No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004/07/20 - Agenda PacketDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING i~ TUESDAY JULY 20, 2004 7:00 P.M. • Commie tiers Altern CONSENT CALENDAR RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ACTION AGENDA Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Nancy Fong Rich Macias Richard Fletcher Larry McNiel The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. 7:00 p.m. (Donald/gene) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16726 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES, L.P. - A residential subdivision of 15single-family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the northwest corner of Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 0225-101-34. Related File: Development Review DRC2004-00276. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00276 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES, L.P. -The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 15single-family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the northwest corner of Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 0225-101-34. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16726. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. • 7:05 p.m. (Ruben/Joe) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00297 - MOHAMMAD ALI - A request for the construction of asingle-family residence in the Very Low District (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) and Hillside Overlay District, located at Lot 23 of Tract 12650, 11002 Deer Canyon Drive -APN: 1074-501-10. 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. • DRC ACTION AGENDA July 20, 2004 Page 2 7:10 p.m. (Emily/Shelley) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00290 -CALVARY CHAPEL -The proposed development of a 17,733 square foot multi-purpose building and master plan for future 12,500 square feet worship center for Calvary Chapel located on 4.10 acres of land in the Terra Vista Business Park in the Office Park (OP) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located on the west side of Elm Street between Town Center Drive and Church Street-APN: 1077-422-14. 8:00 p.m (Brad) REVIEW OF ROUTE 66 OUTPARCEL DESING -VICTORIA GARDENS REGIONAL CENTER -The review of Design Guidelines for Route 66 Out- parcelswithin the Victoria Gardens Malls in the Mixed Use District of the Victoria Community Plan, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Boulevard -APN: 0227-201-35. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Donald Granger July 20, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16726 -YOUNG CALI FORNIA HOMES, L.P. - A residential subdivision of 15single-family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the northwest corner of Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard - APN:0225-101-34. Related File: Development Review DRC2004-00276. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00276 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES, L.P. -The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 15 single-family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the northwest corner of Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 0225-101-34. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16726. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Background: The applicant is proposing a 15-lot subdivision with house product (Monterra 4). The homes have been designed with four architectural styles (Bungalow, Country, Ranch, and Santa Barbara), and will include a total of four floor plans. Three of the plans include front porches, and • the remaining plan has an option for aside-on garage. The applicant is proposing the same house product that was previously approved by the Planning Commission on September 11, 2002, for Tracts 14493-1 and 14522 (Development Review DRC2002-00442), and forTentative Tract 16306 (Development Review DRC2002-01029), which was approved on June 25, 2003. Tracts 14493-1 and 14522 (Monterra 1) are located on the west side of Day Creek Boulevard, on the north and south sides of Vintage Drive. Tract 16306 (Monterra 2) is located at the southwest corner of Vintage Drive and Day Creek Boulevard. Monterra 3 (Development Review DRC2003-01186), located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street, was reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee on May 18, 2004. The model homes for Tracts 14493-1 and 14522 will serve as the model homes for the proposed project. Design Parameters: The site falls within the Rancho Etiwanda planned development, a 1,238 residential unit development approved by the County in May 1991, and, subsequently, annexed in to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project site was rough graded when the Rancho Etiwanda area was mass graded and infrastructure was installed. The site is bordered bysingle-family homes to the north and west, and future single-family homes, to the south, across Banyan Street. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. The applicant has worked diligently with staff to resolve all 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. DRC ACTION COMMENTS DRC2004-00276 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES, L.P. • July 20, 2004 Page 2 The decks should be a standard feature, not an option, for all lots that have reverse frontage on Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard. The decks shall have variation including, but not limited to, in the railing, deck sizes, materials, and supporting posts. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. All interior private yard slopes are required to be landscaped with ground cover, shrubs, and one tree per 150 square feet of area. River rock shall be real, or native fieldstone maybe used. Stone veneers are not permitted. 3. Provide decorative pavement on driveways. Decorative driveways shall have variation throughout the subdivision. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that with the Secondary Issue addressed, the Committee recommend approval to the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Fong, McPhail • Staff Planner: Donald Granger The Committee reviewed the project and recommend approval, subject to policy issues and the following conditions: The decks shall be a standard feature, not an option, for all lots that have reverse frontage on Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard. The supporting structural members on the decks shall match the secondary materials on the houses (river rock, stacked stone, brick, etc.). The brick work, stacked stone, or river rock shall be carried up to the deck flooring. The decks shall also have upgraded treatment and variation including, but not limited, to plexiglass or covered elements with exposed trusses. Final design shall be subject to City Planner review and approval. The rear elevations on houses that have reverse frontages on Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard shall be substantially enhanced to provide visual interest. Enhancement shall include the addition of several elements including, but not limited to, greater use of divided light windows, corbels, shutters, potshelfs, and keystones in the window surrounds. Final design shall be subject to City Planner review and approval. n U • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:05 p.m. Ruben Warren July 20, 2004 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00297-MOHAMMADALI-A requestfortheconstructionofa single-family residence in the Very Low District (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) and Hillside Overlay District, located at Lot 23 of Tract 12650, 11002 Deer Canyon Drive - APN: 1074-501-10. Design Parameters: The site is within the Hillside Overlay District and is part of the Deer Creek neighbor. The applicant is proposing to construct a custom home approximately 8,900 square feet. The house is a two-story with a tuck under 4-space garage. Because of the tuck-under garage, the total cut was 10 feet, which exceed the maximum 5 feet, where it triggers Planning Commission review. 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. There are no major design issues with the design of the house. 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 trees along the east property boundary. 2. Provide trees at the east side of the front yard. 3. Provide larger size trees to the front of the house. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project to the Committee. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Fong, McPhail Staff Planner: Ruben Warren The Committee reviewed the proposed project and recommended approval. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Emily W imer July 20, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00290 - CALVARYCHAPEL -The proposed development of a 17,733 square foot multi-purpose building and master plan for future 12,500 square feet worship center for Calvary Chapel located on 4.10 acres of land in the Terra Vista Business Park in the Office Park (OP) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located on the west side of Elm Street between Town Center Drive and Church Street - APN: 1077-422-14. Design Parameters: The applicant is requesting approval of the elevations for the worship center only. As proposed, the building is comprised of the same materials as the first building, which has recently been completed. The building will have a trellis feature, which extends from the worship center to the second building, for a gathering area after services. The Business Park currently includes such businesses as Madole and Associates, Central School District, Mountain Faith Community Church, San Joaquin Valley College, and additional medical and professional offices. The completion of the final phase of Calvary Chapel will complete the development of the Terra Vista Business Park. • Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The applicant has worked diligently on the first phase to complete the improvements to prevent this proposed construction from disrupting other portions of the site. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. The gable shape roof at the north elevation, which faces Church Street, should be consistent with the design of the Calvary Church's Multi-Purpose building (Exhibit "B"). 2. The pop-out wall with parapet roof should be curved consistent with the design of the Multi- Purposebuilding and those within the business park. The recessed area with the door should have the same consistency in design as in the Multi-Purpose building. 3. The trellis feature shall be completed to original specifications shown in the working drawings of Phase I construction. 4. All walkways from the corners of Elm Avenue/Town Center Drive and Elm Avenue/Church Street shall be continued across the drive aisle using decorative/colored pavement. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee approve Phase II of the • development with the above changes. Attachments DRC ACTION COMMENTS DRC2002-00290 -CALVARY CHAPEL July 20, 2004 • Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Fong, McPhail Staff Planner: Emily Wimer The applicant revised the elevations to incorporate staff comments. The gable shaped roof was modified at the north elevation to be consistent with the Multi-Purpose building on-site. The pop-out wall was raised 12 inches and curved to be consistent as well. Lastly, the recessed area with two doors on the west and east elevations were modified by the Committee to have a rectangular shape. The applicant also asked the Committee if the trellis feature could be modified to incorporate a design which was less costly. The Committee members agreed that the street view of the trellis should look similarto the approved, however, the interior portion could be modified to incorporate a trellis with undulation and movement. The Committee asked that the applicant work with staff to provide quality design, and recommend approval subject to staff support of a new trellis design. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • • 7:30 p.m. Brad Buller July 20, 2004 REVIEW OF ROUTE 66 OUTPARCEL DESING -VICTORIA GARDENS REGIONAL CENTER - The review of Design Guidelines for Route 66Out-parcels within the Victoria Gardens Malls in the Mixed Use District of the Victoria Community Plan, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Boulevard -APN: 0227-201-35. Design Parameters: On April 20, 2004, the Design Review Committee reviewed the Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Design Guidelines forthe Route 66Out-parcels. The Committee conceptually approved the Site Plan and Landscape Plan with the conditions that the applicant worked with staff to resolve all the identified issues. The Committee also directed the applicant to work with staff in revising the Design Guidelines to provide more detailed design criteria for the building elevations. Attached is a copy of the April 20, 2004, Design Review Committee action comments. The applicant has been working with staff and submitted the revised Deign Guidelines. Staff is of the opinion that the revised Design Guidelines has achieved the level of acceptable design criteria. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Design Guidelines will be available at the meeting and staff will present an oral report. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Fong, McPhail Staff Planner: Brad Buller The Committee reviewed the proposed Design Guidelines and determined that there are sufficient design criteria to guide the design of building elevations and, therefore, recommended approval. 1._J • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS JULY 20, 2004 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, `~_ Br uller Secretary n U • •l DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY JULY 20, 2004 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Nancy Fong Alternates: Rich Macias Richard Fletcher Larry McNiel CONSENT CALENDAR 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. (Donald/gene) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16726 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES, L.P. - A residential subdivision of 15single-family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the northwest corner of Banyan • Street and Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 0225-101-34. Related File: Development Review DRC2004-00276. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004- 00276 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES, L.P. -The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 15single-family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the northwest corner of Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 0225-101-34. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16726. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:10 p.m. (Emily/Shelley) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00290 -CALVARY CHAPEL -The proposed development of a 17,733 square foot multi-purpose building and master plan for future 12,500 square feet worship center for Calvary Chapel located on 4.10 acres of land in the Terra • Vista Business Park in the Office Park (OP) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located on the west side of Elm Street between Town Center Drive and Church Street -APN 1077-422-14. DRC AGENDA July 20, 2004 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 I, Melissa Andrewin, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 15, 2004, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. w • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Donald Granger July 20, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16726 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES, L.P. - A residential subdivision of 15single-family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the northwest corner of Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 0225-101-34. Related File: Development Review DRC2004-00276. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00276 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES, L.P. -The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 15 single-family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the northwest corner of Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 0225-101-34. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16726. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration: Background: The applicant is proposing a 15-lot subdivision with house product (Monterra 4). The homes have been designed with four architectural styles (Bungalow, Country, Ranch, and Santa Barbara), and will include a total of four floor plans. Three of the plans include front porches, and • the remaining plan has an option for aside-on garage. The applicant is proposing the same house product that was previously approved by the Planning Commission on September 11, 2002, for Tracts 14493-1 and 14522 (Development Review DRC2002-00442), and for Tentative Tract 16306 (Development Review DRC2002-01029), which was approved on June 25, 2003. Tracts 14493-1 and 14522 (Monterra 1) are located on the west side of Day Creek Boulevard, on the north and south sides of Vintage Drive. Tract 16306 (Monterra 2) is located at the southwest corner of Vintage Drive and Day Creek Boulevard. Monterra 3 (Development Review DRC2003-01186), located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street, was reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee on May 18, 2004. The model homes for Tracts 14493-1 and 14522 will serve as the model homes for the proposed project. Design Parameters: The site falls within the Rancho Etiwanda planned development, a 1,238 residential unit development approved by the County in May 1991, and, subsequently, annexed into the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project site was rough graded when the Rancho Etiwanda area was mass graded and infrastructure was installed. The site is bordered bysingle-family homes to the north and west, and future single-family homes, to the south, across Banyan Street. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. The applicant has worked diligently with staff to resolve all 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. DRC COMMENTS DRC2004-00276-YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES, L.P. July 20, 2004 • Page 2 The decks should be a standard feature, not an option, for all lots that have reverse frontage on Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard. The decks shall have variation including, but not limited to, in the railing, deck sizes, materials, and supporting posts. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. All interior private yard slopes are required to be landscaped with ground cover, shrubs, and one tree per 150 square feet of area. River rock shall be real, or native fieldstone maybe used. Stone veneers are not permitted. Provide decorative pavement on driveways. Decorative driveways shall have variation throughout the subdivision. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that with the Secondary Issue addressed, the Committee recommend approval to the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Donald Granger Members Present: r~ L.I • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Emily W imer July 20, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00290 - CALVARYCHAPEL -The proposed development of a 17,733 square foot multi-purpose building and master plan for future 12,500 square feet worship center for Calvary Chapel located on 4.10 acres of land in the Terra,Vista Business Park in the Office Park (OP) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located on the west side of Elm Street between Town Center Drive and Church Street - APN 1077-422-14. Design Parameters: The applicant is requesting approval of the elevations for the worship center only. As proposed, the building is comprised of the same materials as the first building, which has recently been completed. The building will have a trellis feature, which extends from the worship center to the second building, for a gathering area after services. The Business Park currently includes such businesses as Madole and Associates, Central School District, Mountain Faith Community Church, San Joaquin Valley College, and additional medical and professional offices. The completion of the final phase of Calvary Chapel will complete the development of the Terra Vista Business Park. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee • discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The applicant has worked diligently on the first phase to complete the improvements to prevent this proposed construction from disrupting other portions of the site. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: The gable shape roof at the north elevation, which faces Church Street, should be consistent with the design of the Calvary Church's Multi-Purpose building (Exhibit "B"). 2. The pop-out wall with parapet roof should be curved consistent with the design of the Multi- Purposebuilding and those within the business park. The recessed area with the door should have the same consistency in design as in the Multi-Purpose building. 3. The trellis feature shall be completed to original specifications shown in the working drawings of Phase I construction. 4. All walkways from the corners of Elm Avenue/Town Center Drive and Elm Avenue/Church Street shall be continued across the drive aisle using decorative/colored pavement. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee approve Phase II of the • development with the above changes. Attachments DRC COMMENTS DRC2002-00290 -CALVARY CHAPEL July 20, 2004 • Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: EmilyWimer Members Present: L~ C~ • C N W S F a 6 l7 Z N X W 2 r J N ~+ ZF W Z aW Sq L7 N S~ S Y ^ J Z H W Z r A W Z 4 Q ~ W > S R' z WN Z f 6 °d l7 Z h N X w J a z W A W C T n w z W O S J WA S v ~ ~T Y K 6 a N N W Z N J m Q pYp N 6 u .. a z> w ~6 U Ny' r ~K W XW 4 Wr o i V V J J G ~O Z ~~ a .a a' 0 WWNZZ F~6 NJd e .~~ E a r ,~01 ~~ i ? ~~ J ~ I ee ~~:sii ii g? a~:;ll II .....p ~ ii asss,R ._ 9 sass: a __ ~ I I i I 6~~1 ° III ~ i ~~6 i ~ ~~lii II~ ~~~iii!!~; .I ~i~liil~~ • ~~ ,~I ~ .~, ;,~ ~~~ a :. L ~I .~ ~~ • 3~ • i s a 3 Y F i i~ pe i ' 9 1 {pC i 1 € ~E'E S9~9 yy b66 { 6F 3 B C ~ [r{ A ~yiy p 5~ ~ j F 'i ~~ 3 f ~ ~E~ i c~ :~ ii s ~ s• g(@ p~ F , i 8 ~ 3,' ~ ~ oe6 g~ ~p ~~ ~~ ~~ ~9 ~~ pF i9~ i i! i~ 7 g! A3 ~ile ~ 33 `~ 4I tl~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 o qo o a o© v S r 2~ i ~~! ~~~ n • ~' C mittee Members: Alternates: CONSENT CALENDAR DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY JULY 6, 2004 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ACTION AGENDA Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Nancy Fong Rich Macias Richard Fletcher Larry McNiel The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. 7:00 p.m. (Doug/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL• ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16769- HARMA MAGHAKIAN -The proposed subdivision of 1.46 acres of land into five parcels in the General Industrial District (Subareal), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street -APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Development Review DRC2001-00154 and Variance DRC2001-00155. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00154 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN - A request to construct three light industrial buildings (Building "A" - 6,033 square feet, Building "B" -7,210 square feet, and Building "C" - 7,125 square feet) on 1.46 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street -APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Variance DRC2001-00155 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16769. VARIANCE DRC2001-00155 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN - A request to reduce the building and landscape setbacks along 8th Street and Vineyard Avenue on 1.46 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street -APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Development Review DRC2001-00154 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16769. 7:10 p.m. (Doug/Willie) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16972-1 -JEFFERSON ON FOURTH, L.P. - A request for a condo map related to 467 multi-family apartments on 18.54 acres in the Mixed Use District (Subarea 18), located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Milliken Avenue -APN: 0210-082-47. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-00505. On June 1, 1994, an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055) was prepared and certified by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as a Program Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 18. DRC AGENDA July 6,2004 • Page 2 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. 7:20 p.m. (Vance/gene) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00510 - F. J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES -The development of a commercial center totaling 41,672 square feet on 5.12 net acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4), located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. An alternative site plan consisting of a 13,000 square foot pharmacy is being considered -APN: 0229-311-14 and 15. Related File: Variance DRC2003-00511. VARIANCE DRC2003-00511 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES-A requestto reduce the required building setback from 25 feet to 16 feet along the south property line, the required parking setback from 15 feet to 10 feet for the southwest side of the site, and the required parking and landscape setbacks from 45 feet to 32 feet along the westerly 450 feet of Foothill Boulevard frontage for the development of commercial center totaling 44,011 square feet with up to four buildings on 5.12 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4), located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. APN: 0229-311-14 and 15. • 7:40 p.m. (Emily/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP -A requestto develop a 25,622 square foot warehouse on 1.25 acre of land in the Industrial District (Subarea 13), located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue -APN-229-283-02. 8:00 p.m. (Doug/Cam) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16507- FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS - A request to subdivide 9.57 acres of land into four parcels in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located at 8226 Rochester Avenue -APN: 0229-111-05. Related Files: Development Review DRC2004-00109. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00109 -FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS - A request to develop four industrial buildings totaling 196,995 square feet on 9.57 acres of land in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located at 8226 Rochester Avenue-APN: 0229-111-05. Related Files: Tentative Parcel MapSUBTPM16507. 8:20 p.m. (Doug/Mark) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2004-00379 - FAMOUS DAVES RESTAURANT - A request to develop a 5,888 square foot Famous Dave's Restaurant, with a bar on 1.67 acres of land within General Industrial District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue -APN: 0229-263-48. Related • Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16300. DRC AGENDA July 6,2004 • Page 3 8:40 p.m. (Doug/Mark) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00243-NUTTALL-UCHIZONOASSOCIATES - A request to develop a 7,600 square foot BJ's Restaurant & Brewhouse on 2 acres of land within General Industrial District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue - APN: 0229-263-48. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16300. 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 n LJ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16769 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN -The proposed subdivision of 1.46 acres of land into five parcels in the General Industrial District (Subareas ), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street - APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Development Review DRC2001-00154 and Variance DRC2001-00155. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-001 54 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN - A request to construct three light industrial buildings (Building "A" - 6,033 square feet, Building "B" - 7,210 square feet, and Building "C" - 7,125 square feet) on 1.46 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street - APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Variance DRC2001-00155 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16769. VARIANCE DRC2001-00155 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN - A request to reduce the building and landscape setbacks along 8th Street and Vineyard Avenue on 1.46 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street - APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Development Review DRC2001-00154 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16769. • The applicant addressed issues. Please see attached plans. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fong, McPhail, Stewart Staff Planner: Doug Fenn Staff informed the Committee that the applicant had worked with staff and had revised the development plans that addressed the design issues identified at the February 17, 2004, Design Review Committee meeting. The Committee reviewed the revised project and agreed with staff that the project had addressed all their concerns. The Committee recommended approval to the Planning Commission. n I~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16972-1 -JEFFERSON ON FOURTH, L. P. - A request for a condo map related to 467 multi-family apartments on 18.54 acres in the Mixed Use District (Subarea 18), located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Milliken Avenue - APN: 0210-082-47. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-00505. On June 1, 1994, an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055) was prepared and certified by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as a Program Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 18. The applicant proposes the subdivision of the apartment complex into condo units. Because of the accelerating housing prices in our city and the surrounding communities, this subdivision propose will be beneficial to the community and in the spirit of the city's housing element in our General Plan. Staff believes that this would be an opportunityforfirst time homebuyers with the option of owning a residence. Design Review Committee Action: • Members Present: Fong, McPhail, Stewart Staff Planner: Doug Fenn The Committee recommended approval to the Planning Commission. u • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Vance Pomeroy July 6, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00510 - F. J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES-The developmentofacommercialcentertotaling41,672squarefeeton 5.12 net acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4), located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. An alternative site plan consisting of a 13,000 square foot pharmacy is being considered -APN: 0229-311-14 and 15. Related File: Variance DRC2003-00511. VARIANCE DRC2003-00511 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES- A request to reduce the required building setback from 25 feet to 16 feet along the south property line, the required parking setback from 15 feet to 10 feet for the southwest side of the site, and the required parking and landscape setbacks from 45 feet to 32 feet along the westerly 450 feet of Foothill Boulevard frontage for the development of commercial center totaling 44,011 square feet with up to four buildings on 5.12 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4), located on the southeastcornerof Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. APN: 0229-311-14 and 15. Background/Design Parameters: The project was originally reviewed by the Committee on December 2, 2003. The Committee recommended that the applicant revised the project to address the identified issues as shown in the attached DRC Action Comments (Exhibit "A"). Specifically, the • Committee stated that the project was overbuilt, had inadequate buffering, and was lacking in architectural style for the buildings, as well as in good site design and landscaping. The applicant took the comments to heart and met with staff at various meetings to redesign the project. In redesigning the Site Plan, the applicant eliminated the gas station and the fast food restaurant. On April 20, 2004, the Committee reviewed two alternative Site Plans, Scheme A consisting of a retail building at the corner and Scheme B consisting of a drive-thru drug store at the corner. The Committee, in general, accepted the two Site Plan concepts and also provided further design direction for the elevations of the building and as shown in the attached DRC Action Comments (Exhibit "B"). The applicant has continued to work diligently with staff in addressing all the design issues brought up by the Committee. After working with staff, the site design and architecture of the building have improved substantially and are ready for full review by the Committee. There are three alternate site layout schemes: Scheme A: Provides a 7,379 square-foot retail building at the corner with two retail buildings along the rear and one retail building at the northeast corner of the site, these totaling 33,747 square feet. Scheme B: Provides a 14,550 square foot drive-thru drug store building at the intersection corner with a single 23,008 square foot retail building along the rear and a 6,453 square-foot retail building at the northeast corner of the site. Scheme 61: Similar to Scheme B, except for the orientation of the loading area. • Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. • DRC AGENDA DRC2003-00510 - F.J July 6, 2004 Page 2 HANSHAW PROPERTIES Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Scheme A:' a. Retail Building D should have the same tower element and pedestrian orientation at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue similarto Scheme B and as directed by the City Planner at the various review meetings with the applicant. 2. Scheme B: a. The corner orientation issues for the Activity Center are solved in this scheme. The architectural program with increased setbacks and the use of tower masses and repetition of other design features has made the loading dock addition along Etiwanda Avenue properly blend into the design of the drug store building (Building C) while providing additional screening for the drive-through element at the south end of the store. b. Truck circulation and maneuvering for this scheme is problematic. A redesign of the area south of the building should eliminate the parking, increase the landscape area, and provide sweeping wide-radius curves to allow truck maneuvering in and out of the loading dock. The size of the dock/drive-thru opening at the southwest corner of the building should be revisited, as it may be too narrow for safe maneuvering of the trucks. The parking on the west end of Building B can be retained. 3. Scheme B1: a. No architectural drawings are provided forthis scheme. It would require, by condition of approval, further review of the architecture by the City Planner. b. Repeat the same tower element and pedestrian orientation at the corner similar to Scheme B. Repeat the same architectural treatment for the west elevation similarto Scheme B. c. Truck circulation and maneuvering for this scheme is also problematic. The drive-thru performs double-duty as the truck loading and unloading area. Although delivery schedules are rigorous, this presents a difficult conflict. Even with a redesign of the area south of the building to re-arrange the parking and increase the truck maneuvering space from the Etiwanda Avenue ingress/egress, the conflict will remain. If this scheme is acceptable, a thorough re-design of the truck maneuvering through this area must be examined. C~ Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. • Follow the streetscape design for Foothill Boulevard/Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan. The activity center design should stop at the driveway off Foothill Boulevard. East of the driveway, the design should follow the Suburban parkway streetscape. 2. Because the landscape setback has increased in depth, a double row of tree wells should be accommodated consistent with the Foothill Boulevard/Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan. DRC AGENDA DRC2003-00510 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES • July 6, 2004 Page 3 3. Landscape planters at key locations near building and parking lot corners should be increased in size for providing better pedestrian space and walkway. 4. The main entry driveway from Foothill Boulevard and its southerly path toward Building B will not provide adequate turning space for large vehicles. The entry opening should be 35 feet wide narrowing to no less than 30 feet all the way to Building B. This issue applies to all three schemes. 5. Trash enclosures should not face the street or any of the residential areas. Take care to prevent a trash truck from blocking drive aisles especially near ingress/egress points. 6. The row of parking at the east side of Building B needs to meet the 15 feet setback from the property line. This can be achieved 7. Add freestanding planter pots (minimum size three feet diameter) along the colonnade of the retail buildings. 8. Revise the Landscape Plan to be consistent with the Site Plan. 9. Provide dense landscaping along the south and east property boundaries for adequate buffering. . 10. Provide lockable gates at the east and west end of the landscape area south of Retail Buildings Band/or C. Provide security fencing for Building A at the east side to the east property boundary. 11. Provide Route 66 icons at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. Provide bus shelter design consistent with the Route 66 theme. 12. The wainscot for the columns should have a ledge stone for better transition to stucco material. 13. Add stone wainscot to the north portion of the east elevation for Building A, as it is visible from Foothill Boulevard view. 14. Provide pedestrian connection from the public sidewalk to the project at the south property boundary 15. The above items apply to all three schemes. Polic v Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. The portion of the site east of the main entry is considered Suburban Parkway in the Foothill Boulevard District and must incorporate meandering sidewalks. 2. Parking lot trees are needed atone for every three spaces rather than the current spacing. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee review the alternate schemes and recommend approval to the Planning Commission with conditions. Attachments DRC AGENDA DRC2003-00510 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES • July 6, 2004 Page 4 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fong, McPhail, Stewart Staff Planner: Vance Pomeroy At the meeting, both Scheme A and Scheme B were presented to the Committee. The applicant discussed each of the changes proposed as recommended by staff. The Committee found the proposed changed acceptable: 1. Widen the southerly driveway to 44 feet with two right-turn lanes. 2. Provide sidewalk from Etiwanda Avenue to the southerly building walkways. 3. Shift trash enclosures to the west end of the parking stalls rather than near the parking area at the truck maneuvering area. 4. Provide a corner, Activity Center tower, and pedestrian element on the corner retail building on Scheme A similar to the one provided on the drug store in Scheme B. 5. Widen the radii for the truck maneuvering area at the southwest corner of the project. 