HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003/04/15 - Agenda PacketDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES
• TUESDAY APRIL 15, 2003 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Larry McNiel
Alternates: Rich Macias
CONSENT CALENDAR
Dan Coleman
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) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00049 -AMERICAN PACIFIC HOMES - A
design review and building elevations and detailed site plan for 23single-family lots
on 11 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the
Etiwanda Specific Plan, located east of Mulberry Street and generally south of
I-210 Freeway and the I-15 interchange -APN: 0228-011-20, 24, 25 and 34. Related
Files: Variance DRC2003-00050, and Subtt16302.
• 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.
(Brent) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00237 - ROBINSON'S MAY - A request to
construct a two story, 180,080 square foot department store (Robinson's May) within
the Victoria Gardens Regional Center in the Mixed Use District of the Victoria
Community Plan, located north of Foothill Boulevard, South of Church Street,
between Day Creek Boulevard and the I-15 Freeway -APN: 0227-262-35, 36, and
38; 0227-171-22 and 23; 0227-201030, 33, 35, and 36; 0227-21 1-24, 39, and 40 thru
43.
7:30 p.m
(Rick) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00072-LISA
KELLY - A development review for seven industrial buildings ranging is size from
5,586 square feet to 28,000 square feet on 10.5 acres in the General Industrial
District (Subarea 4) located on the east side of Archibald Avenue between 6th Street
and 4th Street -APN: 0210-071-52.
7:50 p.m.
(Debra) DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00076-FUSCOEENGINEERING-A
proposed W Ickes Furniture Store of 40,000 square feet on 4.87 acres of land in the
Industrial Park (Subarea 12) District located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and
Buffalo Avenue. APN: 0229-263-78 and 79.
DRC AGENDA
April 15, 2003
Page 2
8:10 p.m.
(Emily) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2002-00864 -
CARNEYARCHITECTS - A request to develop two single-story industrial buildings
totaling 45,106 square feet on 3.5 acres of land located, at the northwest corner of
White Oak Avenue and Elm Avenue in Subarea 7 of the Industrial District -
APN: 0208-352-92.
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. Doug Fenn April 15, 2003
•
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00049 -AMERICAN PACIFIC HOMES - A design review and
building elevations and detailed site plan for 23 single-family lots on 11 acres of land in the Low
Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located east of
Mulberry Street and generally south of I-210 Freeway and the I-15 interchange - APN: 0228-011-20,
24, 25 and 34. Related Files: Variance DRC2003-00050, and Subtt16302.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion:
The project is an infill project within the North Etiwanda area of Rancho Cucamonga. The proposed
product is in compliance with pertinent Development Code Regulations and is the exact same
product that has been recently approved for Tract SUBTR16302 at the southeast corner of Victoria
Street and East Avenue. Staff and the Engineering Department have 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 approve the project as proposed.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman
• Staff Planner: Doug Fenn
The Committee approved the project as submitted.
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Brent Le Count April 15, 2003
•
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00237 - ROBINSON'S MAY - A request to construct a two
story, 180,080 square foot department store (Robinson's May) within the Victoria Gardens Regional
Center in the Mixed Use District of the Victoria Community Plan, located north of Foothill Boulevard,
South of Church Street, between Day Creek Boulevard and the I-15 Freeway- APN: 0227-262-35,
36, and 38; 0227-171-22 and 23; 0227-201030, 33, 35, and 36; 0227-211-24, 39, and 40 thru 43.
Design Parameters: The building will be located on the south side of the future South Main Street
within the center, at the southerly terminus of the Town Green (the building's north entrance is
aligned with the Town Green). There are vast parking fields to the south, smaller parking lots on the
east and west sides of the building, and on-street parallel parking along the north side of the building
on South Main Street. All four sides of the building will have pedestrian entrances all of which utilize
glass, colored stucco, decorative cornice work, and horizontal change of building plane to prove
visual interest and a sense of arrival. Also, all of the entrances will have double door foyers. There
is a truck loading dock proposed on the southeast corner of the building. The dock area is actually
tucked under the second floor and a screen wall that appears to continue the first floor along the
south elevation is provided in order to conceal the existence of the loading dock. Finally, the entire
perimeter of the building is proposed to be at the same grade level so that customers do not have to
go up or down steps.
Planning Commission Workshop: On January 22, 2003, the applicant had a Workshop with the
Planning Commission to review project design. The Commission discussed areas of concern
including variation in colors and materials, use of cornices, reducing the boxy appearance of the
• building, screening and buffering the loading dock from visual intrusion as well as seasonal winds
out of the east and that the design of the building and surrounding landscaping should be sensitive
to the pedestrian experience. The attached revised drawings are in response to Commission input.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
Provide enhanced paving treatment in the driveway entrance to the loading dock area at the
southeast corner of the building. The intent is to maintain a high level of visual interest
relative to the pedestrian experience as customers walk by the dock area.
2. Provide tree planting staggered relative to the street tree planting within the planters located
adjacent to the building so as to provide a strong tree canopy over the side walks on the
east, west, and south sides.
3. Consider providing additional areas of glazing along the base of the building to act as
display windows to further enhance visual interest (similar to the glass displays at entry
points.
4. Provide dense shrub planting (more than 3-foot on center) along the base of the building to
act as a "living" wainscoting since there is only colored stucco proposed for the building
base.
• 5. Provide decorative enhanced paving across private streets connecting each entryto parking
lots.
