The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004/03/16 - Agenda PacketDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY MARCH 16, 2004 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ACTION AGENDA Committee Members: Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Alternates: Rich Macias Richard Fletcher CONSENT CALENDAR Nancy Fong Larry McNiel The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. 7:00 p.m (Emily/gene) TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16089 -DOW DING - A request to subdivide 2.135 acres of land into three single-family lots in the Very Low Residential District (1 to 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of Wilson Avenue, approximately 330 feet east of Hermosa Avenue - APN: 1074-261-03. 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. (Debra/Rene) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16648 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES -A requestto subdivide 7.68 acres of land into seven single-family residential lots totaling 1.03 acres and one remainder parcel of 6.14 acres for the purpose of developing a public storage facility located in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the east 210 Freeway on-ramp-APN: 1076-001-02 and 1076-341-01. Related File: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00850. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00850 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to develop a public storage facility of 185,491 square feet, along with 3,597 square feet forthe manager's office and apartment, on 6.14 acres in the Low Residential District (2- 4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the east 210 Freeway on-ramp -APN: 1076-331-02 and 1076-341-01. ' 7:40 p.m. (Debra/Joe) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00638 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES/DR HORTON -The design review of site plan and building elevations for a proposed tri-plex condominium project consisting of 186 . attached dwelling units on 18.48 acres (21.38 gross acres) in the Mixed-Use/Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Arbors Village of the Victoria Community Plan, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Church Street -APN: 0227-201-37, 40, and a portion of 41. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16612. DRC AGENDA March 16, 2004 Page 2 • 8:00 p.m. (Larry/gene) DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00880 - PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES INC. -CARRIAGE ESTATES III -The design review for a detailed site map and elevations for 33single-family lots on 28.7 acres of land in the Very Low Residential and Estate Residential Districts (1-2 and .1-1 dwelling units per acre, respectively) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located north of Banyan Street between Etiwanda and Bluegrass Avenues - APN: 0225-111-18, 20, 24, 25, and 27. Related Files: Tentative Tract SUBTT16466 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00533. 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. Emily Wimer March 16, 2004 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16089 -DOW DING - A request to subdivide 2.135 acres of land into three single-family lots in the Very Low Residential District (1 to 2 dwelling units per acre) located on the north side of W ilson Avenue, approximately 330 feet east of Hermosa Avenue - APN: 1074-261-03. Background: The project had been reviewed by the Trails Advisory Committee (TAC) on November 12, 2003, and received conceptual approval for the trail locations. The applicant will be responsible to install standard fencing and gates. After the TAC's review, and only recently, the applicant has submitted the required additional information for the project to be deemed complete for Design Review. Desion Parameters: The 2.135-acre site is on the north side of Wilson Avenue east of Hermosa Avenue. There is one single-family home, which will remain, and the additional area has a Christmas tree farm. A Eucalyptus windrow with approximately 23 trees exists on the east property line. To accommodate the horse trail and community trail, eight fruit trees, two Palm trees, and two Eucalyptus trees must be removed. Along Hermosa Avenue, from the Alta Loma Strom Basins to Wilson Avenue, there is an existing . parkway trail following a Eucalyptus windrow. The trail will be extended along the west side until it joins the Almond Trial. The applicant is proposing three single-family lots, which well' exceed the Very Low Residential requirements. The average lot size is 31,443 square feet. The average lot length is 278.6 feet, which exceeds the requirement by 78 feet in length. The project is a subdivision only, and no house product was submitted. The applicant intends to sell the subdivided lots individually. The existing house will remain on Lot 1. 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 any major issues. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION: Members Present: McPhail, Stewart, Fong Staff Planner: Emily Wimer The Committee recommended approval. U • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Debra Meier March 16, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16648 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide 7.68 acres of land into seven single-family residential lots totaling 1.03 acres and one remainder parcel of 6.14 acres for the purpose of developing a public storage facility located in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the east 210 Freeway on-ramp - APN: 1076-001-02 and 1076-341-01. Related File: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00850. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00850 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to develop a public storage facility of 185,491 square feet, along with 3,597 square feet for the manager's office and apartment, on 6.14 acres in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the east 210 Freeway on-ramp - APN: 1076-331-02 and 1076-341-01. Design Parameters: The proposed project consists of two components: a public storage facility on 6.14 acres and a subdivision to create seven single-family lots on 1.03 acres; however, no home product is proposed at this time. The public storage facility includes 185,491 square feet of storage space, and 3,597 square feet of office space and an apartment for the manager. The seven single- family lots will take access from Heather Street, with the northern side of Heather Street being • completed with the subdivision improvements. Project Site And Surrounding Land Uses: The existing land use surrounding the site includes single-family residential adjacent to the east and south boundaries, the 210 Freeway along the north boundary, and Haven Avenue on the west boundary. Existing improvements on the site include curb, gutter, and sidewalk along Haven Avenue. The project site is typical of an urban vacant parcel of land, which has been maintained annually for weed control; no trees, structures, or other unique feature exist on the site. Neighborhood Compatibility: Given the underlying Low Residential designation of the project site, the public storage facility can only be permitted with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, subject to certain mitigating conditions, as outlined in the Development Code. Code section 17.08.030.E.5 states the following: The development ofmini-storage facilities maybe considered in residential land use districts as a means of mitigating land use conflicts outlined in Section 17.08.050. F. There are certain locations within the City where residentially designated properties are located adjacent to undeveloped parcels of land where this transition between the existing residential neighborhood and non-residential influences (i. e. high traffic corridors, commercial or industrial land uses, etc.) is a primary design issue that prevents desirable development, resulting in such parcels remaining undeveloped or underdeveloped. The mini-storage use would be considered in situations where the facility would act as mitigational buffers for residential developments impacted by unchangeable environmental issues, such as • traffic and noise, as determined by the Planning Commission. DRC COMMENTS SUBTT16648 AND DRC2003-00850 March 16, 2004 . Page 2 The proposed Aim All Storage facility is located on just such a parcel as envisioned by the Code section noted above. The residentially zoned property is immediately adjacent to the 210 Freeway and existing residential development is situated east and south of the vacant parcel. The freeway is a significant generator of nuisance noise that must be mitigated in a residential environment. The noise is typically mitigated by the construction of a solid masonry wall, which can often reach heights of 17 feet, and often then only mitigate noise to industry-acceptable levels, rather than truly comfortable levels for the enjoyment of the backyard. The proposed self-storage facility is, by the nature of the operation, a facility that has a low activity level, generates little traffic and generates very little noise; and would, therefore, provide a buffer between the freeway and existing single-family residential neighborhood, as an alternative to the excessive height block wall. Variance: The applicant has submitted a Variance application to consider a request for a reduction in setback to 0 feet along the south and east boundaries of the publicstorage facility. The standard setback requirement for a commercial activity that is adjacent to a residential land use is 20 feet. However, in this case, due to the inherent design of the public storage facility, a 20-foot setback would become a "no man's land" - an area situated between the building wall and a property line wall that would have limited visibility and no convenient access. This situation breeds maintenance problems and difficulty in policing unauthorized activities. The Planning Commission approved a similar Variance request for another Aim All Storage located at the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Hermosa Avenue, where an existing residential neighborhood bordered the project site. Although, in this case the applicant is also creating seven single-family lots along the south boundary of the project, and it has been suggested that ratherthan approving the variance along the south boundary, that the depth of the proposed lots could be extended by 20 feet as an alternative to the Variance. A summary of the issue is provided in Comment #1 below in order to initiate Committee discussion. Architectural Elements: The architectural design of the project features a contemporary Mediterranean theme. Building materials include Mission file roofing, stucco finish with multiple layers of stucco-covered entablature. Along the freeway elevation the building height varies, as does the building detailing; including segments of split-face concrete block, and tower elements with gabled rooflines. The business signage will be limited to a total of three signs in any combination of wall-mounted and monument signage; this may include the north facing building wall which faces the freeway. The south-facing building wall (which also forms the north boundary of the proposed Tentative Tract SUBTT16648) is 12 feet in height. The wall surface will be stucco on a CMU wall with adouble- . banded entablature. The east-facing building wall is along the rear property line of existing residents on Valinda Avenue. The grading of the site is such that the proposed building wall will not be visible from the two northerly residents facing Valinda Avenue; the remaining six residents facing Valinda Avenue will view the proposed building wall anywhere from a few inches to approximately 2Yz feet above their existing rear yard block wall. Comment #2 below provides a staff recommendation to further minimize impact of the building wall on the existing residents. • Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: DRC COMMENTS SUBTT16648 AND DRC2003-00850 March 16, 2004 • .Page 3 PERTAINING TO THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP The Design Review Committee should consider whether it would be desirable to increase the depth of the single-family lots by 20 feet (equivalent to the setback variance needed) to compensate for the 14-foot high slope and 12-foot building wall height that the future resident will face in the rear yard of the lot. PERTAINING TO AIM ALL STORAGE As the line of Building B becomes visible along the east boundary (along the property boundary of the Valinda Avenue residents) the proposed building material shall be compatible in some fashion to the existing block wall and/or provide a decorative cornice trim as noted on the south elevation. 2. Delete City logo signage on the northwest corner of the building tower element. The southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the 210 Freeway on-ramp is not designated in the City General Plan Exhibit III-14 or Table III-26 as a City Gateway. Furthermore, it is inappropriate to include City's logo on anon-public building. 3. The proposed project sits below street grade along Haven Avenue, with the worst-case condition being right at the corner of Haven Avenue and the 210 Freeway on-ramp. The • applicant shall analyze the line-of-sight from the sidewalk and/or driving lane on Haven Avenue across the top of the parapet line onto the roof of the structure for Sections 1 and 22. A slight increase in height of the parapet may block visibility of the rooftop across the facility. 4. It is the preference of the Planning Division to utilize the Haven Avenue parkway width to decrease the overall rate of grade of the proposed slope, rather than having a 2:1 slope at the edge of the building face that provides little landscaping visible to the public parkway. However, the Engineering Division expresses a preference for relocating and reconstructing the sidewalk to a curvilinear configuration. This would be the only section of Haven Avenue (a distance of 600 feet) in the immediate area to be reconstructed with curvilinear sidewalk. All other sidewalks south of the 210 Freeway to Victoria Street were constructed prior to City incorporation and are adjacent to (and parallel to) the property line with parkway landscaping. 