6. Widen the radii for ingress and egress at Foothill Boulevard. 7. Provide minimum landscape setback for the parking area at the southeast corner of the project. 8. Provide fence/gates behind the retail buildings as they abut the residential areas to the south and the east. The Committee recommended approval for the project, both Schemes A and B, subject to the above Primary and Secondary issues and the proposed changes. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Emily W imer July 6, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP - A request to develop a 25,622 square foot warehouse on 1.25 acre of land in the Industrial District (Subarea 13), located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue - APN: 0229-283-02. Design Parameters: The project is located on the east side of Charles Smith Road on approximately 1.25 acres of vacant land. The project is bordered to the east by the I-15 freeway, to the south by Cardlock filling station, and to the north by an industrial warehouse building. The building is a 25,622 square foot speculative warehouse and includes a 5,104 square foot mezzanine. ' Background: The project was originally approved on March 17, 2003, by the Planning Commission. Since the original approval, the applicant has submitted revised elevations of the warehouse building to the Committee. DRC Action Comments for October 1, 2002, and October 14, 2003, are included for Committee review. In May of 2004, the applicant submitted a request to revise the second primary exterior material from Travertine Stone to Heavy Sandblasted Concrete. On January 14, 2004, the applicant was scheduled for Planning Commission review of the Committee's decision to deny the request. The • decision was upheld at Planning Commission. The applicant appealed the Planning Commission decision to City Council. At the February 18, 2004, City Council meeting, the Council directed staff to work with the applicant and incorporate the heavy sand blasted concrete to create a building which both staff and the applicant would approve of. Since the City Council meeting, the applicant has met with staff and the City Planner on numerous occasions to discuss the modifications to the building. On April 15, 2003,the applicant met with staff to revise the materials and provide detail of the type of sandblasted concrete that will be incorporated. To create some movement of the building, the applicant has agreed to extend the sandblasted concrete up 2 feet in height. The decorative reveal lines in the elevations will be a minimum of 1 Yz-inch wide by 3/a-inch deep. The main panels of sandblasted concrete will also extend out from the tilt up building a minimum of 2 feet at both entries and also both corners of the front elevation. The majority of the building remains painted tilt-up concrete. The material changes will effect the front and side elevations of the building. Maior Issues: 1. No major issues exist. If the Committee approves the modification, the applicant can submit to the Building and Safety Division with construction drawings. Secondary Issues: 1. The applicant has submitted pictures of the proposed sandblasted concrete that they would like to incorporate, however, the renderings appear darker and accentuate the building more than the pictures. To address this, the developer shall use a dark sealant to ensure that the sandblasted concrete will read as an accent color in contrast to the picture shown on the • materials board. 2. Trash enclosure shall meet all Development Code requirements, and match materials on the proposed building. DRC AGENDA DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED . July 6, 2004 Page 6 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee approve the request which allows the applicant to revise construction drawings accordingly. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fong, McPhail, Stewart Staff Planner: EmilyWimer The applicant agreed to the heavy sandblasted concrete with a dark sealant. The Committee reviewed and approved the project with the condition that the accent material should be extended 2 feet in height. The pronounced office entrances should be constructed of heavy sandblasted concrete as well. r~ L J L~ • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16507- FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS - A request to subdivide 9.57 acres of land into four parcels in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located at 8226 Rochester Avenue - APN: 0229-111-05. Related Files: Development Review DRC2004-00109. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00109 -FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS - A request to develop four industrial buildings totaling 196,995 square feet on 9.57 acres of land in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located at 8226 Rochester Avenue - APN: 0229-111-05. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16507. Design Parameters: The subject site is located on the west side of Rochester Avenue, between Arrow Route and Jersey Boulevard. To the north is the heavy industrial steel forgery, Schlosser Forge Company. To the south is an existing industrial warehouse complex. The site is vacant and with a gentle slope from north to south, and it presently drains from north to south. The site has no public improvements of sidewalk, curb, and gutter along Rochester Avenue, except for Boston Place. There are no mature trees on the subject site. • The infill industrial development contains four single-story industrial buildings (not warehouse), which total 196,995 square feet. The buildings are rectangular shaped, which is conducive for the intended use. Access into the project site will be off of Rochester Avenue and Boston Place. Additionally, the applicant has provided outdoor eating areas for each building. The buildings have a nominal amount of 360-degree architectural elements. The buildings do not have two primary materials as was directed by staff to add. The buildings do not evoke a quality and contrast that has been submitted by the applicant in previous industrial warehouse type projects. The building will have blue medium performance glazing and amulti-color paint scheme. The map portion of the project is for financing purposing. 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. Architecture -The applicant needs to provide at least two primary materials. Staff recommends the building reflect the richness and contrast of the existing industrial buildings to the south of the site (which were also designed by HPA Architects). 2. The entire portion of Building "A" that fronts along Rochester Avenue should reflect a professional office facade. 3. All screen walls between the gates of the building must be decorative to match the proposed architectural style of the project. 4. Call out the material of the decorative paving at all entryways into the project site. DRC AGENDA SUBTPM16507 AND DRC2004-00109 -FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS July 6, 2004 Page 2 5. The applicant must better depict how trucks can make the turn radius between all of the building entry points to the loading area. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Parapets are to be high enough so as to screen all roof-mounted equipment. The warehouse areas of the building do not appear to have sufficient parapet to screen any HVAC units. Transformers should be screed by decorative concrete tilt-up wall. Provide trellis over each of the outdoor employee eating areas. 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 to match the building elevations. No exterior downspouts are to be visible on any of the buildings. Landscaping should surround the trash enclosures. . Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends redesign of the project and return at the discretion of the Committee as either a consent or full item. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fong, McPhail, Stewart , Staff Planner: Doug Fenn The applicant came to the meeting prepared with revised elevations that depicted sandblasting instead of just concrete tilt up. However, staff informed the Committee that the additional changes were minimal and that more sandblasting and spandrel glass should be used on Building "A." The Committee agreed with staff and also recommended that all of the buildings should have additional architectural elements and details that wrap around the buildings to provide a 360-degree architecture. The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff, and once the aforementioned items were addressed to the satisfaction of staff, then the project can be scheduled for City Planner review and approval. C~ • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:20 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2004-00379 - FAMOUS DAVES RESTAURANT - A request to develop a 5,888 square foot Famous Dave's Restaurant, with a bar on 1.67 acres of land within General Industrial District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue - APN: 0229-263-48. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16300. Design Parameters: The site is a part of the recently approved master plan DRC2003-00770 for three 4-story hotels: Courtyard by Marriott; Hilton Garden Inn; and a Hilton Homewood Suites. There are four restaurant building pads (which will come under a separate entitlement), which will front along 4th Street and total 22,111 square feet. This 6,196 square foot project is the second restaurant to request a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Bar and design review of the project. The elevations of the building are not richly designed and could use significant improvement. The architectural materials consist of siding, a small amount of stonework, pitch metal seamed roofs, and a main entryway (which fronts 4th Street). Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. The applicant has not sufficiently addressed staff's earlier recommendations. The following are some further recommendations that would give the project a enhanced look: Architecture -All elevations must reflect a creative, rich, and compatible design of the previously approved master plan, Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770. Specific recommendations include: Add a significant amount of stonework on all sides of the building (do not just add a wainscot). Be very creative and "liberal" with the amount. The north side of the building needs to mimic the south elevation along with enhancements that should be on the south elevation. If two customer "Take Out" windows are provided on the east elevation, why is there not a sidewalk in front of them? If these are not customer order/pick-up windows, then delete all "Take Out" signs. Landscaping -Staff recommends the following revisions: • Provide trees and shrubs around all four sides of the building. The proposed plan is completely devoid of anything but ground cover in this area. Box size trees should be provided at least at one tree per 30 linear feet of building elevation. • Provide combination of berms and continuous shrub row to screen parking areas from public view. • Plant material should be selected that accents architecture, provides shade for cars, and to create a natural foundational design element that "anchors" building to the site. Be creative and design a pleasant, inviting environment. DRC AGENDA DRC2004-00379-FAMOUS DAVES RESTAURANT July 6, 2004 Page 2 Provide accent trees along both sides of pedestrian connection to hotels. Plan should identify specific tree species for various uses. 3. Site Plan -Staff recommends the following revisions: Provide truck unloading zone (outside of drive aisles) Patio dining area should be wrapped around to the front Provide outdoor plaza area with public art or point of interest on the front of the building area. This will create a gathering place for customers, as they wait to be seated. Also, provide ample outside bench seating for customers waiting fortables (the covered porch west of entry is suggested). 4. Noise Attenuation -Provide noise study and design elements to mitigate traffic noise for the outdoor patio dining area that is subject to noise levels exceeding City standards of 60/65dBA (nighUday). For example, clear Lexan panels (similar to those at Romano's Macaroni Grill Restaurant). Likewise, replace open metal railing surrounding patio with solid stonewall. Secondary Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Signs - Identify type and materials of two proposed wall signs. Are they individual channelized letters with internal illumination? • 2. Provide bicycle rack. 3. Parapets are to be high enough so as to screen all roof-mounted equipment 4. Transformers should be screened by decorative wall material which matches the architectural material of the building with landscaping in front of the screen wall. 5. All freestanding lighting standards (this includes outdoor furniture, trash receptacles, and such) should be the same as the light standards for the entire master planed project. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: The applicant must submit a Uniform Sign Program. None of the proposed signage is part of this permit process. All signage must be in conformance with the City Sign Ordinance. 2. No exterior downspouts are to be visible on any of the buildings. 3. Landscaping should surround the trash enclosures. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends redesign of the project and return at the discretion of the Committee as either a consent or full item. . Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fong, McPhail, Stewart Staff Planner: Doug Fenn DRC AGENDA DRC2004-00379 -FAMOUS DAVES RESTAURANT . July 6, 2004 Page 3 At the meeting, the applicant presented revised elevation that showed additional stonework. The Committee was disappointed in the changes and recommended that the following should be added to the project: a) Roof material should match what was approved in the master plan for the three hotel buildings. Metal roof material may be considered only if it is used sparingly and is not the dominant element of the building. b) More stone materials should be applied to all four sides of the building in addition to what the architect had proposed. c) Dormers and other similar type of architectural elements should be added to provide interest and variation to the roof. d) The blank wall at the north side of east elevation needs additional architectural elements. e) The landscaping plan need more variety of plant material. Whatwas submitted appears to be insufficient. f) Consider adding trelliswork in the outdoor patio area as well as expanding the patio area to the south elevation. g) A plaza and waiting area should be redesigned with more landscaping, benches, and other aesthetic amenities that would be in the spirit of the approved master plan. h) Address all the identified Secondary and Policy Issues. The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff and bring the project back to the Committee for review. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:40 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00243 - NUTTALL-UCHIZONO ASSOCIATES - A request to develop a 7,600 square foot BJ's Restaurant & Brewhouse on 2 acres of land within General Industrial District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue - APN:0229-263-48. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16300. Design Parameters: The site is a part of the recently approved master plan DRC2003-00770 for three 4-story hotels, which are as follows: Courtyard by Marriott, Hilton Garden Inn, and Hilton Homewood Suites. There are four restaurant building pads (which will come under a separate entitlement), which will front along 4th Street and total 22,111 square feet. This 7,600 square foot project is the first restaurant to request design review. The elevations of the building are richly designed to reflect the ambiance and character of the proposed use. The architectural materials consists of; a brick header course, and large mural, decorative light sconces, cornice work at the corners and main entry way (which fronts 4th Street), spandrel and vision glass, canopies, and a detached silo. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The applicant has done a good job of addressing staff's earlier recommendations, athe following are some further recommendations that would give the project a enhanced and polished look: The detached silo should be walled with a brick base that is at least four feet high. This should help keep children and teenagers from climbing on the support poles of the silo. 2. Provide a decorative frame-like structure (brick) around the mural. 3. The applicant forgot to submit elevations in the submittal packet for the north and east elevation. The north-south elevation is mislabeled as the north elevation. The elevations on the south and east should reflect the richness and variety of the north elevation. 4. Extend the decorative vertical brick and cornice element above the roofline. 5. The west side of the building where the metal seam roof is located should have metal support rods to mimic the canopy over the primary entrance. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. The following inconsistencies with the Sign Ordinance should be resolved: • a. There is a maximum of three wall signs (one per building face) or two wall signs and a monument sign. Five wall signs are shown. DRC AGENDA DRC2004-00243 - NUTTALL-UCHIZONO ASSOCIATES • July 6, 2004 Page 5 b. There is a maximum of one wall sign permitted per building face. Two wall signs are shown on the south elevation facing 4th Street. Delete "Restaurant Brwhouse" from the entry canopy. c. The maximum wall sign area is 10 percent of the building face, not to exceed 150 square feet. 2. No signs will be permitted on equipment, such as the silo. 3. No exterior downspouts are to be visible on any of the buildings. 4. Landscaping should surround the trash enclosures. 5. Parapets are to be high enough so as to screen all roof mounted equipment. The warehouse areas of the building do not appear to have sufficient parapet to screen any HVAC units. 6. Transformers should be screened by decorative wall material which matches the architectural material of the building with landscaping in front of the screen wall. 7. All freestanding lighting standards should be the same as the light standards for the entire 'master planed project. . Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends redesign of the project and return as a Consent Calendar item. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fong, McPhail, Stewart Staff Planner: Doug Fenn The applicant presented revised elevations that addressed the identified issues in the staff report. The Committee reviewed the revised plans and recommended the project be scheduled for City Planner review. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • July 6, 2004 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, m .~- - Brad Buller Secretary • • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY JULY 6, 2004 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA • Committee Members: Cristine M it Pam Stewart Alternates: Rich ci / Richard Fletcher CONSENT CALENDAR Nancy Fong Larry McNiel The following items are expected'fo 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/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16769 - HARMA MAGHAKIAN -The proposed subdivision of 1.46 acres of land into five parcels in the General Industrial District (Subareal), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street -APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Development Review DRC2001-00154 and Variance DRC2001-00155. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00154 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN - A request to construct three light industrial buildings (Building "A" - 6,033 square feet, Building "B" - 7,210 square feet, and Building "C" - 7,125 square feet) on 1.46 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street -APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Variance DRC2001-00155 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16769. VARIANCE DRC2001-00155 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN - A request to reduce the building and landscape setbacks along 8th Street and Vineyard Avenue on 1.46 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street -APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Development Review DRC2001-00154 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16769. 7:10 p.m. (Doug/Willie) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16972-1 -JEFFERSON ON FOURTH, L.P. - A request for a condo map related to 467 multi-family apartments on 18.54 acres in the Mixed Use District (Subarea 18), located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Milliken Avenue -APN: 0210-082-47. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-00505. On June 1, 1994, an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055) was prepared and certified by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as a Program Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 18. DRC AGENDA July 6,2004 Page 2 • 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 mayopen the meeting for public input. 7:20 p.m. (Vance/Rene) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00510 - F. J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES -The development of a commercial center totaling 41,672 square feet on 5.12 net acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4), located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. An alternative site plan consisting of a 13,000 square foot pharmacy is being considered -APN: 0229-311-14 and 15. Related File: Variance DRC2003-00511. VARIANCE DRC2003-00511 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES-A request to reduce the required building setback from 25 feet to 16 feet along the south property line, the required parking setback from 15 feet to 10 feet for the southwest side of the site, and the required parking and landscape setbacks from 45 feet to 32 feet along the westerly 450 feet of Foothill Boulevard frontage for the development of commercial centertotaling 44,011 square feet with up to fourbuildings on 5.12 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4), located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. APN: 0229-311-14 and 15. • 7:40 p.m. (Emily/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP -A request to develop a 25,622 square foot warehouse on 1.25 acre of land in the Industrial District (Subarea 13), located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue -APN-229-283-02. 8:00 p.m. (Doug/Cam) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16507- FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS - A request to subdivide 9.57 acres of land into four parcels in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located at 8226 Rochester Avenue-APN: 0229-111-05. Related Files: Development Review DRC2004-00109. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00109 -FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS - A request to develop four industrial buildings totaling 196,995 square feet on 9.57 acres of land in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located at 8226 Rochester Avenue-APN: 0229-111-05. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16507. 8:20 p.m. (Doug/Mark) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2004-00379 - FAMOUS DAVES RESTAURANT - A request to develop a 5,888 square foot Famous Dave's Restaurant, with a bar on 1.67 acres of land within General Industrial District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue -APN: 0229-263-48. Related • Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16300. DRC AGENDA July 6,2004 • Page 3 8:40 p.m. (Doug/Mark) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00243-NUTTALL-UCHIZONOASSOCIATES - A request to develop~a 7,600 square foot BJ's Restaurant & Brewhouse on 2 acres of land within General Industrial District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue '- APN: 0229-263-48. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16300. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place far 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, Melissa Andrewin, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 1, 2004, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16769 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN -The proposed subdivision of 1.46 acres of land into five parcels in the General Industrial District (Subarea1), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street - APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Development Review DRC2001-00154 and Variance DRC2001-00155. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00154 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN - A request to construct three light industrial buildings (Building "A" - 6,033 square feet, Building "B" - 7,210 square feet, and Building "C" - 7,125 square feet) on 1.46 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street - APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Variance DRC2001-00155 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16769. VARIANCE DRC2001-00155 -HARMA MAGHAKIAN - A request to reduce the building and landscape setbacks along 8th Street and Vineyard Avenue on 1.46 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1), located at the northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and 8th Street - APN: 0209-013-15. Related Files: Development Review DRC2001-00154 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16769. The applicant addressed issues. Please see attached plans. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Doug Fenn Members Present: • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16972-1 -JEFFERSON ON FOURTH, L. P. - A request for a condo map related to 467 multi-family apartments on 18.54 acres in the Mixed Use District (Subarea 18), located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Milliken Avenue - APN: 0210-082-47. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-00505. On June 1, 1994, an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055) was prepared and certified by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as a Program Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 18. The applicant proposes the subdivision of the apartment complex into condo units. Because of the accelerating housing prices in our city and the surrounding communities, this subdivision propose will be beneficial to the communityand in the spirit of the citys housing element in our General Plan. Staff believes that this would be an opportunityfor first time homebuyers with the option of owning a residence. Design Review Committee Action: • Staff Planner: Doug Fenn Members Present: • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Vance Pomeroy July 6, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00510 - F. J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES -The developmentof a commercial centertotaling 41,672 square feet on 5.12 net acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4), located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. An alternative site plan consisting of a 13,000 square foot pharmacy is being considered -APN: 0229-311-14 and 15. Related File: Variance DRC2003-00511. VARIANCE DRC2003-00511 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES- A request to reduce the required building setback from 25 feet to 16 feet along the south property line, the required parking setback from 15 feet to 10 feet for the southwest side of the site, and the required parking and landscape setbacks from 45 feet to 32 feet along the westerly 450 feet of Foothill Boulevard frontage for the development of commercial center totaling 44,011 square feet with up to four buildings on 5.12 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4), located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. APN: 0229-31 1-14 and 15. Background/Design Parameters: The project was originally reviewed by the Committee on December 2, 2003. The Committee recommended that the applicant revised the project to address • the identified issues as shown in the attached DRC Action Comments (Exhibit "A"). Specifically, the Committee stated that the project was overbuilt, had inadequate buffering, and was lacking in architectural style for the buildings, as well as in good site design and landscaping. The applicant took the comments to heart and met with staff at various meetings to redesign the project. In redesigning the Site Plan, the applicant eliminated the gas station and the fast food restaurant. On April 20, 2004, the Committee reviewed two alternative Site Plans, Scheme A consisting of a retail building at the corner and Scheme B consisting of a drive-thru drug store at the corner. The Committee, in general, accepted the two Site Plan concepts and also provided further design direction for the elevations of the building and as shown in the attached DRC Action Comments (Exhibit "B"). The applicant has continued to work diligently with staff in addressing all the design issues brought up by the Committee. After working with staff, the site design and architecture of the building have improved substantially and are ready for full review by the Committee. There are three alternate site layout schemes: Scheme A: Provides a 7,379 square-foot retail building at the corner with two retail buildings along the rear and one retail building at the northeast corner of the site, these totaling 33,747 square feet. Scheme B: Provides a 14,550 square foot drive-thru drug store building at the intersection corner with a single 23,008 square foot retail building along the rear and a 6,453 square-foot retail building at the northeast corner of the site. Scheme 61: Similar to Scheme B, except for the orientation of the loading area. • Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. • DRC AGENDA DRC2003-00510 - F.J. July 6, 2004 Page 2 HANSHAW PROPERTIES Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Scheme A: Retail Building D should have the same tower element and pedestrian orientation at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue similarto Scheme B and as directed by the City Planner at the various review meetings with the applicant. 2. Scheme B: a. The corner orientation issues for the Activity Center are solved in this scheme. The architectural program with increased setbacks and the use of tower masses and repetition of other design features has made the loading dock addition along Etiwanda Avenue properly blend into the design of the drug store building (Building C) while providing additional screening for the drive-through element at the south end of the store. n U b. Truck circulation and maneuvering for this scheme is problematic. A redesign of the area south of the building should eliminate the parking, increase the landscape area, and provide sweeping wide-radius curves to allow truck maneuvering in and out of the loading dock. The size of the dock/drive-thru opening at the southwest corner of the building should be revisited, as it may be too narrow for safe maneuvering of the trucks. The parking on the west end of Building B can be retained. 3. Scheme B1: a. No architectural drawings are provided for this scheme. It would require, by condition of approval, further review of the architecture by the City Planner. b. Repeat the same tower element and pedestrian orientation at the corner similar to Scheme B. Repeat the same architectural treatment for the west elevation similarto Scheme B. c. Truck circulation and maneuvering for this scheme is also problematic. The drive-thru performs double-duty as the truck loading and unloading area. Although delivery schedules are rigorous, this presents a difficult conflict. Even with a redesign of the area south of the building to re-arrange the parking and increase the truck maneuvering space from the Etiwanda Avenue ingress/egress, the conflictwillremain. Ifthis scheme isacceptable, athorough re-design of the truck maneuvering through this area must be examined. • Secondarv Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Follow the streetscape design for Foothill Boulevard/Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan. The activity centerdesign should stop at the driveway off Foothill Boulevard. East of the driveway, the design should follow the Suburban parkway streetscape. 2. Because the landscape setback has increased in depth, a double row of tree wells should be accommodated consistent with the Foothill Boulevard/Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan. DRC AGENDA DRC2003-00510 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES • July 6, 2004 Page 3 3. Landscape planters at key locations near building and parking lot comers should be increased in size for providing better pedestrian space and walkway. 4. The main entry drivewayfrom Foothill Boulevard and its southerly path toward Building B will not provide adequate turning space for large vehicles. The entry opening should be 35 feet wide narrowing to no less than 30 feet all the way to Building B. This issue applies to all three schemes. 5. Trash enclosures should not face the street or any of the residential areas. Take care to prevent a trash truck from blocking drive aisles especially near ingress/egress points. 6. The row of parking at the east side of Building B needs to meet the 15 feet setback from the property line. This can be achieved 7. Add freestanding planter pots (minimum size three feet diameter) along the colonnade of the retail buildings. 8. Revise the Landscape Plan to be consistent with the Site Plan. 9. Provide dense landscaping along the south and east property boundaries for adequate buffering. • 10. Provide lockable gates at the east and west end of the landscape area south of Retail Buildings Band/or C. Provide security fencing for Building A at the east side to the east property boundary. 11. Provide Route 66 icons at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. Provide bus shelter design consistent with the Route 66 theme. 12. The wainscot for the columns should have a ledge stone for better transition to stucco material. 13. Add stone wainscot to the north portion of the east elevation for Building A, as it is visible from Foothill Boulevard view. 14. Provide pedestrian connection from the public sidewalk to the project at the south property boundary 15. The above items apply to all three schemes. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. The portion of the site east of the main entry is considered Suburban Parkway in the Foothill Boulevard District and must incorporate meandering sidewalks. 2. Parking lot trees are needed at one for every three spaces rather than the current spacing. • Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee review the alternate schemes and recommend approval to the Planning Commission with conditions. Attachments DRC AGENDA DRC2003-00510 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES July 6, 2004 Page 4 Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Vance Pomeroy Members Present: 1. ~ • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Lisa Kuschel December 2, 2003 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00510 - F. J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES - A request for the development of a shopping center to include 42,155 square feet of commercial retail area, including a gas station/convenience store and adrive-thru fast food restaurant, on 3.55 net acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4) located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. An alternative site plan is also proposed for the development of 41,475 square feet of commercial retail area, including two drive-thru fast food restaurants. - APN: 0229-311-14 and 15. Related Files: Variance DRC2003-00511 and Pre-Application Review DRC2003-00027. Design Parameters: The northwest corner of the property is located in the activity center of the Foothill Boulevard Districts Subarea 4 (see attached). Subarea 4 acts as a major gateway into the City. This activity center is unique because it does not require detailed pedestrian amenities; the Development Code calls for landscape and rolling berms instead of hardscape materials. The corner building setback is encouraged to be 25 feet from the Foothill Boulevard curb face; however, the other buildings are located outside the activity center and require a 45-foot setback from Foothill Boulevard curb face. The property is surrounded by single-story single-family homes to the south and east. Variances are requested to reduce the required building setback from 25 feet to 17 feet along the south property line, and to reduce the required parking and landscape setbacks from 45 feet to 32 feet. • Pre-Application Review: During the February 12, 2003, Pre-Application Review workshop, the Commissioners indicated that deviation from their drive-thru policies would only be considered for an exceptional project design. There was also concern expressed with overbuilding the site. The four alternates presented to Commission ranged from 27,500 square feet to 31,000 square feet and included a gas station/convenience market plus two drive-thru fast food restaurants. The current proposal is 25 percent larger in floor area, but has one less pad building. See attached minutes. 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: Site Plan -Two alternatives are proposed that affect the streetscene along Foothill Boulevard: 1) a gas station/convenience market with one drive-thru fast food restaurant, and 2) two drive-thru fast food restaurants. Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-96 (see attached) requires drive-thru businesses to be at least 300 feet apart, and at least 300 feet away from an intersection. The proposal is 200 feet apart. Architecture -Architectural character is encouraged to be contemporary interpretations ofthe winery or barn prototype. Although attractive, the project design is neither of these styles. Examples of appropriate architectural styles are attached. 3. Building D -Identical elevations and footprints are proposed under Alternate B for both buildings. As specific tenants are identified, it can be anticipated that this will change. • Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: ~xHr~rr'A" DRC COMMENTS DRC2003-00510 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES • December 2, 2003 Page 2 Drive-Thru Lane Setbacks -Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-96 requires drive-thru lanes to be setback 45 feet from the curb face. In both alternatives, Building D has only a 34-foot 6-inch setback due to the bus bay/right-turn lane. Staff supports the project design which includes berming and a low decorative screen wall around the drive-thru lanes. 2. Landscape/Streetscape -Redesign parkway and street improvements to implement the Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan design elements (see attached). Also, the Foothill Boulevard Districts requires a "formal, double-row street tree planting utilizing aninformally-shaped, colorful street tree." Refer to tree list in attached (page 17.32-85). The project design shows only a single row of trees. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Provide continuous pedestrian circulation system by extending decorative pavement treatment across drive-aisles. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and return as a full item. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: . Members Present: Pam Stewart, Cristine McPhail, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: 'Lisa Kuschel The Committee recommended that the applicant work with staff and redesign the project to address the issues identified in the staff report as well as the following issues: The Committee preferred the Site Plan with a gas station and one drive-thru restaurant. However, the Site Plan still needs work to address the technical issues such as, but not limited to, delivery gas trucks to the gas station, plazas, pedestrian circulation, and the Activity Design for Foothill Boulevard/Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan. 2. The Committee would not support the Variance for reducing the landscape setback along Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. The Committee believed that there was too much proposed on the property, which causes the setback problem. 3. The Committee expressed that the design did not address the many comments raised at the February 12, 2003, Planning Commission Workshop. The issues raised were: Adequate buffer for the adjacent residential, too much proposed on the property, on-site circulation, the use of good design, and landscaping. 4. The Committee recommended that the architectural style should be more of the winerytheme. The use of river rock material would reinforce the identity of the Etiwanda community. The Committee cited the example of the gas station project approved at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. • 5. The Committee directed the applicant to revise the plans and submit them for their review again. The Committee stated that the design of the canopy for the gas station should have the same level of design with sufficient details and architectural elements as the retail buildings. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Lisa Kuschel April 20, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00510 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES -The development of a commercial centertotaling 42,155 square feet on 5.12 net acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4), located at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue. An alternative Site Plan consisting of adrive-thru pharmacy is being considered -APN: 0229-311-14 and 15. Related File: Variance DRC2003-00511. Design Parameters: At the December 2, 2003, meeting, the Design Review Committee directed the applicant to revise the project and address the identified design issues. A copy of the December 2, 2003, Design Review Committee action is attached for reference. The applicant has been working diligently with staff in redesigning the site plan and elevations to address the design concerns. To streamline the processing time, staff has agreed that the applicant submits only the detailed Site Plan and elevations for Design Review Committee review. Once the Design Review Committee recommended approval, the applicant will prepare Grading and Landscape Plans for Planning Commission review. The applicant in redesigning the Site Plan has eliminated the fast food drive-thru and the gas station. The new design includes two alternative Site Plans. Site Plan A is designed with a 13,000 • square-foot drive-thru drug store at the corner that included a loading area at the rear of the building. Site Plan B is designed with a 7,621 square-foot retail building featured on the corner. All other buildings are planned for retail space. Variances are requested to reduce the required building setback from 25 feet to 16 feet along the south property line, and to reduce the required parking and landscape setbacks from 45 feet to 32 feet for approximately 250 feet of Foothill Boulevard street frontage. 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: Site Plan. a. Site Plan A: This version of Site Plan includes a proposed drug store at the corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. This corner is designated as an Activity Center per Foothill Boulevard Districts and Special Boulevards per the Citys General Plan. Having a pharmacy with a loading area does not meet the intent of the Activity Center. The loading area as designed does not have sufficient maneuvering area to make it work. Further, the loading activities would significantly impact the adjacent residential area to the south, such as frequent deliveries. Staff does not support this version of the Site Plan. b. Site Plan B: This version of the Site Plan shows a retail building at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. Staff believes that this is a superior Site Plan and supports it. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2003-00510 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES April 20, 2004 • Page 2 2. Elevations: Revised elevations include tower elements, colonnade, stacked stones accent and as a wainscot, pop-outs, and trellis work. Staff believes that the revised elevations have improved substantially. a. The pop-out element at the west elevation of Retail Building D should be increased in depth to 3 feet. b. Storefront glass and spandrel glass should be provided at the north side of the west elevation for Building "D." c. Add a tower element at the northwest comer of Retail Building "D." Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Create a plaza terminus area in front of Building "B" entry at the end of drive entry off Foothill Boulevard. 2. For Site Plan "B," maximize the landscaped area near the handicap parking spaces (southwest comer of the building) rather than providing a hardscape finger. 3. Foothill Streetscape. Redesign to comply with the Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan. The • activity center should have a design of formal arrangement of double row street trees and hardscape for the segment from the corner to the driveway. The segment east of the driveway should have design elements of the Suburban Parkways. ' 4. Provide lockable wrought iron gates at each end of service corridorfor Buildings "B"and "C" to prevent nuisance problems. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Provide continuous pedestrian circulation system by extending decorative pavement treatment across drive aisles. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Site Plan Alternate B be conceptually approved for use of the property as a general retail center. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, McPhail, Fong Staff Planner: Lisa Kuschel At the meeting, the applicant presented a revised Scheme B Site Plan that showed the a deeper • setback forthe corner building from Etiwanda Avenue, and adequate screening ofthe drive-thru and loading area for the drug store. The Committee accepted this Scheme B Site Plan with the condition that the applicant works with staff to refine the screening of the drive-thru and loading area and resolve all technical items before Planning Commission review. The Committee also accepted ' 'the Scheme A Site Plan with a retail building at the comer instead of a drug store. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2003-00510 - F.J. HANSHAW PROPERTIES April 20, 2004 • Page 3 The Committee expressed concerns with the proposed elevations not having sufficient vertical variation. The Committee suggested bringing the towers higher and more variation to building height instead of long horizontal roofline. The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff in revising the elevations that meet theirexpectations. The Committee stated that the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue is an activity center and the building and site design at this corner should be more pedestrian friendly to take advantage of this activity center. The Committee directed the applicant to add tower elements with storefront glass and plaza area in front of it. The applicant stated thattheyagreed to address the identified items underthe secondaryand policy issues. The Committee directed the applicant to v~ark with staff. • • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Emily Wimer July 6, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP - A request to develop a 25,622 square foot warehouse on 1.25 acre of land in the Industrial District (Subarea 13), located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue - APN: 0229-283-02. Design Parameters: The project is located on the east side of Charles Smith Road on approximately 1.25 acres of vacant land. The project is bordered to the east by,the I-15 freeway, to the south by Cardlock filling station, and to the north by an industrial warehouse building. The building is a 25,622 square foot speculative warehouse and includes a 5,104 square foot mezzanine. Background: The project was originally approved on March 17, 2003, by the Planning Commission. Since the original approval, the applicant has submitted revised elevations of the warehouse building to the Committee. DRC Action Comments for October 1, 2002, and October 14, 2003, are included for Committee review. In May of 2004, the applicant submitted a request to revise the second primary exterior material from Travertine Stone to Heavy Sandblasted Concrete. On January 14, 2004, the applicant was scheduled for Planning Commission review of the Committee's decision to deny the request. The • decision was upheld at Planning Commission. The applicant appealed the Planning Commission decision to City Council. At the February 18, 2004, City Council meeting, the Council directed staff to work with the applicant and incorporate the heavy sand blasted concrete to create a building which both staff and the applicant would approve of. Since the City Council meeting, the applicant has met with staff and the City Planner on numerous occasions to discuss the modifications to the building. On April 15, 2003,the applicant met with staff to revise the materials and provide detail of the type of sandblasted concrete that will be incorporated. To create some movement of the building, the applicant has agreed to extend the sandblasted concrete up 2 feet in height. The decorative reveal lines in the elevations will be a minimum of 1 Yz-inch wide by 3/<-inch deep. The main panels of sandblasted concrete will also extend out from the tilt up building a minimum of 2 feet at both entries and also both corners of the front elevation. The majority of the building remains painted tilt-up concrete. The material changes will effect the front and side elevations of the building. Maior Issues: 1. No major issues exist. If the Committee approves the modification, the applicant can submit to the Building and Safety Division with construction drawings. Secondary Issues: 1. The applicant has submitted pictures of the proposed sandblasted concrete that they would like to incorporate, however, the renderings appear darker and accentuate the building more than the pictures. To address this, the developer shall use a dark sealant to ensure that the sandblasted concrete will read as an accent color in contrast to the picture shown on the • materials board. 2. Trash enclosure shall meet all Development Code requirements, and match materials on the proposed building. DRC AGENDA DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED • July 6, 2004 Page 6 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee approve the request which allows the applicant to revise construction drawings accordingly. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Emily Wimer Members Present • C~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS i 7:30 p.m. Emily Wimer October 1, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP -Development of a 25,622 square foot warehouse in the Industrial District, Subarea 13, located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue - APN - 229-283-02. Desion Parameters: The project was approved at the Design Review Committee meeting on August 6, 2002. The Committee members discussed the window materials, and it was conditioned that the applicant would provide Solar gray glass on the I-15 Freeway elevation of the building (see attached condition #6 of Design Review Committee action dated August 6, 2002). If clear glass is allowed the window of the building could lead to advertising and signage, which cannot be restricted. Staff has informed the applicant that the modification of the condition would require approval by the Design Review Committee. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee deny the request for clear glass on the freeway elevation. Attachment Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: . Staff Planner: Emily W imer This item was cancelled and will be on the November 5, 2002 agenda. • p~builnti~~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:40 p.m. Emily W imer October 14, 2003' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP - A request to development of a 25,622 square foot warehouse in Industrial District, Subarea 13 on a 1.25 acre site, located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue - APN: 0229-283-02. Design Parameters: The project is situated located on the east side of Charles Smith Road on approximately 1.25 acres of vacant land. The project is bordered to the east by the I-15 freeway, to the south by Cardlock filling station, and to the north by an industrial warehouse building. The building is a 25,622 square foot speculative warehouse and includes a 5,104 square foot mezzanine. The applicant has asked to modify the approved exterior building materials. The original material, Travertine stone, was approved by the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission in October of 2002. Since the approval, the applicant has submitted plans, which would change the exterior materials of the building. Staff informed the applicant that the change would require Design Review Committee approval. The applicant is proposing the second primary exterior material, Travertine Stone, be replaced with split-face block. The Travertine Stone is used along the west elevation facing Charles Smith Avenue. The majority of the building is painted tilt-up concrete. The proposal will change the exterior look of the building on all four elevations. The proposed change would also affect the • horizontal bands on the exterior of the building, which wrap around the entirety of the building. The original color proposed matched the tan travertine stone. The proposed split-face block would change the horizontal reveals to a gray hue similar to the painted concrete of original design. Plans and samples of Travertine Stone and split-face block will be available at the meeting. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee deny the request and uphold the originally approved exterior materials. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Emily Wimer Applicant withdrew from the project. • l4kik/im~nf • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16507-FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS - A request to subdivide 9.57 acres of land into four parcels in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located at 8226 Rochester Avenue - APN: 0229-111-05. Related Files: Development Review DRC2004-00109. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00109 -FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS - A request to develop four industrial buildings totaling 196,995 square feet on 9.57 acres of land in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located at 8226 Rochester Avenue -APN: 0229-111-05. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16507. Design Parameters: The subject site is located on the west side of Rochester Avenue, between Arrow Route and Jersey Boulevard. To the north is the heavy industrial steel forgery, Schlosser Forge Company. To the south is an existing industrial warehouse complex. The site is vacant and with a gentle slope from north to south, and it presently drains from north to south. The site has no public improvements of sidewalk, curb, and gutter along Rochester Avenue, except for Boston Place. There are no mature trees on the subject site. The infill industrial development contains four single-story industrial buildings (not warehouse), . which total 196,995 square feet. The buildings are rectangular shaped, which is conducive for the intended use. Access into the project site will be off of Rochester Avenue and Boston Place. Additionally, the applicant has provided outdoor eating areas for each building. The buildings have a nominal amount of 360-degree architectural elements. The buildings do not have two primary materials as was directed by staff to add. The buildings do not evoke a quality and contrast that has been submitted by the applicant in previous industrial warehouse type projects. The building will have blue medium performance glazing and amulti-color paint scheme. The map portion of the project is for financing purposing. 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: Architecture -The applicant needs to provide at least two primary materials. Staff recommends the building reflect the richness and contrast of the existing industrial buildings to the south of the site (which were also designed by HPA Architects). The entire portion of Building "A" that fronts along Rochester Avenue should reflect a professional office facade. 3. All screen walls between the gates of the building must be decorative to match the proposed • architectural style of the project. 4. 'Call out the material of the decorative paving at all entryways into the project site. DRC AGENDA SUBTPM16507 AND DRC2004-00109 -FRANCIS WANG, HPA ARCHITECTS • July 6, 2004 Page 2 5. The applicant must better depict how trucks can make the turn radius between all of the building entry points to the loading area. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Parapets are to be high enough so as to screen all roof-mounted equipment. The warehouse areas of the building do not appear to have sufficient parapet to screen any HVAC units. 2. Transformers should be screed by decorative concrete tilt-up wall. 3. Provide trellis over each of the outdoor employee eating areas. 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 to match the building elevations. 2. No exterior downspouts are to be visible on any of the buildings. 3. Landscaping should surround the trash enclosures. • Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends redesign of the project and return at the discretion of the Committee as either a consent or full item. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Doug Fenn Members Present: CJ • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:20 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2004-00379 - FAMOUS DAVES RESTAURANT - A request to develop a 5,888 square foot Famous Dave's Restaurant, with a bar on 1.67 acres of land within General Industrial District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue - APN: 0229-263-48. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16300. Design Parameters: The site is a part of the recently approved master plan DRC2003-00770 for three 4-story hotels: Courtyard by Marriott; Hilton Garden Inn; and a Hilton Homewood Suites. There are four restaurant building pads (which will come under a separate entitlement), which will front along 4th Street and total 22,111 square feet. This 6,196 square foot project is the second restaurant to request a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Bar and design review of the project. The elevations of the building are not richly designed and could use significant improvement. The architectural materials consist of siding, a small amount of stonework, pitch metal seamed roofs, and a main entryway (which fronts 4th Street). • Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. The applicant has not sufficiently addressed staff's earlier recommendations. The following are some further recommendations that would give the project a enhanced look: Architecture -All elevations must reflect a creative, rich, and compatible design of the previously approved master plan, Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770. Specific recommendations include: Add a significant amount of stonework on all sides of the building (do not just add a wainscot). Be very creative and "liberal" with the amount. The north side of the building needs to mimic the south elevation along with enhancements that should be on the south elevation. If two customer "Take Out" windows are provided on the east elevation, why is there not a sidewalk in front of them? If these are not customer order/pick-up windows, then delete all "Take Out" signs. 2. Landscaping -Staff recommends the following revisions: • Provide trees and shrubs around all four sides of the building. The proposed plan is completely devoid of anything but ground cover in this area. Box size trees should be provided at least atone tree per 30 linear feet of building elevation. • Provide combination of berms and continuous shrub row to screen parking areas from • public view. • Plant material should be selected that accents architecture, provides shade for cars, and to create a natural foundational design element that "anchors" building to the site. Be creative and design a pleasant, inviting environment. DRC AGENDA DRC2004-00379 -FAMOUS DAVES RESTAURANT . July 6, 2004 Page 2 Provide accent trees along both sides of pedestrian connection to hotels. Plan should identify specific tree species for various uses. 3. Site Plan -Staff recommends the following revisions: Provide truck unloading zone (outside of drive aisles) Patio dining area should be wrapped around to the front Provide outdoor plaza area with public art or point of interest on the front of the building area. This will create a gathering place for customers, as they wait to be seated. Also, provide ample outside bench seating for customers waiting for tables (the covered parch west of entry is suggested). 4. Noise Attenuation -Provide noise study and design elements to mitigate traffic noise for the outdoor patio dining area that is subject to noise levels exceeding City standards of 60/65dBA (night day). For example, clear Lexan panels (similar to those at Romano's Macaroni Grill Restaurant). Likewise, replace open metal railing surrounding patio with solid stonewall. Secondary Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Signs -Identify type and materials of two proposed wall signs. Are they individual channelized letters with internal illumination? • 2. Provide bicycle rack. 3. Parapets are to be high enough so as to screen all roof-mounted equipment. 4. Transformers should be screened by decorative wall material which matches the architectural material of the building with landscaping in front of the screen wall. 5. All freestanding lighting standards (this includes outdoor furniture, trash receptacles, and such) should be the same as the light standards for the entire master planed project. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. The applicant must submit a Uniform Sign Program. None of the proposed signage is part of this permit process. All signage must be in conformance with the City Sign Ordinance. 2. No exterior downspouts are to be visible on any of the buildings 3. Landscaping should surround the trash enclosures. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends redesign of the project and return at the discretion of the Committee as either a consent or full item. Design Review Committee Action: • Staff Planner: Doug Fenn Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:40 p.m. Doug Fenn July 6, 2004 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00243-NUTTALL-UCHIZONOASSOCIATES-A request to develop a 7,600 square foot BJ's Restaurant & Brewhouse on 2 acres of land within General Industrial District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue - APN: 0229-263-48. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16300. Design Parameters: The site is a part of the recently approved master plan DRC2003-00770 for three 4-story hotels, which are as follows: Courtyard by Marriott, Hilton Garden Inn, and Hilton Homewood Suites. There are four restaurant building pads (which will come under a separate entitlement), which will front along 4th Street and total 22,111 square feet. This 7,600 square foot project is the first restaurant to request design review. The elevations of the building are richly designed to reflect the ambiance and character of the proposed use. The architectural materials consists of; a brick header course, and large mural, decorative light sconces, cornice work at the corners and main entry way (which fronts 4th Street), spandrel and vision glass, canopies, and a detached silo. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee . discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The applicant has done a good job of addressing staff's earlier recommendations, athe following are some further recommendations that would give the project a enhanced and polished look: The detached silo should be walled with a brick base that is at least four feet high. This should help keep children and teenagers from climbing on the support poles of the silo. 2. Provide a decorative frame-like structure (brick) around the mural. 3. The applicant forgot to submit elevations in the submittal packet for the north and east elevation. The north-south elevation is mislabeled as the north elevation. The elevations on the south and east should reflect the richness and variety of the north elevation. 4. Extend the decorative vertical brick and cornice element above the roofline. 5. The west side of the building where the metal seam roof is located should have metal support rods to mimic the canopy over the primary entrance. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. The following inconsistencies with the Sign Ordinance should be resolved: • a. There is a maximum of three wall signs (one per building face) or two wall signs and a monument sign. Five wall signs are shown. DRC AGENDA DRC2004-00243 - NUTTALL-UCHIZONO ASSOCIATES . July 6, 2004 Page 4 b. There is a maximum of one wall sign permitted per building face. Two wall signs are shown on the south elevation facing 4th Street. Delete "Restaurant Brewhouse" from the entry canopy. c. The maximum wall sign area is 10 percent of the building face, not to exceed 150 square feet. 2. No signs will be permitted on equipment, such as the silo. 3. No exterior downspouts are to be visible on any of the buildings. 4. Landscaping should surround the trash enclosures. 5. Parapets are to be high enough so as to screen all roof mounted equipment. The warehouse areas of the building do not appearto have sufficient parapet to screen any HVAC units. 6. Transformers should be screened bydecorative wall material which matches the architectural material of the building with landscaping in front of the screen wall. 7. All freestanding lighting standards should be the same as the light standards for the entire master planed project. • Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends redesign of the project and return as a Consent Calendar item. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Doug Fenn Members Present: \_J