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2003-00237 - ROBINSON'S MAY
April 15, 2003
Page 2
•
6. A bus bay turnout is proposed on the north side of the private street east Robinson's May.
This bay will eliminate landscaping that would otherwise provide a bufferforthe loading area
at the southeast corner of the building. Staff suggests relocating to the west of Robinson's
May.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
Roof equipment and ground-mounted equipment shall be fully screened from public view,
including passers by on the I-15 Freeway. Should screening be necessary, it shall be of the
highest architectural and visual quality to match building architecture.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend
approval of the subject Development Review application subject to the above comments and any
other comments the Committee may have.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Brent Le Count
The applicant presented a revised Site Plan with an Edison transformer and emergency generator at
• the southeast corner within a 10-foot high enclosure. The Committee requested that the project be
revised in light of staff's comments and the following additional comments to which the applicant
agreed:
Coordinate with Forest City to re-align the drive aisle immediately to the east of the site in
the vicinity of the southeast corner. The intent is to move the drive aisle easterly so that at
least 10 feet of sidewalWlandscape width can be provided from the face of curb to the face
of the utility enclosure wall.
2. Provide dense landscaping on the northern and southern ends of the utility enclosure near
the southeast corner of the building. Include vine planting trained to climb the enclosure
walls.
3. Provide a bench or other pedestrian oriented fixture at the base of the east side of the utility
enclosure wall and provide a decorative shade overhang element above.
4. Relocate the proposed bus bay east of the southeast corner of the site to provide more room
for landscaping to screen the loading dock. If relocation is infeasible, then provide as dense
as possible landscaping in this area to achieve the screening affect.
5. The metal canopies over the main customer entrances shall be extended further out over the
sidewalWentrance. The applicant agreed to an overall dimension of 4 feet.
6. The building surfaces on the north elevation that may be exposed during the interim
between construction of the Robinson May store and the two mall shops on the north side
• shall be painted/treated in a visually attractive fashion. A suggestion would be to paint the
exposed surfaces to represent a facsimile the future mall shops that will be built there.
7. It is not necessary to expand the area of window displays.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
•
7:30 p.m. Rick Fisher April 15, 2003
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00072 -LISA KELLY-A
development review for seven industrial buildings ranging is size from 5,586 square feet to
28,000 square feet on 10.5 acres in the General Industrial District (Subarea 4) located on the east
side of Archibald Avenue between 6th Street and 4th Street-APN: 0210-071-52.
Design Parameters: The site is located along Archibald Avenue that is designated as a Special
Boulevard bythe General Plan and Industrial Districts. The seven proposed buildings will be part of
an existing industrial park that was built over 20 years ago. There are nine existing industrial
buildings in the park. The proposed buildings will fill in the remaining vacant lots. Buildings 1
through 5 will be used primarily for manufacturing and warehouse activities. Buildings 6 and 7 front
on Archibald Avenue and will be used primarily for office type uses. The internal streets are private:
Crescent Drive, London Way, Hawthorne Drive, and Dover Way. The loading areas have been
located in the rear of the buildings to reduce their visibility from these streets. The loading areas of
Buildings 3 and 4 will be visible from London Way. However, London Way is not a heavilytraveled
street and the visual impact is not considered significant. Buildings 3, 4, and 5 will have dock high
loading doors for semi-trucks. Adequate turn radius dimensions have been provided to allow
maneuvering for these trucks. A railroad spur track is located behind these buildings but loading
doors for rail service have not been provided because of the nature of the proposed tenants. All of
the other buildings will have surface level loading doors.
Building materials include concrete tilt up walls, horizontal reveal lines, painted accent colors, foam
cornices, slate stone accent diamonds, and aluminum fixed glass windows and doors. The site is
• surrounded by industrial development to the north, south, and east, with single- family homes to the
west across Archibald Avenue. Each building will have its own outdoor eating area for employees.
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:
Building Elevations (Building 6): Provide greater vertical and horizontal articulation to
Building 6 facing Archibald Avenue. The goal is to provide an office appearance, break-up
long linear building mass, and enhance streetscape along this special boulevard. Explore
alternative building footprints.
2. Building Elevations: Section 17.30.060) of the Development Code states that the built
environment within the Industrial area shall contain a "high quality, timeless building design,
which includes building entry focal point, sufficient articulations to the building planes, and
the creative use of building materials." Accent treatment, such as changes in exterior
materials and textures is required. A minimum of two primary building materials shall be
used. The recommended primary and secondary building materials are as follows:
a. Primary materials -concrete, sandblasted concrete, textured block, brick, granite, and
marble.
Secondary materials- glass, tile, polished brass or copper, brick, concrete, painted
metal elements, and painted accent stripes.
•
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2003-00072 -LISA KELLY
April 15, 2003
Page 2
u
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 greater vertical and horizontal articulation to Building 6 facing Archibald Avenue.
The goal is to provide an office appearance, break-up long, linear building mass, and
enhance streetscape along this special boulevard. Explore alternative building footprints.
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 doors and service doors to match main building colors.
2. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles,
entrances and exits shall be striped per city standards.
3. Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for
commercial, office, and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area.
4. A minimum of 20 percent of trees planted within industrial projects shall be specimen size
trees, 24-inch box or larger.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised and brought back for further
review.
• Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Rick Fisher
The Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the following revisions that were
agreed to by the applicant, being made prior to the project being scheduled for Planning
Commission:
1. Building 6: The Committee requested more relief be provided between the tower elements
and the front of the wall of the building to create more depth, dimension, and interest. The
tower elements will be moved out to a projection of 2.5 feet (30 inches) from the face of the
building.
2. All Building Elevations: The Committee requested adding a second primary building
material to comply with the Development Code requirement.
3. Building 6: The Committee requested exploring more creative solution than the medallion
accents which have become commonplace in the area.
4. The Committee stated that the existing 2-foot high berm along the Archibald Avenue
frontage could remain as long as shrubs are planted on top of the berm to screen the
parking lot from view. The Committee also suggested that the applicant explore reducing
• the amount of turf along Archibald Avenue to conserve water, possibly by using river rock
cobble.
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2003-00072 -LISA KELLY
April 15, 2003
Page 3
•
5. The Committee agreed that a perimeter solid wall was not required because other industrial
users surround the project; hence, there are no public views to protect. The Committee
recommended that existing non-conforming chain link fencing be replaced with wrought iron
around perimeter.