5. Landscape Palette -The 45-foot average parkway depth along the street frontage of this project should be revised and landscaped in accordance with the Haven Avenue Beautification Master plan -featuring Magnolias in the foreground and informal masses of Bottle Tree (Brachychiton populneus) behind. 6. Provide trees within large landscaped area south of Building "G" (east of Lot 1). 7. Construct a 6-foot decorative wall along the east property line of Lot 1, and along the north property line of Lot 6, rather than wrought iron, for privacy and separation between the public storage and residential use. 8. Assuming public storage is built first, full frontage improvements along Haven Avenue, • including landscaping, and including block wall at Lots 6 and 7, should be completed with Phase I. No Phasing Plan was proposed; hence, the timing of residential portion is unknown. DRC COMMENTS SUBTT16648 AND DRC2003-00850 March 16, 2004 . Page 4 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee discuss the issues noted with the applicant; recommend appropriate action for resolution prior to recommending Planning Commission consideration. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION: Members Present: McPhail, Stewart, Fong Staff Planner: Debra Meier The applicant provided a response to each item identified in the staff comments, and essentially concurred with all staff recommendations. There is one clarification that should be noted pertaining to Item #2 under AIM ALL STORAGE - It is the desire of the City Planner to obtain an artistic representation of the City logo on the north west corner of the structure; particularly located on the face of the tower at this location. The art is not intended to be an exact duplication of the City gateway elements, but is in a location where the opportunity to announce entry into the City in an artistic fashion is appropriate. The applicant is agreement with this request. PERTAINING TO AIM ALL STORAGE The Committee discussed the various alternatives related to the sidewalk location, based on comments Planning and Engineering Divisions and the applicant. The Committee agreed to allow • the sidewalk to remain in place, given the factors of grade and the potential forfuture right-tum lane development in this location. The Committee recommended that the architecture of the facility be reviewed and modified to provide more richness in detailing. The Committee suggested that the architect analyze the introduction of additional building material in key visible locations that would provide texture and interest to the street frontage. Specific suggestions included the use of medallions or the inlays. In summary, the Committee would like to increase the articulation and richness of the street exposure of the project. The revised architectural design for Aim All Storage will be scheduled for follow-up Committee review and approval on April 6, 2004. PERTAINING TO THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP The Committee concurred that the additional lot depth of 20 feet was not necessary; however, a condition of approval shall be placed on the Tentative Map that the design review of these lots shall include enhanced slope planting in order to add the element of buffering provided between the residential lots and the public storage facility. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Debra Meier March 16, 2004 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00638 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES/DR NORTON - The design review of site plan and building elevations for a proposed tri-plex condominium project consisting of 186 attached dwelling units on 18.48 acres (21.38 gross acres) in the Mixed-Use/Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Arbors Village of the Victoria Community Plan, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Church Street -~ APN: 0227-201-37, 40, and a portion of 41. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16612. Design Parameters: The Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract SUBTT16612 and the associated Development Review DRC2003-00638 on November 12, 2003, and the various components of the project are now in the Building and Safety Department plan review process. As a result of plan check review, staff identified that the pool/restroom building was substantially modified from the approved elevations, which necessitates review by the Design Review Committee. Plans will be provided at the meeting for Committee review and discussion. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. • Pool/Restroom Building Design Issue: The pool/restroom building that was previously approved mimicked a small French Country cottage, the overall design, including the roof pitch being consistent with the larger residential structures within the project. The revised pool/restroom building has been modified to include a rather significant Turret element on the east end of the building. One residential building elevation within the project does utilize the turret design element, however, it is integrated into the building structure in a manner that is much more reminiscent of the traditional use of the Turret. Staff has several observations and suggestions for the Committee to consider with regard to the Turret design element that has been added to the pool/restroom building: 1. The primary consideration is whether the size and scale of the Turret is in proportion to the rest of the structure; and, 2. Consider that the more traditional use of the Turret would lend itself to becoming incorporated into the building entrance, rather than the stand-alone element as it is currently shown; and 3. The scale of the pool/restroom building has increased in significance to the degree that the Committee may want to consider including stone accent elements, either as building wainscot, as an accent to frame the entries into the turret, or as a veneer to the entire Turret. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the plans provided at the meeting to consider the modifications to the pool/restroom building, prior to completion of the building plan check process and issuance of permits for this building. Design Review Committee Action: . Members present: McPhail, Stewart, Fong Staff Planner: Debra Meier DRC ACTION COMMENTS DRC2003-00638 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES/DR NORTON - March 16, 2004 • Page 2 The Committee agreed with the idea of using the structure to create a focal for the corner, which is located near the project entry. The committee recommended, however, that the turret be appropriately incorporated into the structure; due to the small size of the restroom building the turret appears out of proportion. The Committee recommended that the applicant work through staff to resolve the design prior to issuance of the building permit. • • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 p.m. Larry Henderson March 26, 2004 DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00880 -PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES INC. - CARRIAGE ESTATES III - A request for 33 single-family residences on 28.7 acres of land in the Very Low Residential and Estate Residential Districts (1-2 and .1-1 dwelling units per acre, respectively) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located north of Banyan Street between Etiwanda and Bluegrass Avenues - APN: 0225-111-18, 20, 24, 25, and 27. Related Files: Tentative Tract SUBTT16466 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00533. Design Parameters: The site for this already approved Tentative Map is vacant and slopes about 5 percent from north to south. Several windrows exist on the site and these are addressed through Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00533. The site is bounded by residential land on all sides with some vacant land remaining on the south. The site will be developed under the Very Low Residential and Estate Residential Districts (1-2 and .1-1 dwelling units per acre, respectively) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan using the same house built under Carriage Estates II to the south and Carriage Estates I to the southwest. Three of the previously approved five house plans are being proposed, with four different architectural styles: Traditional Country, Early California Ranch, Bungalow, and California Country. All plans have four car garages; optional cabana/pool rooms, and RV garages broken into various configurations as • follows: Twelve of the Plan 2 type homes are single-story, 3,817 square feet, with two attached two-car garages. This plan has four bedrooms with aden/option bedroom five. Eight of the 12 have a 2X designation with a different garage arrangement. Ten of the Plan 4 type homes are two-story, 4,438 square feet, and features two attached two-car garages. The Plan is afour-bedroom with a teen room/option bedroom five with bath and a studio/option office. Eleven of the Plan 5 type homes are two-story, 5,000 square feet, and features athree-car garage and one attached single car garage. The Plan is afour-bedroom with a retreat, a teen room, and an office/option bedroom five/media room option. Major Issues: There are no major issues identified for discussion. Secondary Issues: 1. There is only one lot with frontage on Etiwanda Avenue (Plan 5). In keeping with the design policies of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, the design is oriented with the front of the house facing Etiwanda Avenue. However, this plan has the least distinctive front porch and there is no walkway shown coming in from Etiwanda Avenue. It is recommended that a stronger architectural statement of front yard prominence be established by designing a porch extension with roof to minimum 8-foot dimension, attractive seating area with low sitting walls, and decorative pavement, as well as a connecting walkway to Etiwanda Avenue. In addition, • amore extensive Landscape Plan for the Etiwanda Avenue frontage is to be required with the use of 24-inch box trees, turf, and flowering shrubs be used to create an attractive Etiwanda prominence. DRC ACTION COMMENTS DRC2003-00880 -PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES INC. -CARRIAGE ESTATES III March 16, 2004 • Page 2 2. The slopes adjacent to Bluegrass Avenue should be shifted to be next to the public sidewalk and incorporated into an easement for public maintenance and the local trail shifted to the east. Perimeter block walls shall be on the inside edge of the trail in all cases. 3. Corral areas should be adjacent to the local trails whenever possible to eliminate the trail/coral access sloped drives. This will provide better equestrian related service access and eliminate homeowner maintenance of an access ramp. The Grading Plan should be adjusted accordingly. 4. If a concrete Swale or gutter is used between the trail and yard, then a bridge design will be needed at all gate connections. 5. Increase the variation in required +/- 5-foot front yard setbacks for Lots 14 through 21. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to the above comments. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: McPhail, Stewart, Fong Staff Planner: Larry Henderson • The DRC members concurred with the staff recommendations and requested the additional modifications as follows: Plan 2 "Bungalow" Style is not up to an acceptable level. The applicant needs to look at window sizes relative to the wall plane scale since it looks more like a ranch style. Also, look at using river rock as the wainscot instead of fake, stacked stone. The backyard -Trail access gates need to be steel (decorative or mesh), not wood. All the items need to be addressed before bringing back to DRC on April 6, 2004. The applicant is directed to work with staff on revised plans submittal for items contained in the Items 1 7 herein. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • March 16, 2004 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respecttully submitted, B uller Secretary • n DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING • TUESDAY MARCH 2, 2004 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ACTION AGENDA Committee Members: Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Alternates: Rich Macias Richard Fletcher CONSENT CALENDAR Nancy Fong Larry McNiel The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. 7:00 p.m. (Mike/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00650 -JIM KYPREOS - A development review of site and architectural plans fora 3,036 square foot drive-thru restaurant within the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Malachite Avenue - APN: 0208-261-19. Related File: Pre-Application Review DRC2003-00175. • 7:10 p.m. (Doug/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00866 - PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT -The development of four one-story concrete tilt-up industrial buildings ranging from 18,270 square feet to 236,440 square feet for a total of 303,580 square feet on 12.91 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue, "Watson I-15 Business Center" - APN: 0229-121-37, 39, 40, 41, 43, and 44. 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. (Donald/Cam) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16487 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - A request for a single parcel subdivision for Industrial Condominium Purposes, in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street -APN: 0208-352-11. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00987 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - A request to construct a 16,448 square foot office building on 1.2 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street -APN: 0208-352-11. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. DRC ACTION AGENDA March 2, 2004 Page 2 • 7:40 p.m. (Larry/Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16567 -JOHN LAING HOMES - A request to subdivide 12.74 net acres of land into 23 numbered and 9 lettered lots related to develop 18single-family detached condominiums and 138 attached condominiums with common recreation facility, common area landscaping, within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located between Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road, and between Hellman and Malachite Avenues - APN: 0208-141-06 thru 18, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38; and 0208-151-07, 14, and 23 thru 29. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-01036, Development District Amendment DRC2003-01037, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-01035, and Historic Point of Interest DRC2004-00105. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, MASTER PLAN, AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-01036 -JOHN LAING HOMES - A request to develop 18 single-family detached condominiums facing San Bernardino Road, and 138 attached condominiums with common recreation facility, common area landscaping, on 12.74 net acres of land within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located between Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road, and between Hellman and Malachite Avenues - APN: 0208-141-06 thru 18, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38; and 208-151-07, 14, and 23 thru 29. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16567, Development District Amendment DRC2003-01037, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-01035, and Historic Point of Interest DRC2004-00105. 8:OOp.m. (Doug/Willie) TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTT16300-THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT- The proposed subdivision of 14.8 acres of land into 7 parcels in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, between Pittsburgh Avenue and Richmond Place -APN: 0229-293-48. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-00770. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00770 - THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT - A request to develop a commercial center consisting of 3 four-story hotel buildings totaling 352 rooms and 4 restauranUretail pads on 14.8 acres of land in the Industrial Park District, (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, between Pittsburgh Avenue and Richmond Place -APN: 0229-263-48.. Related File: SUBTT16300. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith March 2, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00650 -JIM KYPREOS - A development review of site and architectural plans fora 3,036 square foot drive-thru restaurant within the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Malachite Avenue - APN: 0208-261-19. Related File: Pre-Application Review DRC2003-00175. PLANS WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE MEETING Background: On November 4, 2003, the Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to two revisions stated below. These two revisions were to be submitted for review as a consent item. Staff Comments: In response to the Committee's comments at the November 4, 2003, meeting, the applicant has revised the project to include the following: Two potential versions of the columns supporting the drive-thru canopy that the Committee can select: • Square section columns with plaster finish • Cylindrical section concrete columns 2. Revise landscaping for easier maintenance. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Mike Smith The Committee chose the square section columns and accepted the revised Landscape Plan with the condition that the applicant removes the Dwarf Heavenly Bamboo shrubs from the lawn areas. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Doug Fenn March 2, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00866 - PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT -The development of four one-story concrete tilt-up industrial buildings ranging from 18,270 square feet to 236,440 square feet for a total of 303,580 square feet on 12.91 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue, "Watson I-15 Business Center" - APN: 0229-121-37, 39, 40, 41, 43, and 44. PLANS WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE MEETING Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Doug Fenn At the meeting, the applicant showed the revised Site Plan and elevations to address the design issues raised at the February 17, 2004, meeting. The revised site plan shows color treatment to the • entry driveways and the truck trailer parking spaces were relocated to an acceptable area. The revised elevations showed two feet pop-outs and with sandblasting for Building "A." The applicant also stated in the meeting that all down spouts for all buildings are interior except for the south elevation of Building "A." The Committee reviewed the revised plans and recommended approval subjected to the following conditions: 1. Additional pop-out at each ends of the east and south elevations for Buildings "C," "D," and "F." 2. Height of parapet wall for all buildings shall be high enough to screen all roof equipment or projections. The applicant shall provide detailed plans for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 3. The applicant shall submit revised development packages for staff review of consistency with Design Review Committee's recommendation prior to scheduling for Planning Commission review and/or City Planner review. • • _ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Donald Granger March 2, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16487 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - A request for a single parcel subdivision for Industrial Condominium Purposes, in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street -APN: 0208-352-11. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00987 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - A request to construct a 16,448 square foot office building on 1.2 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street -APN: 0208-352-11. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Background: On January 6, 2004, the Committee reviewed the project and recommended that the project be revised and brought back for further review. The Committee directed the applicant to pay particular attention to providing a pedestrian sidewalk that connects to other buildings, reconfiguring the "T"intersection, using brick material instead of stacked stone, and adding additional treatment to the wall plane at the south and west elevations where the large towers that house the stairwells are located. The Committee requested that the project return to the Design Review Committee as a • regular item. Design Parameters: The project site is located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street. The project site is located within the Industrial Park Haven Overlay District, which strives for high employment density and a high level of architectural quality. Site planning must incorporate elements of apedestrian-oriented, campus-like setting with generous amounts of landscaping. Paseos, esplanades, and courtyards are highly encouraged. The applicant is proposing to construct atwo-story, 16,448 square foot office building. The project site has been designed with a covered, outdoor employee eating area that includes tables and benches. The building has strong articulation in all wall planes, five balconies, and a courtyard at the entrance of the building with a fountain. The two primary exterior materials consist of stucco and red brick. Horizontal fry reglets provide additional relief to the wall planes. The vacant property to the west is concurrently being proposed for development of two office/medical buildings totaling 23,762 square feet (DRC2003-00988). In response to the Design Review Committee's comments at the January 6, 2004, meeting, the applicant has revised the project to include the following: • A sidewalk along the south side of the main east-west drive aisle and along the west property line has been added. • The north drive aisle opening has been shifted to the north, and the previous offset "T" intersection has been eliminated. • The Landscape Plan has been upgraded with intensified plantings and additional color. • The employee outdoor eating area is oriented to provide a logical connection to the • building. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. DRC ACTION COMMENTS SUBTPM16487 AND DRC2003-00987 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT March 2, 2004 • Page 2 Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. The application of brick is critical to the overall architectural concept. The brick should be modified to include the following: The wood posts with a plaster finish at the balconies create an awkward transition from the brick columns at the first floor. The columns at the balconies on the second floor should be boxed out to match the supporting columns on the first floor. Brick should be added to the columns at the second floor balconies. At the south elevation, the two isolated vertical brick bands with the offset battered cap at the base should be redesigned to provide a logical connection with the rest of the building. The brick band arrowpoints at the south and west elevations do not blend with the dominant brick patterns on the building and should be eliminated. 2. The two large elements that house the stairwells at the south and west elevations are a departure from the form and the roofline of the rest of the building. They appear as "add-ons" because of their distinctly different appearance from the architecture of the building. Their only purpose seems to be to allow a person to access the roof via stairs, rather than a roof hatch, which is very unusual fora 2-story building. The two tower elements should be lowered to be only slightly above the roofline, and should be redesigned with a cornice that matches • the rest of the building. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Large member lumber sizes (8-inch by 8-inch posts, 8-inch by 10-inch beams, and 2-inch by 6-inch lattice) and beams with decorative ends should be utilized at the employee outdoor eating area. Posts should be placed on a 2-foot by 2-foot brick base that is a minimum of 4 feet high in order to complement the building design. Colored concrete with score lines should be used in the employee outdoor eating area. 2. The courtyard at the primary entrance (north elevation) of the building should be redesigned to include landscaping. 3. Colored concrete or 24-inch by 24-inch scored concrete should be used in the first nine spaces in front of the buildings (carpool and handicap) and in the courtyard at the main entrance at the south elevation. Colored/scored concrete will define the buildings entrances and enhance the architecture of the building. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. Outdoor furniture shall be provided in the outdoor employee eating area. 2. All outdoor furniture (tables, benches, trash receptacles, bollards, etc.) shall be uniform. • 3. The project will require review and approval of a Uniform Sign Program. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised and return to Design Review Committee prior to being scheduled for Planning Commission. DRC ACTION COMMENTS SUBTPM16487 AND DRC2003-00987 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT March 2, 2004 • Page 3 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Donald Granger At the meeting, the applicant presented revised drawings which satisfied several of the Major and Secondary Issues raised by the Committee at its January 20, 2004, meeting. The Committee reviewed the project and recommend approval with the following conditions: 1. The columns at the balconies on the second floor shall be boxed out to match the supporting columns on the first floor. The boxed out columns shall extend to the bottom of the cornice. Brick should be added to the columns at all second floor balconies. 2. At the south elevation, west of the exit, the center plaster columns shall be eliminated and the brick recess shall be deepened to a depth of 12 inches. 3. The brick band arrowpoints at the south and west elevations shall be eliminated. 4. The two large elements that house the stairwells at the south and west elevations shall be lowered to be only slightly above the roofline, and shall be redesigned with atwo-tiered cap that matches the rest of the building. Final design shall be subject to City Planner review and • .approval. 5. Large member lumber sizes (8-inch by 8-inch posts, 8-inch by 10-inch beams, and 2-inch by 6-inch lattice) and beams with decorative ends shall be utilized at the employee outdoor eating area. Posts shall be placed on a 2-foot by 2-foot brick base that is a minimum of 4 feet high, and colored concrete with score lines shall be used in the employee outdoor eating area. 6. The courtyard at the primary entrance (north elevation) of the building shall be redesigned to include landscaping. Final design shall include large-size potted plants. 7. Colored concrete or 24-inch by 24-inch scored concrete shall be used in the first nine spaces in front of the buildings (carpool and handicap) and in the courtyard at the main entrance at the south elevation. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Larry Henderson March 2, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16567 - JOHN LAING HOMES - A request to subdivide 12.74 net acres of land into 23 numbered and 9 lettered lots related to develop 18single-family detached condominiums and 138 attached condominiums with common recreation facility, common area landscaping, within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located between Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road, and between Hellman and Malachite Avenues -APN: 0208-141-06 thru 18, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38; and 208-151-07, 14, and 23 thru 29. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-01036, Development District Amendment DRC2003-01037, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-01035, and Historic Point of Interest DRC2004-00105. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, MASTER PLAN, AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-01036 -JOHN LAING HOMES - A request to develop 18 single-family detached condominiums facing San Bernardino Road, and 138 attached condominiums with common recreation facility, common area landscaping, on 12.74 net acres of land within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts located between Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road, and between Hellman and Malachite Avenues -APN: 0208-141-06 thru 18, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38; and 0208-151-07, 14, and 23 thru 29. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16567, Development District Amendment DRC2003-01037, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-01035, and Historic Point of Interest DRC2004-00105. • Backoround: The Planning Commission reviewed aPre-Application Review DRC2003-00503 on June 11, 2003, and again on August 13, 2003 (Exhibit "A"). A neighborhood meeting was conducted by the developer on January 14, 2004. Since then, the developer has been working closely with staff to address Commission and neighborhood concerns. Master Plan: Pursuant to the City Requirements for the Mixed Use Designation, the applicant has submitted a Master Plan which provides an illustrative Land Use Plan for the entire block and a conceptual design features and development standards for the specific residential project that is proposed. Subject to the DRC recommendations, staff is supportive of the overall concepts and development standards as shown in the Master Plan. Design Parameters: As a mid block in-fill project, this development has had a number of significant challenges. The challenges include relating to the Foothill Boulevard Improvement requirements on the south, while responding to the different surrounding land uses including single-familydetached homes to the north, commercial to the east, and a mobile home community to the west. The applicant has responded by using single-family detached units along the San Bernardino Road (north side) frontage and extensive landscape setbacks on the other three sides, in addition to providing multiple pedestrian connections to the Foothill Boulevard frontage for strong linkage to adjacent commercial properties. Access to the site is provided via gated driveways on Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road. Also, the internal motor court design is reminiscent of the Route 66 Motor Courts historically found along Foothill Boulevard in the past. The proposed development has incorporated all of the City's • recommended design criteria and, therefore, there are no outstanding major issues or policy questions identified herein. DRC ACTION COMMENTS SUBTT16567 AND DRC2003-01039-JOHN LAING HOMES March 2, 2004 • Page 2 Other noteworthy details include the following: Architecture: It appears that the Commission's policy on 360-degree architecture has been adequately addressed, particularly on the most publicly visible units. 2. Total open space provided at 53 percent exceeds 45 percent required at this density. 3. Landscaping appears adequate with a total of 588 trees proposed and 585 required. Twenty percent of the trees are 24-inch or larger. 4. Parking: Because the applicant is providing a standard iwo-car garage per dwelling unit, there are five garage spaces provided above the minimum requirement and, in addition, there are eight open parking spaces above the minimum requirement. The open parking spaces appears to be reasonably distributed throughout the development with 33 spaces on the west side and 32 spaces on the east side. There are 22 extra parking spaces above minimum Code requirements. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: All major issues were addressed subsequent to the previous Pre-Application Review • conducted by the Planning Commission in 2003. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Site Plan -The Committee should review the proposed building setbacks along the project boundary, particularly in relation to the adjoining mobile homes. The two-story multi-family buildings propose setbacks varying from 19.9 feet (one third) to 29.9 feet (two thirds). The minimum setback required is 20 feet. Note: in the areas with 19.9 feet setback (which include private patio areas), no trees are provided as a buffer. At a minimum, staff would recommend a continuous buffer of the Podocarpus evergreen trees along the project boundary. 2. Motor Court -The Development Code requires a minimum of 24 feet wide driveway access for two-way traffic; whereas, only 20 feet is proposed in the "neck". The provision of the required 24-foot wide driveway with vine pockets only is acceptable. 3. Recreation Amenities - A total of five are required; however, the Development Code stipulates the Planning Commission shall determine the number and locations of multiple tot lots forthis size project, whereas, the project only has one, and the applicant has proposed the Rose Garden and Gazebo instead of an additional Tot Lot. The amenities shown are well designed. 4. Mailboxes -None are shown on plans for multi-family area. The preferred option is a centralized mailbox within community building. Alternatively, gang mailboxes designed into architectural structures (e.g., trellis) may be located throughout project. 5. Foothill Boulevard Landscaping -The following elements should be provided consistent with • the Suburban Parkway design of the Foothill Boulevard/Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan: DRC ACTION COMMENTS SUBTT16567 AND DRC2003-01039-JOHN LAING HOMES March 2, 2004 Page 3 In addition to London Plane trees, the informal tree clusters should include California Sycamore, and Purple Plum. Rhus Lancea is no longer the desired tree species in the parkway. There should be greater meander in the public sidewalk, except where the right-turn lane is located. This may necessitate sidewalk easement, slope changes and/or retaining walls. The intent was for the sidewalk to meander within a 16-foot parkway (not 13 feet as proposed). • Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. Xeriscape principles should be incorporated into landscape and irrigation design. 2. Air conditioning units located outside private patios should be screened by shrubs. 3. All stone veneer should extend below ground surface. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Larry Henderson The Committee recommended approval based on the applicant's response letter dated March 1, 2004, and with the additional following conditions: The split rail wood fence be substituted with concrete rails. 2. All wood gates have metal frames as verbally indicate by the applicant. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 p.m. Doug Fenn March 2, 2004 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTT16300 - THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT -The proposed subdivision of 14.8 acres of land into 7 parcels in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, between Pittsburgh Avenue and Richmond Place - APN: 0229-293-48. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-00770. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00770 - THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT - A request to develop a commercial center consisting of 3 four- story hotel buildings totaling 352 rooms and 4 restauranUretail pads on 14.8 acres of land in the Industrial Park District, (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, between Pittsburgh Avenue and Richmond Place - APN: 0229-263-48. Related File: SUBTT16300. Design Parameters: The site is surrounded by industrial/office uses to the north and vacant land to the east. To the west, across Pittsburgh Avenue, is the recently approved Marriott's Town Place Suites with associated retail building and restaurant pads DRC2003-00728. To the south is the Ontario Mills. The frontages of the site are fully improved with curb and gutter. The land division is for financing purposes and is in conformance with City regulations • The project is an infill project. The proposed project is a for three multi-story hotels totaling 217,047 square feet, which are as follows: A 69,287 square foot Courtyard by Marriott; 69,580 square foot Hilton Garden Inn; and a 78,280 square foot Hilton Homewood Suites. Each of these hotels isfour- storieshigh. The hotels, though not each one, have Porte-cochere entries, swimming pool and spa area, and other service amenities for their guests. 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. The hotels are richly designed with amodern/traditional theme with ledge stone and vertical element enhancements along with tower elements, substantial pop outs, balconies, key stone details over windows, and smooth trowel finish on the fagade, and a four color paint scheme to add contrast to the buildings. The other four restaurant buildings will have to be designed to reflect the proposed architectural scheme of the project. There is also a plaza area at the southwest corner of the project with a water fountain. Note: There are inconsistencies between various plans. Staff Comments: Maior Issues: None. The applicant has diligently worked with staff to address major issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. All of the hotels can use more vertical stonework on the vertical elements of the buildings. A good example of this would be the pavilion building on Sheet A6.2. The stone material must be enhanced on atl sides of the hotels. DRC ACTION COMMENTS SUBTT16300 AND DRC2003-00770- THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT • March 2, 2004 Page 2 2. A trellised pedestrian pathway should be constructed in the landscape areas from the three hotels that will direct patrons to the restaurant buildings. This pathway will intersect the main intersection access travel lane with an enhanced round-a-bout type landscaped structure. 3. Hotels that depict key details should provide a key stone element. 4. The use of faux balconies should be placed on the facades and should be on all four sides of the buildings. 5. Provide a schedule or callout what materials will be used for the circular design elements that are shown on the interior drive aisles. 6. Provide a decorative privacy screen wall around the pool and spa area. A screen wall must also be provided around any pool ancillary equipment. 7. Provide more trees along all sides of the pad buildings. 8. Corners -Both 4th Street corners should be enhanced with significant landscape and plaza treatment, including public art. 9. Landscaping Palette -Revise the Conceptual Landscape Plan to note which plant materials are being used and their locations by including symbols in the Planting Legend. • 10. Plant trees along both sides of the sidewalk, between trellises, to shade the parking lot and to accent this important pedestrian connection. 11. Provide more direct sidewalk connections from public streets where grades allow: a) from the intersection of 4th Street and Milliken Avenue, through the plaza, and to Buildings C and D; b) from Pittsburgh Avenue to Building B along the south side of the driveway; and c) from 4th Street to Famous Dave's and Panda Inn. 12. Provide a direct sidewalk connection from the southeast corner of Hilton Homewood Suites to Ruby Tuesdays restaurant by crossing the driveway. 13. Provide a decorative scored concrete pavement under and from the porte-cochere across the drive aisle to connect with the circular element in the drive aisle to the south. 14. Delete raised median planters in both driveways along Mission Vista Drive. City Engineering standards prohibit planters within the public right-of-way as shown; hence, there is not enough depth to provide a suitable planter. Polic y Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. Provide shade trees in all parking areas. For example, the following parking rows have few or no trees: east side of Homewood Suites, south side of Hilton Garden Inn, north side of Panda Inn, north and east sides of Famous Dave's, and north and west sides of BJ's. Minimum Code standard is one tree per 3 parking stalls (design intent is to shade at least 50 percent of • pavement area). 2. Provide decorative pavement at all drive entry throats (outside the public right-of-way). • DRC ACTION COMMENTS SUBTT16300 AND DRC2003-00770- THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT March 2, 2004 Page 3 3. Decorative pavement used in common pathways should extend across driveways for continuity and to alert motorists. 4. Trash receptacles must be decorative to match the architecture of the project. No trash enclosures are shown for the four restaurant pads. 5. Outdoor dining patios for restaurants along 4th Street will require a noise study and appropriate sound attenuation barriers, such as Lexan panels. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised per the above recommendations and return to DRC as a full item. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Doug Fenn At the meeting, the applicant stated that they have revised plans that addressed the identified secondary and policy issues except for items #2 and #4 of the secondary issues. They proposed to use molding around the window instead of faux balconies because Hilton Hotel would not allow for them. They also proposed several 10 by 8 feet overhead trellis works along the landscaped areas. They then presented revised plans to the Committee. The Committee reviewed-the revised plan and recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The Committee accepted the revised elevations that show additional stonework for the buildings, and the molding around the windows for Hilton Inn. 2. The Committee approved a long curved trelliswork on both sides of the curved pedestrian area in the middle of the main drive aisle. The columns for the curved trelliswork should include ledge stone or stacked stone material. 3. The applicant shall submit revised development packages for staff review of consistency with the Committee's recommendations and in addressing the identified secondary and policy issues, prior to Planning Commission review. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • March 2, 2004 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjdurned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, l Bra Buller Secretary • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY MARCH 16, 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 (Emily/gene) TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16089 -DOW DING - A request to subdivide 2.135 acres of land into three single-family lots in the Very Low Residential District (1 to 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of Wilson Avenue, approximately 330 feet east of Hermosa Avenue - APN: 1074-261-03. 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. (Debra/Rene) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16648 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide 7.68 acres of land into seven single-family residential lots totaling 1.03 acres and one remainder parcel of 6.14 acres for the purpose of developing a public storage facility located in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the east 210 Freeway on- ramp -APN: 1076-001-02 and 1076-341-01. Related File: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00850. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00850 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to develop a public storage facility of 185,491 square feet, along with 3,597 square feet for the manager's office and apartment, on 6.14 acres in the Low Residential District (2- 4dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the east 210 Freeway on-ramp -APN: 1076-331-02 and 1076-341-01. 7:40 p.m. (Debra/Joe) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00638 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES/DR HORTON -The design review of site plan and building elevations for a proposed tri-plex condominium project consisting of 186 attached dwelling units on 18.48 acres (21.38 gross acres) in the • Mixed-Use/Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Arbors Village of the Victoria Community Plan, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Church Street -APN: 0227-201-37, 40, and a portion of 41. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16612. DRC AGENDA March 16, 2004 Page 2 • 8:00 p.m (Larry/gene) DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00880 - PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES INC. -CARRIAGE ESTATES III -The design revive for a detailed site map and elevations for 33single-family lots on 28.7 acres of land in the Very Low Residential and Estate Residential Districts (1-2 and .1-1 dwelling units per acre, respectively) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located north of Banyan Street between Etiwanda and Bluegrass Avenues - APN:0225-111-18, 20, 24, 25, and 27. Related Files: Tentative Tract SUBTT16466 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00533. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT 1, 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 March 11, 2004, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. ~l~Ou~7`c./ • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Emily Wimer March 16, 2004 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16089 - DOWDING - A request to subdivide 2.135 acres of land into three single-family lots in the Very Low Residential District (1 to 2 dwelling units per acre) located on the north side of W ilson Avenue, approximately 330 feet east of Hermosa Avenue - APN: 1074-261-03. Background: The project had been reviewed by the Trails Advisory Committee (TAC) on November 12, 2003, and received conceptual approval for the trail locations. The applicant will be responsible to install standard fencing and gates. After the TAC's review, and only recently, the applicant has submitted the required additional information for the project to be deemed complete for Design Review. Design Parameters: The 2.135-acre site is on the north side of Wilson Avenue east of Hermosa Avenue. There is one single-family home, which will remain, and the additional area has a Christmas tree farm. A Eucalyptus windrow with approximately 23 trees exists on the east property line. To accommodate the horse trail and community trail, eight fruit trees, two Palm trees, and two Eucalyptus trees must be removed. Along Hermosa Avenue, from the Alta Loma Strom Basins to W ilson Avenue, there is an existing • parkway trail following a Eucalyptus windrow. The trail will be extended along the west side until it joins the Almond Trial. The applicant is proposing three single-family lots, which well exceed the Very Low Residential requirements. The average lot size is 31,443 square feet. The average lot length is 278.6 feet, which exceeds the requirement by 78 feet in length. The project is a subdivision only, and no house product was submitted. The applicant intends to sell the subdivided lots individually. The existing house will remain on Lot 1. 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 any major issues. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION: Staff Planner: Emily Wimer Members Present: • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Debra Meier March 16, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16648 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide 7.68 acres of land into seven single-family residential lots totaling 1.03 acres and one remainder parcel of 6.14 acres for the purpose of developing a public storage facility located in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the east 210 Freeway on-ramp - APN: 1076-001-02 and 1076-341-01. Related File: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00850. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00850 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to develop a public storage facility of 185,491 square feet, along with 3,597 square feet for the manager's office and apartment, on 6.14 acres in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the east 210 Freeway on-ramp - APN: 1076-331-02 and 1076-341-01. Design Parameters: The proposed project consists of two components: a public storage facility on 6.14 acres and a subdivision to create seven single-family lots on 1.03 acres; however, no home product is proposed at this time. The public storage facility includes 185,491 square feet of storage space, and 3,597 square feet of office space and an apartment for the manager. The seven single- family lots will take access from Heather Street, with the northern side of Heather Street being • completed with the subdivision improvements. Project Site And Surrounding Land Uses: The existing land use surrounding the site includes single-family residential adjacent to the east and south boundaries, the 210 Freeway along the north boundary, and Haven Avenue on the west boundary. Existing improvements on the site include curb, gutter, and sidewalk along Haven Avenue. The project site is typical of an urban vacant parcel of land, which has been maintained annually for weed control; no trees, structures, or other unique feature exist on the site. Neighborhood Compatibility: Given the underlying Low Residential designation of the project site, the public storage facility can only be permitted with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, subject to certain mitigating conditions, as outlined in the Development Code. Code section 17.08.030.E.5 states the following: The development ofmini-storage facilities maybe considered in residential land use districts as a means of mitigating land use conflicts outlined in Section 17.08.050.F. There are certain locations within the City where residentially designated properties are located adjacent to undeveloped parcels of land where this transition between the existing residential neighborhood and non-residential influences (i.e. high traffic corridors, commercial or industrial land uses, etc.) is a primary design issue that prevents desirable development, resulting in such parcels remaining undeveloped or underdeveloped. The mini-storage use would be considered in situations where the facility would act as mitigational buffers forresidential developments impacted by unchangeable environmental issues, such as • traffic and noise, as determined by the Planning Commission. DRC COMMENTS SUBTT16648 AND DRC2003-00850 March 16, 2004 • Page 3 The proposed Aim All Storage facility is located on just such a parcel as envisioned by the Code section noted above. The residentially zoned property is immediately adjacent to the 210 Freeway and existing residential development is situated east and south of the vacant parcel. The freeway is a significant generator of nuisance noise that must be mitigated in a residential environment. The noise is typically mitigated by the construction of a solid masonry wall, which can often reach heights of 17 feet, and often then only mitigate noise to industry-acceptable levels, rather than truly comfortable levels for the enjoyment of the backyard. The proposed self-storage facility is, by the nature of the operation, a facility that has a low activity level, generates little traffic and generates very little noise; and would, therefore, provide a buffer between the freeway and existing single-family residential neighborhood, as an alternative to the excessive height block wall. Variance: The applicant has submitted a Variance application to consider a request for a reduction in setback to 0 feet along the south and east boundaries of the public storage facility. The standard setback requirement for a commercial activity that is adjacent to a residential land use is 20 feet. However, in this case, due to the inherent design of the public storage facility, a 20-foot setback would become a "no man's land" - an area situated between the building wall and a property line wall that would have limited visibility and no convenient access. This situation breeds maintenance problems and difficulty in policing unauthorized activities. The Planning Commission approved a similar Variance request for another Aim All Storage located at the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Hermosa Avenue, where an existing residential neighborhood bordered the project site. • Although, in this case the applicant is also creating seven single-family lots along the south boundary of the project, and it has been suggested that rather than approving the variance along the south boundary, that the depth of the proposed lots could be extended by 20 feet as an alternative to the Variance. A summary of the issue is provided in Comment #1 below in order to initiate Committee discussion. Architectural Elements: The architectural design of the project features a contemporary Mediterranean theme. Building materials include Mission file roofing, stucco finish with multiple layers of stucco-covered entablature. Along the freeway elevation the building height varies, as does the building detailing; including segments of split-face concrete block, and tower elements with gabled rooflines. The business signage will be limited to a total of three signs in any combination of wall-mounted and monument signage; this may include the north facing building wall which faces the freeway. The south-facing building wall (which also forms the north boundary of the proposed Tentative Tract SUBTT16648) is 12 feet in height. The wall surface will be stucco on a CMU wall with adouble- banded entablature. The east-facing building wall is along the rear property line of existing residents on Valinda Avenue. The grading of the site is such that the proposed building wall will not be visible from the two northerly residents facing Valinda Avenue; the remaining six residents facing Valinda Avenue will view the proposed building wall anywhere from a few inches to approximately 2Yz feet above their existing rear yard block wall. Comment #2 below provides a staff recommendation to further minimize impact of the building wall on the existing residents. • Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: DRC COMMENTS SUBTT16648 AND DRC2003-00850 March 16, 2004 • Page 4 PERTAINING TO THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP The Design Review Committee should consider whether it would be desirable to increase the depth of the single-family lots by 20 feet (equivalent to the setback variance needed) to compensate for the 14-foot high slope and 12-foot building wall height that the future resident will face in the rear yard of the lot. PERTAINING TO AIM ALL STORAGE As the line of Building B becomes visible along the east boundary (along the property boundary of the Valinda Avenue residents) the proposed building material shall be compatible in some fashion to the existing block wall and/or provide a decorative cornice trim as noted on the south elevation. 2. Delete City logo signage on the northwest corner of the building tower element. The southeast corner of Haven Avenue and the 210 Freeway on-ramp is not designated in the City General Plan Exhibit II I-14 or Table III-26 as a City Gateway. Furthermore, it is inappropriate to include City's logo on anon-public building. 3. The proposed project sits below street grade along Haven Avenue, with the worst-case condition being right at the corner of Haven Avenue and the 210 Freeway on-ramp. The • applicant shall analyze the line-of-sight from the sidewalk and/or driving lane on Haven Avenue across the top of the parapet line onto the roof of the structure for Sections 1 and 22. A slight increase in height of the parapet may block visibility of the rooftop across the facility. 4. It is the preference of the Planning Division to utilize the Haven Avenue parkway width to decrease the overall rate of grade of the proposed slope, rather than having a 2:1 slope at the edge of the building face that provides little landscaping visible to the public parkway. However, the Engineering Division expresses a preference for relocating and reconstructing the sidewalk to a curvilinear configuration. This would be the only section of Haven Avenue (a distance of 600 feet) in the immediate area to be reconstructed with curvilinear sidewalk. All other sidewalks south of the 210 Freeway to Victoria Street were constructed prior to City incorporation and are adjacent to (and parallel to) the property line with parkway landscaping. 