building elevations for nine single-family homes on 11.83 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (.1-2 dwelling units per acre), located on Birdsong Place, south of Hidden Farm Road - APN: 1074-071-23-31. Related File: Tentative Tract Map TT15914 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00501. Desion Parameters: The project site is approximately 11.83 acres in size and slopes from north to south at a gradient of approximately 15 percent. The Planning Commission approved anine-lot subdivision (TT15914) for this property on March 23, 1999. The lots range in size from 19,820 square feet to 38,472 square feet. All of the lots are vacant with the exception of a grove of trees located in the rear of Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5. Birdsong Place is a fully improved street located in the center of the property and extends south from Hidden Farm Road. There is an existing community trail along the north side and a portion of the west side of the project site. One of the requirements of Tentative Tract Map 15914 was the installation of local trails at the rear of each lot. The local trails will connect with the existing community trail. A corral will be located in the rear yard of each lot with access provided to the local trails. Pedestrian steps will be provided from the residences to the corrals on steeply sloping lots. A 4-foot 6-inch high 2-rail white PVC fence will be located between each lot, while a 4-foot 6-inch high 4-rail PVC white fence will be located adjacent to the local trails. These fences are consistent with the equestrian appearance of the area. The nine single-family homes will consist of one- and two-story homes ranging in size from • 3,746 square feet to 4,034 square feet. A total of three floor plans will be available with building elevations comprised of Spanish, Early California, and Italian architecture. The Floor Plans and architecture have been staggered so that identical plans are not located on adjacent lots. The homes have also been designed to step into the hillside and comply with the 30-foot building envelope consistent with the Hillside Development standards of the Development Code. None of the homes wilt block the view of the existing homes to the north and west of the project site. All of the homes will contain three car garages with roll-up doors. Four of the nine Floor Plans will have side-on garages so that garage doors are not the most prominent feature of the homes. An Arborist Report was prepared to examine the existing on-site trees located at the rear of Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5. The report was reviewed by a third party arborist to verify the validity of the report. The report found that large numbers of Eucalyptus trees have been devastated by drought conditions, the Psyllid Lerp, and the Eucalyptus Longhorn beetle. The report recommended the removal of all dead and infested trees and the disposal of all infested wood to prevent the spread of the beetle. A Tree Removal Permit application (DRC2003-00419) has been submitted for the removal of the dead and infested trees. A Fuel Modification Plan was submitted for review and approval by the Fire Department because the property is in a high fire danger area. All new vegetation installed shall comply with the recommendations of the Plan. 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: 1. All three plans/architectural styles -Vary window base trim detail between styles. Add • decorative light fixtures unique to each style. Vary decorative metal railing design between styles and/or change to pre-cast balusters on some styles. Vary decorative wrought iron grille designs. Vary chimney top design and also vary garage door design. DRC COMMENTS ~ DRC2003-00319 - EHR 22 LLC August 5, 2003 • Page 2 2. Plan 1 Spanish -Recess windows on side and rear elevations. Add terraced planters to soften height of stem walls. Provide decorative shutters on side and rear elevations. 3. Plan 1 Italian -Provide stone veneer elements on side and rear elevations, such as chimneystack. Add corbels supporting stair pop out on right side. 4. Plan 1 R Early California -Add elements to break-up vast blank stucco wall on right side elevation, such as, articulation, fenestration and/or detailing. To a lesser extent, treatment is also needed to the fireplace pop out on left side. 5. Plan 2 Spanish -Recess windows on side and rear elevations. Be more consistent in the use of window mullions and shutters around all four elevations. 6. Plan 2R Italian - Be more consistent in the use of window mullions and shutters around all four elevations. 7. Plan 2 Early California -Recess windows on side and rear elevations. Add window shutters where possible on right side. 8. Plan 3 (all three styles) -see comments above for Plans 1 and 2. 9. The minimum distance between a corral and the house on any adjoining lot shall be 70 feet • per Development Code Section 17.08.030.E.2.b. Lot 7 is the shallowest lot in the tract that results in the corral on Lot 7 being within 42.7 feet of house on Lot 6. The corral could be shifted to the northwest corner of Lot 7 and comply; however, would be less than the optimal 30 feet from house on same lot. The corral location shown is 20 feet from the house on Lot 7. The City's guideline is that corrals be at least 30 feet from the home. SecondaN Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Tree removal - The Arborist Report is in the process of being revised based on comments by the third party arborist. All of the issues that were raised in the third party review shall be satisfied, prior to the project being scheduled for Planning Commission. Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property line) for permanence, durability, and design consistency. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the applicant revise the plans according to the conditions listed above and resubmit the plans for staff review and approval, prior to scheduling the project for Planning Commission review. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Christine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong • Staff Planner: Rick Fisher DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00319 - EHR 22 LLC August 5, 2003 • Page 3 The Committee reviewed the revised plans as follows: The applicant showed revised elevations at the meeting that addressed items 1 and 3 through 8major issues. The Committee reviewed the changes and accepted them. The Committee directed the applicant to submit the revised plans, prior to forwarding the project for Planning Commission review. 2. The Committee did not require stone veneer elements on the side and rear elevations for Plan 1ltalian. 3. With regard to the location of corral pad for Lot 7, the Committee directed the applicant to work with staff in locating the corral pad that met the 70-foot distance from a house on the adjoining lot. 4. The Committee required the grading of the corral pad and installing the drainage around it for each lot because of the severe grades. 5. The Committee required the use of block with cap for the interior side and rear property line, but would accept wrought iron for fence material. 6. The Committee recommended that the applicant preserve as much healthy trees as possible. Detailed plans showing the healthy trees that should be preserved and the ones • that are to be removed shall be submitted for Planning Commission review. n U DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:20 p.m. Emily W imer August 5, 2003 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00302 -WEST ROCK LLC - A request to develop a 17,000 square foot multi tenant auto care center on 1.43 acres of land in the Industrial District (Subarea 3), located at 9199 Arrow Route - APN: 0209-012-10. Desion Parameters: The site is located on the south side of Arrow Route, west of Hellman Avenue, and is characterized by industrial development to the east and south, a vacant industrial building to the west, and Arrow Route abutting single-family homes to the north. The 100-foot wide right-of-way of Arrow Route provides a significant physical separation from the residential neighborhood. The applicant would like to develop the property in one phase and sell tenant portions of the building to separate automotive uses, including tires, brakes, a car audio, and auto body tenants. The property line walls the business will be split-faced block. will be incorporated as accent features. The main building will incorporate painted concrete and sandblasted concrete tilt-up, with the accents and cornice trim on all four elevations. The main entry incorporates s-tile roofing and a formal entry with a sandblasted vertical panel, which wraps into the front office portion of the building. Service bays face interior side property lines. 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: • 1. No major issues at this time. The applicant has worked diligently with staff to resolve any major 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. Screening of the parking lot area is critical for an auto repair center with multiple tenants. Provide a combination of low screen walls, berming, and additional trees and shrubs on the north elevation towards the driveway location. 2. Provide a minimum of 3 5-gallon shrubs in each planter area on the east and west elevations. The elevations are shown correctly; however the Site Plan does not coincide. 3. On the north elevation, provide 2-24 inch box trees at the front entryway. Additional trees . (Camphor etc.) shall be provided. 4. Prior to Plan Check approval, across-section shall be provided to illustrate that all roof-mounted equipment shall be screened. If the roof-mounted equipment cannot be screened, the wall or parapet heights shall be extended. 5. The stamped concrete located at the front entry shall be colored a neutral tone and shall extend completely through the driveway. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: • 1. Roll-up doors shall be painted to match the elevations. The main color of the elevations should coincide with the exterior colored elevations, which illustrates a beige color. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project with the revisions recommended above. ; DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00302 -WEST ROCK LLC . August 5, 2003 Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Christine McPhail, Pam Stewart,.Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Emily Wimer The Committee recommended approval subject to the secondary issues and policy issues stated in the review. The Committee also required the use of flat concrete file for roof material, the use of low shrubs and mulch in the front setback area and minimize the use of turf, the window of the roll-up door to have reflective coating (medium tinting), and that the parapet wall shall be high enough to screen all roof equipment and projections. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:40 p.m. Emily Wimer , August 5, 2003 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00569 - CRESTWOOD- A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 10 single-family lots within an approved Tentative Tract Map 16253, on 7 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (1 to 2 dwellings per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the north side of Victoria Street Between Etiwanda and Grape Place - APN: 0227-041-18 and 19. Related File: SUBTT 16253. Design Parameters: The site is located on the north side of Victoria Street west of Etiwanda Avenue. Surrounding land uses include single-family residential homes to the north and south and east, and vacant land to the west. The site slopes southerly at an approximate 2 to 4 percent grade. The elevations consist of 3 separate Floor Plans and 2 elevation options for each floor plan. The developer is proposing all one-story homes, varied setbacks,and the use of siding materials and rock veneers and stucco quoins with accent features such as gable and hip roof styling and side-on garages. Additional features include bay windows, courtyard areas, and architectural accents on chimney features. The Floor Plans range from approximately 2,600 to 3,600 square feet. Tentative Tract Map 16253 was approved on February 13, 2002, at the Planning Commission Hearing. The applicant has worked with staff to ensure the theme of Etiwanda is incorporated into the design of the homes. The lots are 1/2 acre or larger; hence, horse keeping is allowed. 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: 1. Side yard setback -Lots 1, 8, and 9 do not meet 10-foot minimum setback. Staff will not support a variance request. 2. Plan 284A Craftsman -Incorporate gables on side or rear elevations. Significantly increase amount of wood siding. Provide exposed roof beams and add knee brackets. Porch columns should be battered or thicker, possibly with stone base supporting an oversized wood post. Provide exposed rafter ends. Provide shutters on side and rear elevations. Delete wood siding from chimneys and replace with stone veneer. See attached examples. 3. Plan 2846 Santa Barbara Revival -This is a not a style specifically encouraged in the Etiwanda Specific Plan, but rather in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area (north of W ilson Avenue); however, Spanish influence styles are traditional to Southern California. The proposed elevations except for stucco walls, bears little resemblance to this well-known architectural style. If the Committee accepts this style, then staff would suggest significant changes consistent with the style. Provide concrete or clay's' file roofs in reddish-orange colors. Provide exposed rafter tails. Delete keystone, quoin, and stone veneer details, which are not found in this style. Change shutter details to more rustic/simpler style. Add unique details such as wrought iron grille or the accents. See attached examples. Note: porches are not consistent with style. Santa Barbara Revival homes feature courtyards or long colonnades. • 4. Plan 320A Country Rural -The generic looking style of these elevations should be eliminated and replaced with something more traditional and rural as described by Etiwanda Specific Plan. DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00569 - CRESTWOOD August 5, 2003 age 2 5. Plan 3206 California Ranch -Wrap entire house in wood siding and/or brick veneer. 6. Plan 340A California Ranch -Wrap entire house in wood siding and/or brick veneer. 7. Plan 3406 Santa Barbara Revival -Same comments as 2846 above. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: All porches should be a minimum of 8 feet deep (not 3.5 feet to 7 feet as proposed). 2. Return walls and corner side yard walls shall be slump stone or split faced block. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: On corner side yard areas, a 5-foot minimum landscape area is required between the decorative block wall and the sidewalk. Provide irrigation and landscaping in this area. 2. Amore durable gate other than wood is needed. Provide wrought iron or PVC simulated wood grain. • 3. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along Interior site and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability and design consistency. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and return to Design Review Committee. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Christine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Emily Wimer At the meeting, the applicant showed revisions to the elevations that addressed the identified major issues: The revisions for Plan 284A and B included: variation to the roof line, added stacked stone siding and additional shutter accents, brick veneerto the Craftsman elevation; incorporated accent features and deleted the quoins on the sides of building for the Santa Barbara Revival elevation and stacked stone added as a wainscot. 2. The revisions for Plan 3206 included: added brick siding to the lower portion of the home and wrapped to the fence line, added brick to the ledge of the windowsill on both sides, deleted quoins, added stacked stone on the front entry way. • 3. Additional accent features were added including stone chimneys and pot shelves on all elevations. 4. An additional Spanish style elevation was added for Plan 3206. DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00569 - CRESTWOOD • August 5, 2003 Page 3 The Committee recommended approval subject to the condition that the applicant submit revised development plans that show all the above revisions for City Planner review, prior to Planning Commission approval. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:00 p.m. Alan Warren August 5, 2003 HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00218 -PETE VOLBEDA - A request for asingle-family residence at 9026 Laramie Drive in the Very Low Residential District - APN: 1061-811-09. Project Description: This should be the full project description, as it would appear on the Planning Commission agenda. Design Parameters: This section should be used to explain the site context and those major issues or constraints, which affect the project's design. The site is asingle-family lot that is part of previously subdivided Tract 11626 that is near the north Alta Loma portion of the community. Because of its location in the hillside area the design is subject to the City's Hillside Development provisions. The lot slopes to the southeast at a relatively uniform 13 per cent with a more significant drop-off slope (near 45 per cent) just before the street right-of-way. Usually such an application could be handled at the staff level with the review and approval, including conditions, being determined bythe City Planner. Because of the depth of cuUfill on a portion of the site, Planning Commission review is required. The house, as designed, appears to satisfactorily fit within the building envelope as required by the Hillside Development standards. 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: Development Code Section 17.24.0206.2 (Hillside Development) requires Planning Commission review of any hillside project that has "fills or excavations equal to or exceeding 5 feet in vertical depth at their deepest point measured from the nature ground surface." The floor of the northwest corner of the detached garage measures 9 feet below the nearest natural contour (2212 feet to2203 feet). Also, the driveway measures between 5 and 6 feet vertical cut. Staff does not have concerns regarding the 9-foot cut depth at the rear of the lot for the detached garage. By cutting the garage into the slope, the height of the structure is reduced in relation to the natural grade. The garage floor could be raised but that would undoubtedly cause the driveway area in front of the garages to be sloped. City design policies encourage level parking areas in front of single-family residential garages. The driveway slope can be reduced by cutting significant amounts to lower the house pad, but that would be contrary to the goal of the hillside standards, which is to limit the amount of cuUfill. The slope of the driveway is directly related to the existing lot slope along the street frontage. 2. The Equestrian Overlay District requires a level area sufficient in size fora 24-foot by 24-foot corral. The applicant has provided for an irregular corral of about 590 square feet (38 feet by 18 feet with acut-off) immediately adjacent to the private trail in the northwest corner. If • the Committee believes this location and size will satisfy the intent of the equestrian requirements. A small retaining wall will probably be needed to level the corral consistent with the private equestrian trail. DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00218 -PETE VOLBEDA • August 5; 2003 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: Because of the steepness of the slope along the street frontage, staff recommends that the required landscaping be provided extra erosion control plantings to ensure slope stability after construction completion. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Round off and contour all graded slopes to blend with the existing terrain, and present a more natural appearance. 2. Select plant materials for their suitability to the environment and compatibilitywith Xeriscape principles (i.e., water conservation). 3. Retaining walls exposed to public view and return walls are to be decorative masonry and compatible with the architectural style. 4. A detailed Landscape and Irrigation Plan, including slope planting, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval, prior to the issuance of building permits. • Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Design Review Committee forward the application to the Planning Commission with a recommendation of approval subject to the conditions listed in the above comments. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Christine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Alan Warren The Committee recommended approval to the Planning Commission subject to the following: In response to a Grading Review Committee recommendation, the front of the house should be lowered by 3 feet. The resultant first floor level, at the front first floor area, should be around 2,297-foot elevation and the designerwill lower the roofline a corresponding amount. These modifications are request with intent on reducing the perceived physical mass of the structure. 2. The Committee accepted the location, size, and configuration of the corral. 3. All other staff recommendations are included as a part of the Committees recommendation. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • AUGUST 5, 2003 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad ~ er Secretary • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY AUGUST 5, 2003 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Larry McNiel Pam Stewart Alternates: Rich Macias Richard Fletcher CONSENT CALENDAR Nancy Fong Cristine McPhail 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 (Rick/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00319 - EHR 22 LLC - A design review of detailed site plan and building elevations for nine single-family homes on 11.83 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (.1-2 dwelling units per acre), located on Birdsong Place, south of Hidden Farm Road -APN: 1074-071-23-31. Related File: Tentative Tract Map TT15914 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00501. 7:20 p.m. (Emily/Cam) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00302 -WEST ROCK LLC - A request to develop a 17,000 square foot multi tenant auto care center on 1.43 acres of land in the Industrial District (Subarea 3), located at 9199 Arrow Route -APN: 0209-012-10. 7:40 p.m. (Emily/Joe) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00569 - CRESTWOOD- A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 10 single-family lots within an approved Tentative Tract Map 16253, on 7 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (1 to 2 dwellings per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the north side of Victoria Street Between Etiwanda and Grape Place - APN: 0227-041-18 and 19. Related File: SUBTT 16253. 8:00 p.m. • (Alan/Shelley) HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00218-PETEVOLBEDA-A request for a single-family residence at 9026 Laramie Drive in the Very Low Residential District -APN: 1061-811-09. • DRC AGENDA August 5, 2003 Page 2 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 July 31, 2003 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic nter DrV Rancho Cucamonga. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS . 7:00 p.m. Rick Fisher August 5, 2003 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00319 - EHR 22 LLC - A design review of detailed site plan and building elevations for nine single-family homes on 11.83 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (.1-2 dwelling units per acre), located on Birdsong Place, south of Hidden Farm Road - APN: 1074-071-23-31. Related File: Tentative Tract Map TT15914 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00501. Design Parameters: The project site is approximately 11.83 acres in size and slopes from north to south at a gradient of approximately 15 percent. The Planning Commission approved anine-lot subdivision (TT15914) for this property on March 23, 1999. The lots range in size from 19,820 square feet to 38,472 square feet. All of the lots are vacant with the exception of a grove of trees located in the rear of Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5. Birdsong Place is a fully improved street located in the center of the property and extends south from Hidden Farm Road. There is an existing community trail along the north side and a portion of the west side of the project site. One of the requirements of Tentative Tract Map 15914 was the installation of local trails at the rear of each lot. The local trails will connect with the existing community trail. A corral will be located in the rear yard of each lot with access provided to the local trails. Pedestrian steps will be provided from the residences to the corrals on steeply sloping lots. A 4-foot 6-inch high 2-rail white PVC fence will be located between each lot, while a 4-foot 6-inch high 4-rail PVC white fence will be located adjacent to the local trails. These fences are consistent with the equestrian appearance of the area. The nine single-family homes will consist of one- and two-story homes ranging in size from 3,746 square feet to 4,034 square feet. A total of three floor plans will be available with building elevations comprised of Spanish, Early California, and Italian architecture. The Floor Plans and architecture have been staggered so that identical plans are not located on adjacent lots. The homes have also been designed to step into the hillside and comply with the 30-foot building envelope consistent with the Hillside Development standards of the Development Code. None of the homes will block the view of the existing homes to the north and west of the project site. All of the homes will contain three car garages with roll-up doors. Four of the nine Floor Plans will have side-on garages so that garage doors are not the most prominent feature of the homes. An Arborist Report was prepared to examine the existing on-site trees located at the rear of Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5. The report was reviewed by a third party arborist to verify the validity of the report. The report found that large numbers of Eucalyptus trees have been devastated by drought conditions, the Psyllid Lerp, and the Eucalyptus Longhorn beetle. The report recommended the removal of all dead and infested trees and the disposal of all infested wood to prevent the spread of the beetle. A Tree Removal Permit application (DRC2003-00419) has been submitted for the removal of the dead and infested trees. A Fuel Modification Plan was submitted for review and approval by the Fire Department because the property is in a high fire danger area. All new vegetation installed shall comply with the recommendations of the Plan. 