The applicant shall submit plans that show the above revisions. Staff shall review and approve the
plans prior to scheduling the project for Planning Commission.
•
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
•
7:50 p.m. Debra Meier April 15, 2003
DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00076 - FUSCOE ENGINEERING - A proposed
Wickes Furniture Store of 40,000 square feet on 4.87 acres of land in the Industrial Park (Subarea
12) District located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Buffalo Avenue. APN: 0229-263-78
and 79.
Design Parameters: The proposed Wickes Furniture store is proposed at the northeast corner of
4th Street and Buffalo Avenue, on the parcels that were remnants of the COSTCO development. All
of the perimeter landscaping and street improvements have previously been completed. The
applicant proposes a 40,000 square foot store and associated parking on two existing parcels of
land totaling 4.87 acres.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Building Elevations:
a) Right Side Elevation (north): Extend the storefront glass approximately 32 additional
feet toward the west. This will enhance the most visible portion of the elevation as
viewed from the driveway and north parking lot.
b) Right Side Elevation (north): Identify the 6-foot screen wall that is proposed along the
northern portion of the service and loading area.
• c) Rear Elevation (West): Extend the storefront glass on either side of the faux entry in a
similar floor-to-ceiling fashion as used on the other elevations.
2. Conceptual Landscape Plan:
a) Replace sidewalk along South Elevation with landscaping. There are no building
entrances on that elevation.
b) The "island" at the northeast corner of the building should be landscaped.
c) The handicapped parking area should be decorative hardscape as was used in front of
COSTCO; in addition, the walkway along the front of the building shall be decorative
hardscape to match that which was established by COSTCO.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee discuss and resolve the items
noted above with the applicant prior to being forwarded for Planning Commission consideration.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNeil and Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Debra Meier
The applicant concurred with the revisions as suggested by staff, with the exception of Item 1.a.
The suggestion to incorporate additional glass at the northeast building corner conflicted with the
• objectives of the interior design in that portion of the building; at this corner full height interior walls
are preferred. The Committee and the applicant discussed various alternatives that the applicant
might explore, such as using spandrel glass, or incorporating a mural on the exterior building wall.
The applicant was directed to work with staff in developing a solution.
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2003-00076 - FUSCOE ENGINEERING
April 15, 2003
Page 2
•
Committee member McNeil also expressed his reservations pertaining to the main entry's welded
steel tube "space frame" construction technique as proposed at the store entry. The applicant
indicated this store corporate design is based on their Rooms To Go furniture stores in the eastern
and southern United States. Some alternatives were discussed, included incorporating awood-
beam design (similar to the Cinema in Terra Vista Town Center). The applicant was given the
option to provide photographs of the existing structures, which feature this design, to illustrate the
technique to the Committee, prior to recommending any modifications.
The final design shall be reviewed by the Committee as a consent calendar item; this could be
accomplished on May 6, 2003 if the applicant can respond in that time frame.
•
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
•
8:10 p.m. Emily W imer April 15, 2003
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2002-00864 - CARNEY
ARCHITECTS - A request to develop two single-story industrial buildings totaling 45,106 square feet
on 3.5 acres of land located, at the northwest corner of White Oak Avenue and Elm Avenue in
Subarea 7 of the Industrial District - APN: 0208-352-92.
Design Parameters: The project is located on the west side of White Oak Avenue north of Elm
Avenue abutting the former Heritage Hospital. The proposal is fortwo 2-story multi-tenant industrial
buildings. A full drive is located at the south end of the site and a right turn only driveway is located
at the northern most point of the site with access on W hite Oak Avenue. A design constraint is that
the site is on the inside curve of W hite Oak Avenue; hence, there are traffic line-of-sight restrictions
that affect most of the frontage. No berming, walls, shrub hedges, or monument signs will be
allowed within line-of-sight area. The project is over-parked by 59 spaces; therefore, some of the
suites could be office rather than industrial. Office is a permitted use in this zone.
Primary materials for the buildings are painted concrete tilt-up with brick veneer. Accent materials
include cornice trim brick treated diamond features, and two-toned reveal lines.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
• 1. Architecture -Southeast corner of Building "B"should add glass to match northeast corner
of Building "B."
2. Provide sidewalk connection out to the W hite Oak Avenue frontage on both north and south
sides of the formal pedestrian entryway.
3. A 5-foot sidewalk along westerly project boundary should be adjacent to parking spaces,
with 1-foot vehicle overhang to maximize planter space for proposed project and existing
hospital to the west.
i
4. Wrap landscaping planters around both buildings as far as possible for screening purposes.
Relocate roll-up door at northeast corner of Building "B" to not interfere with planter. At
southeast corner of Building "B" replace sidewalk/handicap ramp with landscape planter.
This necessitates adding handicap parking spaces west of Building "B."
Policy issues:
All roll-up doors and man doors shall be painted to match the building.
Outdoor eating area shall include tables, seating, trash receptacle, as well as shade in the
form of trellis feature and/or shade trees.
3. Downspouts for the building shall be located in the rear loading/unloading area only unless
internal to walls.
• Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee approve the project subject to the
above recommendations.
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2002-00864 - CARNEY ARCHITECTS
April 15, 2003
Page 2
•
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Emily Wimer
The Committee recommended approval subject to the Secondary Issue listed above. No additional
modifications were necessary.
C~
CJ
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
•
•
APRIL 15, 2003
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:37 p.m.
Respecttully submitted,
ad Bu
Secretary
•
~J
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY APRIL 15, 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
CONSENT CALENDAR
Dan Coleman
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) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00049 -AMERICAN PACIFIC HOMES - A
design review and building elevations and detailed site plan for 23single-family lots
on 11 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the
Etiwanda Specific Plan, located east of Mulberry Street and generally south of
I-210 Freeway and the I-15 interchange -APN: 0228-011-20, 24, 25 and 34. Related
Files: Variance DRC2003-00050, and Subtt16302.
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
(Brent) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00237 - ROBINSON'S MAY - A request to
construct a two story, 180,080 square foot department store (Robinson's May) within
the Victoria Gardens Regional Center in the Mixed Use District of the Victoria
Community Plan, located north of Foothill Boulevard, South of Church Street,
between Day Creek Boulevard and the I-15 Freeway -APN: 0227-262-35, 36, and
38; 0227-171-22 and 23; 0227-201030, 33, 35, and 36; 0227-211-24, 39, and 40 thru
43.
7:30 p.m
(Rick) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00072-LISA
KELLY - A development review for seven industrial buildings ranging is size from
5,586 square feet to 28,000 square feet on 10.5 acres in the General Industrial
District (Subarea 4) located on the east side of Archibald Avenue between 6th Street
and 4th Street -APN: 0210-071-52.
7:50 p.m.
(Debra) DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00076-FUSCOEENGINEERING-A
proposed W Ickes Furniture Store of 40,000 square feet on 4.87 acres of land in the
Industrial Park (Subarea 12) District located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and
Buffalo Avenue. APN: 0229-263-78 and 79.
DRC AGENDA
April 15, 2003
Page 2
•
8:10 p.m
(Emily) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2002-00864 -
CARNEY ARCHITECTS - A request to develop two single-story industrial buildings
totaling 45,106 square feet on 3.5 acres of land located, at the northwest corner of
White Oak Avenue and Elm Avenue in Subarea 7 of the Industrial District -
APN: 0208-352-92.
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 April 10, 2003 at least 72 hours prior to the
meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic nter Dri ,Rancho Cucamonga.
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
• 7:00 p.m. Doug Fenn April 15, 2003
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00049-AMERICAN PACIFIC HOMES-Adesignreview and
building elevations and detailed site plan for 23 single-family lots on 11 acres of land in the Low
Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located east of
Mulberry Street and generally south of I-210 Freeway and the I-15 interchange - APN: 0228-011-20,
24, 25 and 34. Related Files: Variance DRC2003-00050, and Subtt16302.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion:
The project is an infill project within the North Etiwanda area of Rancho Cucamonga. The proposed
product is in compliance with pertinent Development Code Regulations and is the exact same
product that has been recently approved for Tract SUBTR16302 at the southeast corner of Victoria
Street and East Avenue. Staff and the Engineering Department have 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 approve the project as proposed
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present:
• Staff Planner: Doug Fenn
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
• 7:00 p.m. Brent Le Count April 15, 2003
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00237 - ROBINSON'S MAY - A request to construct a two
story, 180,080 square foot department store (Robinson's May) within the Victoria Gardens Regional
Center in the Mixed Use District of the Victoria Community Plan, located north of Foothill Boulevard,
South of Church Street, between Day Creek Boulevard and the I-15 Freeway - APN: 0227-262-35,
36, and 38; 0227-171-22 and 23; 0227-201030, 33, 35, and 36; 0227-211-24, 39, and 40 thru 43.
Design Parameters: The building will be located on the south side of the future South Main Street
within the center, at the southerly terminus of the Town Green (the building's north entrance is
aligned with the Town Green). There are vast parking fields to the south, smaller parking lots on the
east and west sides of the building, and on-street parallel parking along the north side of the building
on South Main Street. All four sides of the building will have pedestrian entrances all of which utilize
glass, colored stucco, decorative cornice work, and horizontal change of building plane to prove
visual interest and a sense of arrival. Also, all of the entrances will have double door foyers. There
is a truck loading dock proposed on the southeast corner of the building. The dock area is actually
tucked under the second floor and a screen wall that appears to continue the first floor along the
south elevation is provided in order to conceal the existence of the loading dock. Finally, the entire
perimeter of the building is proposed to be at the same grade level so that customers do not have to
go up or down steps.
Planning Commission Workshop: On January 22, 2003, the applicant had a Workshop with the
Planning Commission to review project design. The Commission discussed areas of concern
• including variation in colors and materials, use of cornices, reducing the boxy appearance of the
building, screening and buffering the loading dock from visual intrusion as well as seasonal winds
out of the east and that the design of the building and surrounding landscaping should be sensitive
to the pedestrian experience. The attached revised drawings are in response to Commission input.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Secondarv Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Provide enhanced paving treatment in the driveway entrance to the loading dock area at the
southeast corner of the building. The intent is to maintain a high level of visual interest
relative to the pedestrian experience as customers walk by the dock area.
2. Provide tree planting staggered relative to the street tree planting within the planters located
adjacent to the building so as to provide a strong tree canopy over the side walks on the
east, west, and south sides.
3. Consider providing additional areas of glazing along the base of the building to act as
display windows to further enhance visual interest (similar to the glass displays at entry
points.
4. Provide dense shrub planting (more than 3-foot on center) along the base of the building to
act as a "living" wainscoting since there is only colored stucco proposed for the building
base.
• 5. Provide decorative enhanced paving across private streets connecting each entry to parking
lots.
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2003-00237 - ROBINSON'S MAY
April 15, 2003
• Page 2
A bus bay turnout is proposed on the north side of the private street east Robinson's May.
This bay will eliminate landscaping that would otherwise provide a buffer for the loading area
at the southeast corner of the building. Staff suggests relocating to the west of Robinson's
May.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
Roof equipment and ground-mounted equipment shall be fully screened from public view,
including passers by on the I-15 Freeway. Should screening be necessary, it shall be of the
highest architectural and visual quality to match building architecture.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend
approval of the subject Development Review application subject to the above comments and any
other comments the Committee may have.
Attachment: Planning Commission Minutes dated January 22, 2003
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present:
• Staff Planner: Brent Le Count
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
• PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjoumed Meeting
January 22, 2003 (6:00 p.m.)
Chairman McNiel called the Adjoumed Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission to order at 6:05 p.m. The meeting was held in the Conference Room 2002 at Rancho
Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman
McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Peter Tolstoy
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, Kevin Ennis,
Assistant City Attorney; Jan Reynolds, RDA Analyst; Joe Stofa, Associate
Engineer
ATTENDEES: Victor Dubrowski, Code Consultants, Inc.; Donald Linane, Linane/brews
Architects; Michael Grandy, May Design & Construction; Randy Rathert, May
Design & Construction; Rebecca Kounoa, Kvell Corcoran Assocates; Robert
Corcoran, Kvell Corcoran Associates
•fflf
• NEW BUSINESS
A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2003-00025 - ROBINSON'S MAY - A request to review the
design of a proposed, 180,000 square foot, two story department store on 2.5 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.
Randy Rathert, May Design & Construction, introduced members of their design team that were
present. He explained that the building being presented is a new design for Robinsons-May and
different from any other concept used in California. He said the building has been designed with a
more open floor plan, with the interior similar to their Irvine store, but more upscale.
Robert Corcoran, Project Concept Design Architect, explained the design concept as reminiscent of
the '50s era with colors that relate to the area. He indicated they began the design process with a
clean sheet of paper; however, the building has similarities to the Irvine store, which was also
designed by their firm. He explained that there are entrances on four sides of the building and the
building is architecturally simple, with complex entries, and has been designed to orient both to the
freeway and plaza areas. The developer showed a perspective of the two, low-rise (35 foot high)
buildings proposed to be constructed by Forest City and attached to the plaza-oriented entrance. He
reviewed the loading area at the southeast comer of the building and explained that deliveries occur
at night. He indicated the loading bay would completely enclose the trailers from view because of
the tuck-under design. He stated each of the four entrances is designed with canvas canopies. He
commented that the loading dock would not have doors because if it is enclosed, it encroaches into
„their~aflowa"ble lease. square footage. Mr. Corcoran indicated that all roof equipment would be
• completely screened by a "penthouse" element designed to match the main building. He said the
penthouse will not be visible, or will be barely visible, from most vantage points within Victoria
Gardens, but will be visible from the I-15 Freeway. He explained that they tried to bring the building
into pedestrian scale through the use of glass to bring the views into and out of the store. He
commented that the different levels draw you into the building.
Brad Buller, City Planner, identified the following areas of concern from staffs perception:
Pedestrian orientation. There are two key north-south passages past the Robinsons-May
store from the parking lot. Pedestrian scale along those walls is a concern.
The loading dock should be enhanced to disguise it from the pedestrians. He suggested
decorative pavement across the driveway.
Main entry decorative pavement should extend across the drive aisle.
Cornice articulation or comer treatments should be enhanced.
Mr. Buller distributed color photographs of the Irvine store to the Commissioners.
Mr. Rathert explained that legally they are limited on their total floor area and are at the maximum
allowed; therefore, they cannot put a door across the entrance of loading dock.
Commissioner Stewart stated she would like to see an enhanced cornice treatment, such as shown
forthe Irvine store. She indicated that better color banding is needed similar to the Irvine store. She
liked the glass entries, but would also like to eliminate the canvas awnings and replace them with a
more permanent structure. She felt the entrance should have more movement.
Commissioner Tolstoy felt that an enhanced cornice treatment is needed. He agreed that awnings
are not Tong-lived in this area because of the high winds. He suggested they consider a curved
lattice as replacement. He liked the'S0s era department store design concept. He felt that the east
and west elevations are not pedestrian friendly. He suggested exploring landscaping to soften (both
• height and width) of the building. He stated that there is not enough articulation on the building. He
said he would like some type of lattice/door treatment on the loading dock to be considered.
Commissioner Macias said he agreed with all of the comments made byCommissioners Stewart and
Tolstoy. He liked the Irvine photos presented. He agreed that the awnings would not work. He felt
the colors are bland and suggested more earth tones be used. He expressed concern with the I-15
corridor view and the view of the penthouse. He added that the building comers need treatment. He
commented that the use of Palm trees could be considered. He concurred that the design needs
rethinking to improve the pedestrian orientation.
Chairman McNiel felt the design is ill fitting with Victoria Gardens. He described the design as a big
square that is too mundane. He noted that he understands the sheer mass makes it difficult but was
not convinced that the Irvine design is necessarily the answer. He suggested that color and texture
could help. He asked whether lighting sconces would be provided along the sides of the building.
Mr. Corcoran explained that their intent is to have light fixtures around the building.
Chairman McNiel explained that he is looking for something that makes this a pedestrian friendly
place. He felt that the south, east, and west elevations are not pedestrian friendly. He believed the
loading dock is a concern and could become a problem in the wind; therefore, some treatment or
door needs to be there. He added that the building entries are not attractive and appear utilitarian.
Mr. Buller suggested that the developer might want to protect the loading space because it is
exposed to high winds. He thought they may want to consider alternatives rather than scoring the
building horizontally. He suggested tying the penthouse walls into the entrance element to give it
more exposure. Mr. Buller suggested that the developer rework the long walls and entryways. He
suggested they come back with details on lighting (and night lighting) along with the details of the
PC Adjourned Minutes -2- January 22, 2003
architectural elements. He added that they should show the types of metal, texture, etc. proposed.
He added that attention should be given to the loading dock details.
• r r r r r
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Macias, carried 40, to adjourn. The Planning Commission
adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
B d er
ary
•
•
PC Adjourned Minutes -3- January 22, 2003
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
• 7:30 p.m. Rick Fisher April 15, 2003
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00072 -LISA KELLY-A
development review for seven industrial buildings ranging is size from 5,586 square feet to
28,000 square feet on 10.5 acres in the General Industrial District (Subarea 4) located on the east
side of Archibald Avenue between 6th Street and 4th Street - APN: 0210-071-52.