5. Landscape Palette -The 45-foot average parkway depth along the street frontage of this project should be revised and landscaped in accordance with the Haven Avenue Beautification Master plan -featuring Magnolias in the foreground and informal masses of Bottle Tree (Brachychiton populneus) behind. 6. Provide trees within large landscaped area south of Building "G" (east of Lot 1). 7. Construct a 6-foot decorative wall along the east property line of Lot 1, and along the north property line of Lot 6, rather than wrought iron, for privacy and separation between the public storage and residential use. 8. Assuming public storage is built first, full frontage improvements along Haven Avenue, • including landscaping, and including block wall at Lots 6 and 7, should be completed with Phase I. No Phasing Plan was proposed; hence, the timing of residential portion is unknown. DRC COMMENTS SUBTT16648 AND DRC2003-00850 March 16, 2004 • Page 5 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee discuss the issues noted with the applicant; recommend appropriate action for resolution prior to recommending Planning Commission consideration. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION: Staff Planner: Debra Meier Members Present: • • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Debra Meier'' March 16, 2004 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00638 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES/DR NORTON - Thedesign review of site plan and building elevations for aproposed tri-plex condominium project consisting of 186 attached dwelling units on 18.48 acres (21.38 gross acres) in the Mixed-Use/Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Arbors Village of the Victoria Community Plan, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Church Street - APN: 0227-201-37, 40, and a portion of 41. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16612. Design Parameters: The Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract SUBTT16612 and the associated Development Review DRC2003-00638 on November 12, 2003, and the various components of the project are now in the Building and Safety Department plan review process. As a result of plan check review, staff identified that the pool/restroom building was substantially modified from the approved elevations, which necessitates review by the Design Review Committee. Plans will be provided at the meeting for Committee review and discussion. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. • Pool/Restroom Building Design Issue: The pool/restroom building that was previously approved mimicked a small French Country cottage, the overall design, including the roof pitch being consistent with the larger residential structures within the project. The revised pool/restroom building has been modified to include a rather significant Turret element on the east end of the building. One residential building elevation within the project does utilize the turret design element, however, it is integrated into the building structure in a mannerthat is much more reminiscent of the traditional use of the Turret. Staff has several observations and suggestions for the Committee to consider with regard to the Turret design element that has been added to the pool/restroom building: The primary consideration is whether the size and scale of the Turret is in proportion to the rest of the structure; and, Consider that the more traditional use of the Turret would lend itself to becoming incorporated into the building entrance, rather than the stand-alone element as it is currently shown; and The scale of the pool/restroom building has increased insignificance to the degree that the Committee may want to consider including stone'accent elements, eitheras building wainscot, as an accent to frame the entries into the turret, or as a veneer to the entire Turret. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the plans provided at the meeting to consider the modifications to the pool/restroom building, prior to completion of the building plan check process and issuance of permits for this building. Design Review Committee Action: • Staff Planner: Debra Meier Members present: • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 p.m. Larry Henderson March 26, 2004 DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00880 -PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES INC. - CARRIAGE ESTATES III - A request for 33 single-family residences on 28.7 acres of land in the Very Low Residential and Estate Residential Districts (1-2 and .1-1 dwelling units per acre, respectively) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located north of Banyan Street between Etiwanda and Bluegrass Avenues - APN: 0225-111-18, 20, 24, 25, and 27. Related Files: Tentative Tract SUBTT16466 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00533. AN ORAL PRESENTATION WILL BE MADE BY THE STAFF PLANNER TO THE COMMITTEE. PLANS WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE MEETING. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Larry Henderson Members present: • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING • ,... TUESDAY MARCH 2, 2004 7:00 P.M. Committee Members: Alternates: CONSENT CALENDAR RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA 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 (Mike/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00650 -JIM KYPREOS - A development review of site and architectural plans fora 3,036 square foot drive-thru restaurant within the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Malachite Avenue - APN: 0208-261-19. Related File: Pre-Application Review DRC2003-00175. 7:10 p.m. (Doug/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00866 - PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT -The development of four one-story concrete tilt-up industrial buildings ranging from 18,270 square feet to 236,440 square feet for a total of 303,580 square feet on 12.91 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue, "Watson I-15 Business Center" - APN: 0229-121-37, 39, 40, 41, 43, and 44. 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. (Donald/Cam) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16487 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - A request for a single parcel subdivision for Industrial Condominium Purposes, in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street -APN: 0208-352-11. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00987 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - A request to construct a 16,448 square foot office building on 1.2 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street -APN: 0208-352-11. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. DRC AGENDA March 2, 2004 Page 2 • 7:40 p.m. (Larry/Willie) • 8:OOp.m. (Doug/Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16567 -JOHN LAING HOMES - A request to subdivide 12.74 net acres of land into 23 numbered and 9 lettered lots related to develop 18single-family detached condominiums and 138 attached condominiums with common recreation facility, common area landscaping, within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located between Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road, and between Hellman and Malachite Avenues - APN: 0208-141-06 thru 18, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38; and 0208-151-07, 14, and 23 thru 29. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-01036, Development District Amendment DRC2003-01037, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-01035, and Historic Point of Interest DRC2004-00105. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, MASTER PLAN, AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-01036 -JOHN LAING HOMES - A request to develop 18 single-family detached condominiums facing San Bernardino Road, and 138 attached condominiums with common recreation facility, common area landscaping, on 12.74 net acres of land within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located between Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road, and between Hellman and Malachite Avenues - APN: 0208-141-06 thru 18, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38; and 208-151-07, 14, and 23 thru 29. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16567, Development District Amendment DRC2003-01037, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-01035, and Historic Point of Interest DRC2004-00105. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTT16300 - THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT - The proposed subdivision of 14.8 acres of land into 7 parcels in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, between Pittsburgh Avenue and Richmond Place -APN: 0229-293-48. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-00770. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00770 - THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT - A request to develop a commercial center consisting of 3 four-story hotel buildings totaling 352 rooms and 4 restauranUretail pads on 14.8 acres of land in the Industrial Park District, (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, between Pittsburgh Avenue and Richmond Place -APN: 0229-263-48. Related File: SUBTT16300. 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 arid set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT I, Melissa Andrewin, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, • accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on February 26, 2004, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. n DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith March 2, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00650 -JIM KYPREOS - A development review of site and architectural plans fora 3,036 square foot drive-thru restaurant within the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Malachite Avenue - APN: 0208-261-19. Related File: Pre-Application Review DRC2003-00175. PLANS WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE MEETING • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Doug Fenn March 2, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00866 - PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT -The development of four one-story concrete tilt-up industrial buildings ranging from 18,270 square feet to 236,440 square feet for a total of 303,580 square feet on 12.91 acres of land in~the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue, "Watson I-15 Business Center" - APN: 0229-121-37, 39, 40, 41, 43, and 44. PLANS WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE MEETING • • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Donald Granger March 2, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16487 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - A request for a single parcel subdivision for Industrial Condominium Purposes, in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street -APN: 0208-352-11. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00987 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - A request to construct a 16,448 square foot office building on 1.2 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street -APN: 0208-352-11. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Background: On January 6, 2004, the Committee reviewed the project and recommended that the project be revised and brought back for further review. The Committee directed the applicant to pay particular attention to providing a pedestrian sidewalk that connects to other buildings, reconfiguring the "T"intersection, using brick material instead of stacked stone, and adding additional treatment to the wall plane at the south and west elevations where the large towers that house the stairwells are located. The Committee requested that the project return to the Design Review Committee as a . regular item. Design Parameters: The project site is located at the northeast corner of Red Oak Avenue and Laurel Street. The project site is located within the Industrial Park Haven Overlay District, which strives for high employment density and a high level of architectural quality. Site planning must incorporate elements of apedestrian-oriented, campus-like setting with generous amounts of landscaping. Paseos, esplanades, and courtyards are highly encouraged. The applicant is proposing to construct atwo-story, 16,448 square foot office building. The project site has been designed with a covered, outdoor employee eating area that includes tables and benches. The building has strong articulation in all wall planes, five balconies, and a courtyard at the entrance of the building with a fountain. The two primary exterior materials consist of stucco and red brick. Horizontal fry reglets provide additional relief to the wall planes. The vacant property to the west is concurrently being proposed for development of two office/medical buildings totaling 23,762 square feet (DRC2003-00988). In response to the Design Review Committee's comments at the January 6, 2004, meeting, the applicant has revised the project to include the following: • A sidewalk along the south side of the main east-west drive aisle and along the west property line has been added. , • The north drive aisle opening has been shifted to the north, and the previous offset "T" intersection has been eliminated. • The Landscape Plan has been upgraded with intensified plantings and additional color. • The employee outdoor eating area is oriented to provide a logical connection to the • building. , Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. DRC AGENDA SUBTPM16487 AND DRC2003-00987 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT • March 2, 2004 Page 2 Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. The application of brick is critical to the overall architectural concept. The brick should be modified to include the following: The wood posts with a plaster finish at the balconies create an awkward transition from the brick columns at the first floor. The columns at the balconies on the second floor should be boxed out to match the supporting columns on the first floor. Brick should be added to the columns at the second floor balconies. At the south elevation, the two isolated vertical brick bands with the offset battered cap at the base should be redesigned to provide a logical connection with the rest of the building. The brick band arrowpoints at the south and west elevations do not blend with the dominant brick patterns on the building and should be eliminated. 