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 1. All three plans/architectural styles -Vary window base trim detail between styles. Add • decorative light fixtures unique to each style. Vary decorative metal railing design between styles and/or change to pre-cast balusters on some styles. Vary decorative wrought iron grille designs. Vary chimney top design and also vary garage door design. DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00319 - EHR 22 LLC August 5, 2003 . Page 2 2. Plan 1 Spanish -Recess windows on side and rear elevations. Add terraced planters to soften height of stem walls. Provide decorative shutters on side and rear elevations. 3. Plan 1 Italian -Provide stone veneer elements on side and rear elevations, such as chimneystack. Add corbels supporting stair pop out on right side. 4. Plan 1 R Early California -Add elements to break-up vast blank stucco wall on right side elevation, such as, articulation, fenestration and/or detailing. To a lesser extent, treatment is also needed to the fireplace pop out on left side. 5. Plan 2 Spanish -Recess windows on side and rear elevations. Be more consistent in the use of window mullions and shutters around all four elevations. 6. Plan 2R Italian - Be more consistent in the use of window mullions and shutters around all four elevations. Plan 2 Early California -Recess windows on side and rear elevations. Add window shutters where possible on right side. 8. Plan 3 (all three styles) -see comments above for Plans 1 and 2. 9. The minimum distance between a corral and the house on any adjoining lot shall be 70 feet • per Development Code Section 17.08.030.E.2.b. Lot 7 is the shallowest lot in the tract that results in the corral on Lot 7 being within 42.7 feet of house on Lot 6. The corral could be shifted to the northwest corner of Lot 7 and comply; however, would be less than the optimal 30 feet from house on same lot. The corral location shown is 20 feet from the house on Lot 7. The City's guideline is that corrals be at least 30 feet from the home. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Tree removal - The Arborist Report is in the process of being revised based on comments by the third party arborist. All of the issues that were raised in the third party review shall be satisfied, prior to the project being scheduled for Planning Commission. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property line) for permanence, durability, and design consistency. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the applicant revise the plans according to the conditions listed above and resubmit the plans for staff review and approval, prior to scheduling the project for Planning Commission review. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: • Staff Planner: Rick Fisher DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:20 p.m. Emily Wimer August 5, 2003 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00302 -WEST ROCK LLC - A request to develop a 17,000 square foot multi tenant auto care center on 1.43 acres of land in the Industrial District (Subarea 3), located at 9199 Arrow Route - APN: 0209-012-10. Design Parameters: The site is located on the south side of Arrow Route, west of Hellman Avenue, and is characterized by industrial development to the east and south, a vacant industrial building to the west, and Arrow Route abutting single-family homes to the north. The 100-foot wide right-of-way of Arrow Route provides a significant physical separation from the residential neighborhood. The applicant would like to develop the property in one phase and sell tenant portions of the building to separate automotive uses, including tires, brakes, a car audio, and auto body tenants. The property line walls the business will be split-faced block. will be incorporated as accent features. The main building will incorporate painted concrete and sandblasted concrete tilt-up, with file accents and cornice trim on all four elevations. The main entry incorporates s-tile roofing and a formal entry with a sandblasted vertical panel, which wraps into the front office portion of the building. Service bays face interior side property lines. 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: • 1. No major issues at this time. The applicant has worked diligently with staff to resolve any major 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. Screening of the parking lot area is critical for an auto repair center with multiple tenants. Provide a combination of low screen walls, berming, and additional trees and shrubs on the north elevation towards the driveway location. 2. Provide a minimum of 3 5-gallon shrubs in each planter area on the east and west elevations. The elevations are shown correctly; however the Site Plan does not coincide. 3. On the north elevation, provide 2-24 inch box trees at the front entryway. Additional trees (Camphor etc.) shall be provided. 4. Prior to Plan Check approval, across-section shall be provided to illustrate that all roof-mounted equipment shall be screened. If the roof-mounted equipment cannot be screened, the wall or parapet heights shall be extended. 5. The stamped concrete located at the front entry shall be colored a neutral tone and shall extend completely through the driveway. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: • 1. Roll-up doors shall be painted to match the elevations. The main color of the elevations should coincide with the exterior colored elevations, which illustrates a beige color. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project with the revisions recommended above. DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00302 -WEST ROCK LLC August 5, 2003 • Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Emily Wimer • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:40 p.m. Emily W imer August 5, 2003 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00569 - CRESTWOOD- A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 10single-family lots within an approved Tentative Tract Map 16253, on 7 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (1 to 2 dwellings per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the north side of Victoria Street Between Etiwanda and Grape Place - APN: 0227-041-18 and 19. Related File: SUBTT 16253. Design Parameters: The site is located on the north side of Victoria Street west of Etiwanda Avenue. Surrounding land uses include single-family residential homes to the north and south and east, and vacant land to the west. The site slopes southerly at an approximate 2 to 4 percent grade. The elevations consist of 3 separate Floor Plans and 2 elevation options for each floor plan. The developer is proposing all one-story homes, varied setbacks,and the use of siding materials and rock veneers and stucco quoins with accent features such as gable and hip roof styling and side-on garages. Additional features include bay windows, courtyard areas, and architectural accents on chimney features. The Floor Plans range from approximately 2,600 to 3,600 square feet. Tentative Tract Map 16253 was approved on February 13, 2002, at the Planning Commission Hearing. The applicant has worked with staff to ensure the theme of Etiwanda is incorporated into the design of the homes. The lots are 1/2 acre or larger; hence, horse keeping is allowed. 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: Side yard setback -Lots 1, 8, and 9 do not meet 10-foot minimum setback. Staff will not support a variance request. Plan 284A Craftsman -Incorporate gables on side or rear elevations. Significantly increase amount of wood siding. Provide exposed roof beams and add knee brackets. Porch columns should be battered or thicker, possibly with stone base supporting an oversized wood post. Provide exposed rafter ends. Provide shutters on side and rear elevations. Delete wood siding from chimneys and replace with stone veneer. See attached examples. 3. Plan 2846 Santa Barbara Revival -This is a not a style specifically encouraged in the Etiwanda Specific Plan, but rather in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area (north of W ilson Avenue); however, Spanish influence styles are traditional to Southern California. The proposed elevations except for stucco walls, bears little resemblance to this well-known architectural style. If the Committee accepts this style, then staff would suggest significant changes consistent with the style. Provide concrete or clay 'S'tile roofs in reddish-orange colors. Provide exposed rafter tails. Delete keystone, quoin, and stone veneer details, which are not found in this style. Change shutter details to more rustic/simpler style. Add unique details such as wrought iron grille or file accents. See attached examples. Note: porches are not consistent with style. Santa Barbara Revival homes feature courtyards or long colonnades. • 4. Plan 320A Country Rural -The generic looking style of these elevations should be eliminated and replaced with something more traditional and rural as described by Etiwanda Specific Plan. DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00569 - CRESTWOOD August 5, 2003 age 2 5. Plan 3206 California Ranch -Wrap entire house in wood siding and/or brick veneer. 6. Plan 340A California Ranch -Wrap entire house in wood siding and/or brick veneer. 7. Plan 340B Santa Barbara Revival -Same comments as 284B above. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: All porches should be a minimum of 8 feet deep (not 3.5 feet to 7 feet as proposed). 2. Return walls and corner side yard walls shall be slump stone or split faced block. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: On corner side yard areas, a 5-foot minimum landscape area is required between the decorative block wall and the sidewalk. Provide irrigation and landscaping in this area. 2. Amore durable gate other than wood is needed. Provide wrought iron or PVC simulated wood grain. • 3. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along Interior site and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability and design consistency. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and return to Design Review Committee. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Emily Wimer • xch floor. Coin- ed for piers, col- , concrete block, are the junctions 3. The roof has a exposed, or false .long [he sloping, wall to the roof .vernacular Prai- j rafter ends and ion wall cladding dock, and stucco Secondary influ- aI roof forms are untry during the fated in southern nacu samples t th [ry by nor after [he mid- 'ornia brothers- toge[her in Pasa- 3sman-type bun- admark examples the English Arts their early train- budd these intri- nsive publicuy in Sul, Good Houre- ' Home Journal, I flood of pattern ffered completely .r. Through these ular and fashion- except in Califor- nacular examples • *. ate.. .. _'e k5,' . _. ~ s , d° %jk..+.'•.CSn 1. v ~' exposed roof beams ' Wangular kna brace ~\ `. exposed rafrcr tails " (fPICAL ROOF-WALL JUNCTIONS scone exrcrior chimneys extn Brickwork in gables or porch dormers, usually gabled or shed ' ~Y extended and/or elaborated rafter ends 0 ~Y window boxes and balconies i . ® ~ 1~ ~ - trimgular broad supports I I~ ~- 'multi-pane vsh over sash j( I with one large glass pine 1 sloping Orienul (peaked - (bsnercd) curved shape between porch supports or flared) root Lne ioundvion / ' I small, high windows on each ssde of chimneys multiple tint planes t ® ® ® e u P' trclbscd porch ar pocc caherc too( tramomed windows line o(thra or more windows ~~' I I'PICAL FLARORt\TIONS ~ p 'lls(~TYPICAL PORCH SUPPORTS AND PORCH RAILINGS Low piers without columns above ate common bsw fs% i-~ parts- ' flwr level i ground ~ L ~ct. solid ruling, or column level shoo column '~mmucs so ground level above pier or •thmw brtak a parch flint sobd raibng '~nN PORCH SUPPORT VARIANTS y x. r "^~ ~~ I column or pier with sloping (banned) sides flint to ctibng column more common before pm I ~I ~i _ • \~. ~~ 1 ~. `.. W ~. ~'~ ll~-.~ _. - ~~ Q m ey ~~.~ W U d a w ~- S 17 1 v ~„ '' ~~ ~ ~:~ -cam- ~c* ~` ~.: • ~ a ¢ v _ „~ ~ ~ ~ M~ a a ~' ~~' x~ ¢o w W ~- [ o N o -a= ~. v a N x W J Q W Q ~e U H a LL 8 N C7 S K w O !'L~ L w Ll ..., ' ee ¢ I-i 8 ~ t~~ l .~ . ' .~~ N J H W J Q Q U U Z cW C F S Z ti J U U ~_ Z W x W cZ G_ U <_ .; r \ I ;. .: `~ .. L ~ C Q~ ~ q E za v~- ~W _~ ~'G vg ;N W ~ J n a i H H H DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 p.m. Alan Warren August 5, 2003 HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00218 -PETE VOLBEDA - A request for asingle-family residence at 9026 Laramie Drive in the Very Low Residential District - APN: 1061-811-09. Project Description: This should be the full project description, as it would appear on the Planning Commission agenda. Design Parameters: This section should be used to explain the site context and those major issues or constraints, which affect the project's design. The site is asingle-family lot that is part of previously subdivided Tract 11626 that is near the north Alta Loma portion of the community. Because of its location in the hillside area the design is subject to the City's Hillside Development provisions. The lot slopes to the southeast at a relatively uniform 13 per cent with a more significant drop-off slope (near 45 per cent) just before the street right-of-way. Usually such an application could be handled at the staff level with the review and approval, including conditions, being determined by the City Planner. Because of the depth of cuUfill on a portion of the site, Planning Commission review is required. The house, as designed, appears to satisfactorily fit within the building envelope as required by the Hillside Development standards. 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: Development Code Section 17.24.020B.2 (Hillside Development) requires Planning Commission review of any hillside project that has "fills or excavations equal to or exceeding 5 feet in vertical depth at their deepest point measured from the nature ground surface." The floor of the northwest corner of the detached garage measures 9 feet below the nearest natural contour (2212 feet to2203 feet). Also, the driveway measures between 5 and 6 feet vertical cut. Staff does not have concerns regarding the 9-foot cut depth at the rear of the lot for the detached garage. By cutting the garage into the slope, the height of the structure is reduced in relation to the natural grade. The garage floor could be raised but that would undoubtedly cause the driveway area in front of the garages to be sloped. City design policies encourage level parking areas in front of single-family residential garages. The driveway slope can be reduced by cutting significant amounts to lower the house pad, but that would be contrary to the goal of the hillside standards, which is to limit the amount of cuUfill. The slope of the driveway is directly related to the existing lot slope along the street frontage. 2. The Equestrian Overlay District requires a level area sufficient in size fora 24-foot by 24-foot corral. The applicant has provided for an irregular corral of about 590 square feet (38 feet by 18 feet with acut-off) immediately adjacent to the private trail in the northwest corner. If • the Committee believes this location and size will satisfy the intent of the equestrian requirements. A small retaining wall will probably be needed to level the corral consistent with the private equestrian trail. DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00218 -PETE VOLBEDA August 5, 2003 • 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: Because of the steepness of the slope along the street frontage, staff recommends that the required landscaping be provided extra erosion control plantings to ensure slope stability after construction completion. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. Round off and contour all graded slopes to blend with the existing terrain, and present a more natural appearance. 2. Select plant materials for their suitability to the environment and compatibilitywith Xeriscape principles (i.e., water conservation). 3. Retaining walls exposed to public view and return walls are to be decorative masonry and compatible with the architectural style. 4. A detailed Landscape and Irrigation Plan, including slope planting, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval, prior to the issuance of building permits. • Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Design Review Committee forward the application to the Planning Commission with a recommendation of approval subject to the conditions listed in the above comments. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Alan Warren