Design Parameters: The site is located along Archibald Avenue that is designated as a Special
Boulevard bythe General Plan and Industrial Districts. The seven proposed buildings will be part of
an existing industrial park that was built over 20 years ago. There are nine existing industrial
buildings in the park. The proposed buildings will fill in the remaining vacant lots. Buildings 1
through 5 will be used primarilyfor manufacturing and warehouse activities. Buildings 6 and 7 front
on Archibald Avenue and will be used primarily for office type uses. The internal streets are private:
Crescent Drive, London Way, Hawthorne Drive, and Dover Way. The loading areas have been
located in the rear of the buildings to reduce their visibility from these streets. The loading areas of
Buildings 3 and 4 will be visible from London W ay. However, London W ay is not a heavily traveled
street and the visual impact is not considered significant. Buildings 3, 4, and 5 will have dock high
loading doors for semi-trucks. Adequate turn radius dimensions have been provided to allow
maneuvering for these trucks. A railroad spur track is located behind these buildings but loading
doors for rail service have not been provided because of the nature of the proposed tenants. All of
the other buildings will have surface level loading doors.
Building materials include concrete tilt up walls, horizontal reveal lines, painted accent colors, foam
• cornices, slate stone accent diamonds, and aluminum fixed glass windows and doors. The site is
surrounded by industrial development to the north, south, and east, with single- family homes to the
west across Archibald Avenue. Each building will have its own outdoor eating area for employees.
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. Building Elevations (Building 6): Provide greater vertical and horizontal articulation to
Building 6 facing Archibald Avenue. The goal is to provide an office appearance, break-up
long linear building mass, and enhance streetscape along this special boulevard. Explore
alternative building footprints.
2. Building Elevations: Section 17.30.060) of the Development Code states that the built
environment within the Industrial area shall contain a "high quality, timeless building design,
which includes building entry focal point, sufficient articulations to the building planes, and
the creative use of building materials." Accent treatment, such as changes in exterior
materials and textures is required. A minimum of two primary building materials shall be
used. The recommended primary and secondary building materials are as follows:
a. Primary materials -concrete, sandblasted concrete, textured block, brick, granite, and
marble.
b. Secondary materials- glass, tile, polished brass or copper, brick, concrete, painted
• metal elements, and painted accent stripes.
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2003-00072 -LISA KELLY
April 15, 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"
Provide greater vertical and horizontal articulation to Building 6 facing Archibald Avenue.
The goal is to provide an office appearance, break-up long, linear building mass, and
enhance streetscape along this special boulevard. Explore alternative building footprints.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
Paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main building colors.
2. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles,
entrances and exits shall be striped per city standards.
3. Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for
commercial, office, and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area.
4. A minimum of 20 percent of trees planted within industrial projects shall be specimen size
trees, 24-inch box or larger.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised and brought back for further
• review.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present:
Staff Planner: Rick Fisher
u
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:50 p.m. Debra Meier April 15, 2003
DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00076 - FUSCOE ENGINEERING - A proposed
Wickes Furniture Store of 40,000 square feet on 4.87 acres of land in the Industrial Park (Subarea
12) District located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Buffalo Avenue. APN: 0229-263-78
and 79.
Design Parameters: The proposed Wickes Furniture store is proposed at the northeast corner of
4th Street and Buffalo Avenue, on the parcels that were remnants of the COSTCO development. All
of the perimeter landscaping and street improvements have previously been completed. The
applicant proposes a 40,000 square foot store and associated parking on two existing parcels of
land totaling 4.87 acres.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Building Elevations:
a) Right Side Elevation (north): Extend the storefront glass approximately 32 additional
feet toward the west. This will enhance the most visible portion of the elevation as
viewed from the driveway and north parking lot.
b) Right Side Elevation (north): Identify the 6-foot screen wall that is proposed along the
northern portion of the service and loading area.
• c) Rear Elevation (West): Extend the storefront glass on either side of the faux entry in a
similar floor-to-ceiling fashion as used on the other elevations.
Conceptual Landscape Plan
a) Replace sidewalk along South Elevation with landscaping. There are no building
entrances on that elevation.
b) The "island" at the northeast corner of the building should be landscaped.
c) The handicapped parking area should be decorative hardscape as was used in front of
COSTCO; in addition, the walkway along the front of the building shall be decorative
hardscape to match that which was established by COSTCO.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee discuss and resolve the items
noted above with the applicant prior to being forwarded for Planning Commission consideration.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present:
Staff Planner: Debra Meier
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
• 8:10 p.m. Emily Wimer April 15, 2003
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2002-00864 - CARNEY
ARCHITECTS - A request to develop two single-story industrial buildings totaling 45,106 square feet
on 3.5 acres of land located, at the northwest corner of White Oak Avenue and Elm Avenue in
Subarea 7 of the Industrial District - APN: 0208-352-92.
Design Parameters: The project is located on the west side of White Oak Avenue north of Elm
Avenue abutting the former Heritage Hospital. The proposal is for two 2-story multi-tenant industrial
buildings. A full drive is located at the south end of the site and a right turn only driveway is located
at the northern most point of the site with access on W hite Oak Avenue. A design constraint is that
the site is on the inside curve of W hite Oak Avenue; hence, there are traffic line-of-sight restrictions
that affect most of the frontage. No berming, walls, shrub hedges, or monument signs will be
allowed within line-of-sight area. The project is over-parked by 59 spaces; therefore, some of the
suites could be office rather than industrial. Office is a permitted use in this zone.
Primary materials for the buildings are painted concrete tilt-up with brick veneer. Accent materials
include cornice trim brick treated diamond features, and two-toned reveal lines.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
• Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Architecture -Southeast corner of Building "B" should add glass to match northeast corner
of Building "B."
2. Provide sidewalk connection out to the W hite Oak Avenue frontage on both north and south
sides of the formal pedestrian entryway.
3.. A 5-foot sidewalk along westerly project boundary should be adjacent to parking spaces,
with 1-foot vehicle overhang to maximize planter space for proposed project and existing
hospital to the west.
4. Wrap landscaping planters around both buildings as far as possible for screening purposes.
Relocate roll-up door at northeast corner of Building "B" to not interfere with planter. At
southeast corner of Building "B" replace sidewalk/handicap ramp with landscape planter.
This necessitates adding handicap parking spaces west of Building "B."
Policv issues:
1. All roll-up doors and man doors shall be painted to match the building.
2. Outdoor eating area shall include tables, seating, trash receptacle, as well as shade in the
form of trellis feature and/or shade trees.
3. Downspouts for the building shall be located in the rear loading/unloading area only unless
internal to walls.
• Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee approve the project subject to the
above recommendations.
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2002-00864 - CARNEY ARCHITECTS
April 15, 2003
• Page 2
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present:
Staff Planner: Emily Wimer
n
U
•
• DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES
TUESDAY APRIL 1, 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
CONSENT CALENDAR
Dan Coleman
The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typicallythey 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.
(Nancy) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRCDR01-04 MODIFICATION NO. 2 -AMERICAN
BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to review the design edges for the
"Wetland," and the design guidelines for multi-family development within the Victoria
Arbors Master Plan.
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. Nancy Fong April 1, 2003
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRCDR01-04 MODIFICATION NO. 2 -AMERICAN BEAUTY
DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to review the design edges for the "Wetland," and the design
guidelines for multi-family development within the Victoria Arbors Master Plan.
Background: Victoria Arbors was approved in March of 2001. A condition of approval required that
the design edge around the "wetland" be subject to Design Review Committee review. Attached is a
map showing the design edges for the wetland and the park, which was prepared by the Architerra
Design Group. Also, the developer proposes to modify the approved Master Plan by adding design
guidelines for multi-family development. Also attached are texts and graphic changes for adding
multi-family design guidelines.
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:
Wetland Edges: The plan shows that there is a 15-foot buffer zone around the actual
wetland. W ithin this buffer zone is a 5- to 6-foot high tubular steel fence, a 3:1 landscaped
slope, and a 4-foot wide gravel path for maintenance. The landscape species within the
buffer zone are of non-invasive types. Please make the following additions:
• a. Add a hardscape area where pedestrians can sit or stand and view the "wetland." This
area should have benches and a river rock or stacked stone pedestal with a narrative
plaque that describe the wetland. The narrative plaque is subjected to City Planner
review and approval.
b. Include only passive open space between sidewalk and wetland. Relocate
picnic/barbeque areas to the opposite side of the sidewalk. Picnic areas could result in
trash in wetland.
c. Provide bicycle racks
2. Multi-Family Design Guidelines: The developer indicated that there are future plans for
developing a portion of this block as apartments, which is the reason for adding multi-family
design guidelines for the Victoria Arbors Master Plan. The Design Guidelines are shown on
pages 16 and 17 of Exhibit "A." Development Standards and Design Guidelines in the
Development Code will apply tomulti-family development within the Victoria Arbors Master
Plan. The proposed additional design guidelines will augment the architectural character
and quality within the master plan area as follows:
a. Extend the greenway trail/paseos westward to the planned future regional trail along
Day Creek Channel. (Page 3 of Exhibit "A.")
Extend the greenway trail/paseos from Church Street south to the Foothill Boulevard.
(Page 3 of Exhibit "A.")
• c. The photo at the bottom of page 16 of Exhibit "A" should be replaced with a design
that better represents the Mediterranean style with rich architectural elements,
balconies and trellis, etc.
DRC AGENDA
DRCDR01-04-AMERICAN BEAUTY DEV. CO.
April 1, 2003
• Page 2
3. Mixed Use Commercial Design Guidelines: The developer proposes to add design
guidelines intended for the commercial block at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard
and Day Creek Boulevard. The design guidelines express the architectural vocabulary as
winery theme as shown in pages 21 through 23 of Exhibit "A." Staff believes that the winery
theme is appropriate and that it would not upstage or conflict with architecture from the
regional center.
Staff recommendation: Staff recommends the Design Review Committee approve the wetland
design edges, the multi-family and the commercial design guidelines with conditions as listed above.
Attachments: Map
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Nancy Fong
The Committee recommended approval subject to the following conditions:
Wetland Edges:
• a. Add a hardscape area where pedestrian can sit or stand and view the "wetland." This
area should have benches and a river rock or stacked stones pedestal with a narrative
plaque that describe the wetland. The narrative plaque is subject to City Planner
review and approval.
b. Include only passive open space between sidewalk and wetland. Relocate
picnic/barbeque areas to the opposite side of the sidewalk. Picnic areas could result in
trash in wetland.
c. Provide bicycle racks.
d. Add a gate for the maintenance path at the southeast side of the wetland.
Multi-Family Design Guidelines: At the meeting the applicant presented to the
Committee the revised master plan that addressed the greenway trail/paseos and the
photo design for multi-family housing product. The Committee reviewed and
recommended approval with the following conditions:
a. Provide buffering between single-family and multi-family development, between
commercial and residential development.
b. The design for multi-family development,should not have buildings that line up along
the streets or oriented in a rigid pattern. The site design should be of campus like
setting with generous open space.
•
• ® i; ~~
^ '^ '
. _______
_ • ~_
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~~ Base Line Road '
^ ~1: ~ ~
-~ ®~ d
_~• '^ `1
s m°'~........•• a
Y~^ ,~~
~ U__,,^ m'
1 ~7~ 3'
o' ~ • ••• w
^ • • '
• •
• '• '
1: ~ 1
1 ~
~' ~``~'.s,, ~
~ ......
^ ~ ' Chur~g! eet ~'
1 '
I •~~ ' '
'~ ' '
^
': ~• • '
~ ': '
~ ': '
^ '
^ 1^ ~ '
'~
.~~~~ ~; . Roads
~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ^^~I Victoria Park Lane Trail
® ~ ~ victoria Loop ^^^~ Day Creek Regional Trail '
~ ^ ^ ^ ~ Day Creek Blvd. Senic 8~
~; li ~ Recreation Corridor Trail
^ f ^ ••••• Local Trail Connections
®,~
g!.. Foothill Boulevard
~ ~ COMMUNITY STRUCTURE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
• APRIL 1, 2003
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Bra Buller
Secretary
•
•
• DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY APRIL 1, 2003 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Larry McNiel Pam Stewart
Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias
CONSENT CALENDAR
Dan Coleman
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.
(Nancy) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRCDR01-04 MODIFICATION NO. 2 -AMERICAN
BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to review the design edges for the
"Wetland,"and the design guidelines for multi-family development within the Victoria
Arbors Master Plan.
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 March 27, 2003 at least 72 hours prior to the
meeting perGovemment Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic C ter D 'v ,Rancho Cucamonga.
o c5w . aC
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
• 7:00 p.m. Nancy Fong April 1, 2003
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRCDROI-04 MODIFICATION NO. 2 -AMERICAN BEAUTY
DEVELOPMENT CO. - A request to review the design edges for the "Wetland," and the design
guidelines for multi-family development within the Victoria Arbors Master Plan.
Background: Victoria Arbors was approved in March of 2001. A condition of approval required that
the design edge around the "wetland" be subject to Design Review Committee review. Attached is a
map showing the design edges for the wetland and the park, which was prepared by the Architerra
Design Group. Also, the developer proposes to modify the approved Master Plan by adding design
guidelines for multi-family development. Also attached are texts and graphic changes for adding
multi-family design guidelines.
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:
Wetland Edges: The plan shows that there is a 15-foot buffer zone around the actual
wetland. Within this buffer zone is a 5- to 6-foot high tubular steel fence, a 3:1 landscaped
slope, and a 4-foot wide gravel path for maintenance. The landscape species within the
buffer zone are of non-invasive types. Please make the following additions:
• a. Add a hardscape area where pedestrians can sit or stand and view the "wetland." This
area should have benches and a river rock or stacked stone pedestal with a narrative
plaque that describe the wetland. The narrative plaque is subjected to City Planner
review and approval.
b. Include only passive open space between sidewalk and wetland. Relocate
picnic/barbeque areas to the opposite side of the sidewalk. Picnic areas could result in
trash in wetland.
c. Provide bicycle racks.
2. Multi-Family Design Guidelines: The developer indicated that there are future plans for
developing a portion of this block as apartments, which is the reason for adding multi-family
design guidelines forthe Victoria Arbors Master Plan. The Design Guidelines are shown on
pages 16 and 17 of Exhibit "A." Development Standards and Design Guidelines in the
Development Code will apply tomulti-family development within the Victoria Arbors Master
Plan. The proposed additional design guidelines will augment the architectural character
and quality within the master plan area as follows:
a. Extend the greenway trail/paseos westward to the planned future regional trail along
Day Creek Channel. (Page 3 of Exhibit "A.")
b. Extend the greenway trail/paseos from Church Street south to the Foothill Boulevard.
(Page 3 of Exhibit "A.")
• c. The photo at the bottom of page 16 of Exhibit "A" should be replaced with a design
that better represents the Mediterranean style with rich architectural elements,
balconies and trellis, etc.
DRC AGENDA
DRCDR01-04 -AMERICAN BEAUTY DEV. CO.
April 1, 2003
• Page 2
3. Mixed Use Commercial Design Guidelines: The developer proposes to add design
guidelines intended for the commercial block at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard
and Day Creek Boulevard. The design guidelines express the architectural vocabulary as
winery theme as shown in pages 21 through 23 of Exhibit "A." Staff believes that the winery
theme is appropriate and that it would not upstage or conflict with architecture from the
regional center.
Staff recommendation: Staff recommends the Design Review Committee approve the wetland
design edges, the multi-family and the commercial design guidelines with conditions as listed above.
Attachments: Map
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present:
Staff Planner: Nancy Fong
•
•
1
^
^
1
^
^
i
~~~~~~
I;
~^
^
I'
^
^^
1
^1 1
~ 1
____~` 1 1
~~_~ Base Line Road 1
~ 1^ Y11L~~
t0 ^ f~7lfl!ll ~f' 1- ^
~1: ~ :1 ~1
• ~ ~1
LI^ C
U ^ ~ ~1
^ ` 31
~ 1
1 ~..........•• ~ '
^ 1
1^ ~ J~~I1`JJJ 1
^ 1
^ ~ 1
^ 1
1• 1 1
1^ 1
~~~fi i~ W1ii'YiriY'i~iii W'~i~.~ 1
~ ~, 1
M t ~•~,_
• 1
^
^ '^
•~: -~
~.
.~
^ '^ - • e
~ ^
~ li
• 1'
^ ^
^ ^
^ I.
^
^
^ ^
~ 1 ^ Victoria Loop
~~
1^
~ ^
i^
^,
I
1
I
I
I
Roads
ChUr~g~ eir
1
1
1
1
1
^^^~ Victoria Park Lane Trail
^^^~ Day Creek Regional Trail
^ ^ ^ ~ Day Creek Blvd. Senic &
Recreation Corridor Trail
••••• Local Trail Connections
~`.' Foothill Boulevard
~ 1 COMMUNITY STRUCTURE
~ -
^ Exhibit S
^
~ ~ , COMMUNITY STRUCTURE & DESIGN CONCEPTS CHAPTER 2 3
•