2. The two large elements that house the stairwells at the 'south and west elevations are a departure from the form and the roofline of the rest of the building. They appear as "add-ons" because of their distinctly different appearance from the architecture of the building. Their only purpose seems to be to allow a person to access the roof via stairs, rather than a roof hatch, which is very unusual fora 2-story building. The two tower elements should be lowered to be only slightly above the roofline, and should be redesigned with a cornice that matches the rest of the building. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Large member lumber sizes (8-inch by 8-inch posts, 8-inch by 10-inch beams, and 2-inch by 6-inch lattice) and beams with decorative ends should be utilized at the employee outdoor eating area. Posts should be placed on a 2-foot by 2-foot brick base that is a minimum of 4 feet high in order to complement the building design. Colored concrete with score lines should be used in the employee outdoor eating area. 2. The courtyard at the primary entrance (north elevation) of the building should be redesigned to include landscaping. 3. Colored concrete or 24-inch by 24-inch scored concrete should be used in the first nine spaces in front of the buildings (carpool and handicap) and in the courtyard at the main entrance at the south elevation. Colored/scored concrete will define the buildings entrances and enhance the architecture of the building. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. 1. Outdoor furniture shall be provided in the outdoor employee eating area. 2. All outdoor furniture (tables, benches, trash receptacles, bollards, etc.) shall be uniform. • 3. The project will require review and approval of a Uniform Sign Program. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised and return to Design Review Committee prior to being scheduled for Planning Commission. n U DRC AGENDA SUBTPM16487 March 2, 2004 Page 3 AND DRC2003-00987 -OASIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Donald Granger Members Present: • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Larry Henderson March 2, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16567 -JOHN LAING HOMES - A request to subdivide 12.74 net acres of land into 23 numbered and 9 lettered lots related to develop 18single-family detached condominiums and 138 attached condominiums with common recreation facility, common area landscaping, within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located between Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road, and between Hellman and Malachite Avenues-APN: 0208-141-06 thru 18, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38; and 208-151-07, 14, and 23 thru 29. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-01036, Development District Amendment DRC2003-01037, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-01035, and Historic Point of Interest DRC2004-00105. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, MASTER PLAN, AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-01036 -JOHN LAING HOMES - A request to develop 18 single-family detached condominiums facing San Bernardino Road, and 138 attached condominiums with common recreation facility, common area landscaping, on 12.74 net acres of land within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts located between Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road, and between Hellman and Malachite Avenues -APN: 0208-141-06 thru 18, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38; and 0208-151-07, 14, and 23 thru 29. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16567, Development District Amendment DRC2003-01037, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-01035, and Historic Point of Interest DRC2004-00105. • Background: The Planning Commission reviewed aPre-Application Review DRC2003-00503 on June 11, 2003, and again on August 13, 2003 (Exhibit "A"). A neighborhood meeting was conducted by the developer on January 14, 2004. Since then, the developer has been working closely with staff to address Commission and neighborhood concerns. Master Plan: Pursuant to the City Requirements for the Mixed Use Designation, the applicant has submitted a Master Plan which provides an illustrative Land Use Plan for the entire block and a conceptual design features and development standards for the specific residential project that is proposed. Subject to the DRC recommendations, staff is supportive of the overall concepts and development standards as shown in the Master Plan. Design Parameters: As a mid block in-fill project, this development has had a number of significant challenges. The challenges include relating to the Foothill Boulevard Improvement requirements on the south, while responding to the different surrounding land uses including single-family detached homes to the north, commercial to the east, and a mobile home community to the west. The applicant has responded by using single-family detached units along the San Bernardino Road (north side) frontage and extensive landscape setbacks on the other three sides, in addition to providing multiple pedestrian connections to the Foothill Boulevard frontage for strong linkage to adjacent commercial properties. Access to the site is provided via gated driveways on Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road. Also, the internal motor court design is reminiscent of the Route 66 Motor Courts historically found along Foothill Boulevard in the past. The proposed development has incorporated all of the City's • recommended design criteria and, therefore, there are no outstanding major issues or policy questions identified herein. DRC COMMENTS SUBTT16567 AND DRC2003-01039 -JOHN LAING HOMES • March 2, 2004 Page 2 Other noteworthy details include the following: Architecture: It appears that the Commission's policy on 360-degree architecture has been adequately addressed, particularly on the most publicly visible units. 2. Total open space provided at 53 percent exceeds 45 percent required at this density. 3. Landscaping appears adequate with a total of 588 trees proposed and 585 required. Twenty percent of the trees are 24-inch or larger. 4. Parking: Because the applicant is providing a standard two-car garage per dwelling unit, there are five garage spaces provided above the minimum requirement ahd, in addition, there are eight open parking spaces above the minimum requirement. The open parking spaces appears to be reasonably distributed throughout the development with 33 spaces on the west side and 32 spaces on the east side. There are 22 extra parking spaces above minimum Code requirements. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: All major issues were addressed subsequent to the previous Pre-Application Review • conducted by the Planning Commission in 2003. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Site Plan -The Committee should review the proposed building setbacks along the project boundary, particularly in relation to the adjoining mobile homes. The two-story multi-family buildings propose setbacks varying from 19.9 feet (one third) to 29.9 feet (two thirds). The minimum setback required is 20 feet. Note: in the areas with 19.9 feet setback (which include private patio areas), no trees are provided as a buffer. At a minimum, staff would recommend a continuous buffer of the Podocarpus evergreen trees along the project boundary. 2. Motor Court -The Development Code requires a minimum of 24 feet wide driveway access for two-way traffic; whereas, only 20 feet is proposed in the "neck". The provision of the required 24-foot wide driveway with vine pockets only is acceptable. 3. Recreation Amenities - A total of five are required; however, the Development Code stipulates the Planning Commission shall determine the number and locations of multiple tot lots forthis size project, whereas, the project only has one, and the applicant has proposed the Rose Garden and Gazebo instead of an additional Tot Lot. The amenities shown are well designed. 4. Mailboxes -None are shown on plans for multi-family area. The preferred option is a centralized mailbox within community building. Alternatively, gang mailboxes designed into architectural structures (e.g., trellis) may be located throughout project. • 5. Foothill Boulevard Landscaping -The following elements should be provided consistent with the Suburban Parkway design of the Foothill Boulevard/Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan: DRC COMMENTS SUBTT16567 AND DRC2003-01039 -JOHN LAING HOMES • March 2, 2004 Page 3 In addition to London Plane trees, the informal tree clusters should include California Sycamore, and Purple Plum. Rhus Lancea is no longerthe desired tree species in the parkway. There should be greater meander in the public sidewalk, except where the right-turn lane is located. This may necessitate sidewalk easement, slope changes and/or retaining walls. The intent was for the sidewalk to meander within a 16-foot parkway (not 13 feet as proposed). Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Xeriscape principles should be incorporated into landscape and irrigation design. 2. Air conditioning units located outside private patios should be screened by shrubs. 3. All stone veneer should extend below ground surface. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Larry Henderson • Members Present: • CITY OF. RANCHO CUCAMONGA • PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ' Adjoumed Meeting June 11, 2003 Vice-Chairman Macias called the Adjoumed Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 8:45 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, Richard Fletcher, Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart ABSENT: Lary McNiel STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Doug Fenn, Associate Planner, Dan James, Senior Engineer, Alan Waxen, Associate Planner NEW BUSINESS A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2003-00503 -JOHN LAING HOMES - A request for 18 single-family detached condos and 140 single-family attached motor court condos with a common recreation facility and common area landscaping within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts with improvements consistent with the Foothill Boulevard Visual Improvement Plan located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Hellman and . Malachite Avenues - APN: 020&141-06 thru 17, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38 and 020&151-20 thru 23. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, introduced the item and gave an overview of the Pre-Application Review process. Terry Galloway, after iniroducing the project team, presented a summary of the design concept and special features that he believes make the project a benefit to the area. David Kent, architect provided responses to some of the comments contained in a written staff Preliminary Review of the project. Alan Waxen, Associate Planner, addressed design issues that included major setback issues along Foothill Boulevard and San Bemardino Road that would significantly affectthe ultimate streetscapes. Also, he highlighted the need for the applicant to provide a land use master plan for the entire Mixed Use area and to show how the project complies with the General Plan requirements for the area. Pedestrian and possibly vehicular linkages to the suround properties were recommended to allow for easy access of the future nearby businesses to the residents of the complex. Mr. Waxen added that the driveway off San Bemardino Road, which may be used as the main entry/exit from the site, could thereby increase traffic concerns to the neighbors. Relocation of the pool recreation area to the center of the complex was also suggested and it was pointed out that additional recreation facilities, for a total of five, are required by City standards. Commissioner McPhail opened the Commission comments by stating that she feltthe location of the pool area was acceptable and that the openness of the tot lot was a benefit. She liked the • neighborhood "feel" of the site, but recommended that the project needs to have a more distinctive l®andscapiTng palQette. Commissioner Stewart expressed agreement with staff that a master plan is needed to appropriately place the complex within the Mixed Use context. She commented favorably on the San Bemardino frontage with the single-family units facing the street. Further she encouraged the designers to consider adding onto the multi-family buildings more of the architectural treatments exhibited on the single-family houses. Ms. Stewart declared that she does not like auto-court type multi-family designs. She felt the location of the tot-lot was not in a desirable location from a parents' point of view, as it is close to the San Bemardino Road frontage. In closing, she stated that more visitor parking is probably needed. Commissioner Fletcher stated that additional pedestrian linkage to the adjoining properties and Foothill Boulevard is needed to make access to the nearby businesses convenient to the residents. ~ce Chairman Macias agreed with Commissioner Stewart that Master Planning the area is pivotal to ensuring the appropriate site relationships with the Mixed Use area. He thought that, with the need to include additional recreation areas, the number and size of the buildings may need to be scaled back. Again in agreement with Commissioner Stewart, ice Chairman Macias reiterated the Commission's previous doubts about auto-courts as an acceptable design solution for residential developments. Mr. Coleman thanked the applicants for their interest in using the Pre-Application Review process to further the success of their project. ..... for review of a 65,245 square foot Marriott's Town Place Suite Hotel along with . restaurant and retail pad buildings within the Industrial Park District, located comer of Milliken Avenue and 4th Street. - APN 0229-342-13. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, introduced the item and gave an Review process. Pre-Application Chuck Buquet, after introducing the project team, presented a s ary of the design concept and special features. He stated the proposed concept for the fo ory hotel along with three high-end restaurants and retail building would "raise the bar for ho ability centers." Marty Campbell indicated there is currently a lot in I interest in Rancho Cucamonga, and that the location of the project is ideal for restaurant us Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner, echoe ntiments from the City Planner that this southern entry into the city is a good location for the pr sect project; however, because this is a good location and entry point into the city, only excepti design and architecture would be considered. Additionally, he indicated a landscape Plante r similar improvement must be extended in the center of the project to discourage vehicul affic off of 4th Street from taking a short cut through the project in order to get quicker acres to Milliken Avenue. Commissioner Fletch xpressed concern about the location of trash enGosures adjacent to Milliken Avenue. He supp d the project, as long as the proposed improvements and good architecture are incorporated in a overall design. _ Commissi r Stewart expressed agreement with the project and had no objection to a median break o illiken Avenue. • C missioner McP ~ Milliken Avenue. ei era ed that rich and luscious landscaping must be installed as pa PC Adjourned Minutes -2- June 11, 2003 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjoumed Meeting August 13, 2003 Chairman Macias called the Adjoumed Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 8:15 p.m. The meeting was held at Cucamonga County Water District, 10440 Ashford Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Rich Macias, Cristine McPhail, Pam Stewart ABSENT: Larry McNiel STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner, Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Warren Morelion, Assistant Planner, Alan Warren, Associate Planner e ~ • ~ OLD BUSINESS P,. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2003-00503 -JOHN LAING HOMES -Second review of a request for 18single-family detached condos and 140 single-family attached motorcourt condos with a common recreation facility and common area landscaping within the Mixed Use District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts with improvements consistent with the Foothill Boulevard Vsual Improvement Plan, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Hellman and Malachite Avenues - APN: 0208-141-06 thru 17, 33, 34, 35, 37, and 38 and 0208-151-20 thru 23. Brad Buller, City Planner, introduced the item and gave an overview of the previous Pre-application Review on June 11, 2003. He explained that following that meeting the applicant designed an altemative complex with townhouse rows opposing central driveways. Mr. Buller emphasized that the purpose of the workshop was to clarify the Commissioners' view of the auto-court concept versus a standard row townhouse design for the site. Rhonda Neely of Laing Homes summarized the altemative plan and highlighted the positive features of each site plan concept. She added that her company is appreciative of the Commission's input and that Laing Homes is prepared to move forward with either design for the site. Mr. Buller shared a conversation he had with Commissioner McNiel just before he left for the evening. He indicated Commissioner McNeil expressed reservations about the auto court concept from the closed-in appearance within each court area and also how the court's misuse (parking, play area, etc.) will negatively affect the residents. He said Commissioner McNiel mentioned that he would be willing to give auto-courts a chance at this location only. Commissioner Fletcher stated he did not know about any inherent negative aspects of the auto-court concept. He added that he liked the example of the townhouse row architecture better than the architecture of the auto-court. He asked if there is there atot-lot in the altemative plan. • Commissioner McPhail commented that she preferred the view of the auto court plan from Foothill Boulevard. She indicated any plan that is eventually proposed must have sufficient outdoor amenities for those who will reside in the complex. She added that she likes the single-family ~~ • • housing portion along San Bernardino Road. With either plan, she felt the architecture needs to be superior. Commissioner Stewart said that she did not care for either design as presented because they both look over built. While she commented that she did not care for auto-courts, she added that she could support anauto-court plan that has an appropriate amount of open space. She believed that a tot lot is needed. She proposed that some bungalows along Foothill Boulevard might enhance a "Route 66" streetscape. She felt high quality landscaping is needed along the Foothill Boulevard frontage. Chairman Macias agreed with Commissioner Stewart that he was not fond of the auto court concept; however, he preferred the auto-court plan between the two designs submitted. He added that Commissioner Stewart's suggestion regarding bungalows along Foothill Boulevard had merit within the "Route 66" context. He also believed that both plans appear too dense and that a reduction in units might be warranted. He concluded by saying that any plan needs to be pedestrian friendly and a tot lot is a must for the complex. Brad Buller, City Planner, summarized the comments of the Commission. He stated that the plans . conform to the area's multiple family density range. Further he added that single story bungalow type elements would be appropriate along Foothill Boulevard and that such features might provide a less dense appearance from the major street frontage. He advised the applicants that they could move forward with submittal of a Design Review application for either type of project. ..... B. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605 AND REVIEW DRC2003-00637 -SYCAMORE TOWN HOMES - CHARLES JOSEF A Pre-Application Review to consider a conceptual design concep development of ti6 town homes and 133 flats on 20.00 acres of lan ~ he Boulevard Mixed Use Corridor area within Subarea 1 of the Fo District north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bemar ~ Road and APN: 0207-101-31 and 34. Brad Buller, City Planner, introduced the item process. He emphasized that the purpose c design overall and its relationship to the s~c OCIATES - r the proposed Western Foothill s, located on the Baker Avenue - an overview of the Pre-Application Review workshop was to look at the proposed project ig area. Chuck Buquet, Charles Joseph Ass ales, introduced the development team and gave an overview of the project. He indicated that project is currently going through the development process with the City, and added that there ve been some revisions to the project layout that were not reflected on the plans the Com sinners received for the workshop. However, he thought the Commissioners and st ould like the new changes. He indicated that someone has done a lot of grading on the grope and flattened out an area; however, they have not been able to discoverwho did it. Victor Maho ,Chief Financial Officer for Cameo Homes, discussed the proposed project in detail. Using ph simulations of the site for reference, he explained the project layout. He also noted that the a ~ nt property owner, Sycamore Inn, is in support of the project. Giannini, Associate Landscape Architect, added that the applicant's intention is, to save as trees on-site as possible. PC Adjourned Minutes -2- August 13, 2003 • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 p.m. Doug Fenn March 2, 2004 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTT16300 - THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT -The proposed subdivision of 14.8 acres of land into 7 parcels in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, between Pittsburgh Avenue and Richmond Place - APN: 0229-293-48. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-00770. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00770 - THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT - A request to develop a commercial center consisting of 3 four- story hotel buildings totaling 352 rooms and 4 restauranUretail pads on 14.8 acres of land in the Industrial Park District, (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, between Pittsburgh Avenue and Richmond Place - APN: 0229-263-48. Related File: SUBTT16300. Design Parameters: The site is surrounded by industrial/office uses to the north and vacant land to the east. To the west, across Pittsburgh Avenue, is the recently approved Marriott's Town Place Suites with associated retail building and restaurant pads DRC2003-00728. To the south is the Ontario Mills. The frontages of the site are fully improved with curb and gutter. The land division is for financing purposes and is in conformance with City regulations. • The project is an infill project. The proposed project is a for three multi-story hotels totaling 217,047 square feet, which are as follows: A 69,287 square foot Courtyard by Marriott; 69,580 square foot Hilton Garden Inn; and a 78,280 square foot Hilton Homewood Suites. Each of these hotels isfour- stories high. The hotels, though not each one, have pone-cochere entries, swimming pool and spa area, and other service amenities for their guests. 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. The hotels are richly designed with amodern/traditional theme with ledge stone and vertical element enhancements along with tower elements, substantial pop outs, balconies, key stone details over windows, and smooth trowel finish on the fapade, and a four color paint scheme to add contrast to the buildings. The other four restaurant buildings will have to be designed to reflect the proposed architectural scheme of the project. There is also a plaza area at the southwest corner of the project with a water fountain. Note: There are inconsistencies between various plans. Staff Comments: Maior Issues: None. The applicant has diligently worked with staff to address major issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. All of the hotels can use more vertical stonework on the vertical elements of the buildings. A • good example of this would be the pavilion building on Sheet A6.2. The stone material must be enhanced on all sides of the hotels. DRC AGENDA SUBTT16300 AND DRC2003-00770- THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT • March 2, 2004 Page 2 2. A trellised pedestrian pathway should be constructed in the landscape areas from the three hotels that will direct patrons to the restaurant buildings. This pathway will intersect the main intersection access travel lane with an enhanced round-a-bout type landscaped structure. 3. Hotels that depict key details should provide a key stone element. 4. The use of faux balconies should be placed on the facades and should be on all four sides of the buildings. 5. Provide a schedule or callout what materials will be used for the circular design elements that are shown on the interior drive aisles. 6. Provide a decorative privacy screen wall around the pool and spa area. A screen wall must also be provided around any pool ancillary equipment. 7. Provide more trees along all sides of the pad buildings. 8. Corners -Both 4th Street corners should be enhanced with significant landscape and plaza treatment, including public art. 9. Landscaping Palette -Revise the Conceptual Landscape Plan to note which plant materials are being used and their locations by including symbols in the Planting Legend. • 10. Plant trees along both sides of the sidewalk, between trellises, to shade the parking lot and to accent this important pedestrian connection. 11. Provide more direct sidewalk connections from public streets where grades allow: a) from the intersection of 4th Street and Milliken Avenue, through the plaza, and to Buildings C and D; b) from Pittsburgh Avenue to Building B along the south side of the driveway; and c) from 4th Street to Famous Dave's and Panda Inn. 12. Provide a direct sidewalk connection from the southeast corner of Hilton Homewood Suites to Ruby Tuesdays restaurant by crossing the driveway. 13. Provide a decorative scored concrete pavement under and from the Porte-cochere across the drive aisle to connect with the circular element in the drive aisle to the south. 14. Delete raised median planters in both driveways along Mission Vista Drive. City Engineering standards prohibit planters within the public right-of-way as shown; hence, there is not enough depth to provide a suitable planter. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. Provide shade trees in all parking areas. For example, the following parking rows have few or no trees: east side of Homewood Suites, south side of Hilton Garden Inn, north side of Panda Inn, north and east sides of Famous Dave's, and north and west sides of BJ's. Minimum Code • standard is one tree per 3 parking stalls (design intent is to shade at least 50 percent of pavement area). 2. Provide decorative pavement at all drive entry throats (outside the public right-of-way). DRC AGENDA SUBTT16300 AND DRC2003-00770- THARALDSON DEVELOPMENT March 2, 2004 Page 3 3. Decorative pavement used in common pathways should extend across driveways for continuity and to alert motorists. 4. Trash receptacles must be decorative to match the architecture of the project. No trash enclosures are shown for the four restaurant pads. 5. Outdoor dining patios for restaurants along 4th Street will require a noise study and appropriate sound attenuation barriers, such as Lexan panels. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised per the above recommendations and return to DRC as a full item. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Doug Fenn Members Present: