Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996/04/16 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES TUESDAY APRIL 16, 1996 5:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Heinz Lumpp Larry McNiel Larry Henderson Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Dave Barker John Melcher 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. NO ITEMS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 5:00 p.m. (Scott) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-04 - DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES - Review of the detailed site plan and building elevations for a previously approved Tract Map (Tract 14072) consisting of 22 single family lots in the Low Residential designation (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest comer of Highland Avenue and Jasper Street - APN: 201-212-17, 19, and 21. 5:40 p.m. (Nancy) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-05 - WESTERN DEVELOPMENT CO. -The design review of detailed site plan and elevations for Building 12, a 10,000 square foot restaurant within the Town Center Square, in the Community Commercial District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue - APN: 1077-421-58 and 63. (Continued from April 2, 1996). 6:10 p.m. (Brent) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-13 - MAX WILLIAMS ARCHITECTS - A request to re-use an existing vacant single family home for a Church and school in the Low Density Residential district, located at 9244 19th Street. - APN: 201-341-04. Related File: Variance 96-03. 6:40 p.m. (Brent) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-32 - REX SHAFFER - A request to add 3,112 square feet of body shop/office space to an existing auto body facility in Subarea 3 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 9777 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 208- 282-03 and 04. DRC AGENDA April 16, 1996 Page 2 7:10 p.m. (Scott) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-33 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS - A request to establish a lube facility within an existing commercial retail center in the Regional Related Commercial designation(Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Interstate 15 - APN: 229-031-37. ( Continued from March 19, 1996.) PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT I, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on April 4, 1996, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. I0 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 5:00 p.m. Scott Murphy April 16, 1996 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-04-DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES -Review of the detailed site plan and building elevations for a previously approved Tract Map(Tract 14072) consisting of 22 single family lots in the Low Residential designation (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Highland Avenue and Jasper Street - APN: 201-212-17, 19, and 21. Background: On September 12, 1990, the Planning Commission approved the Tentative Tract 14072. The original applicant has since submitted the final map for plan check. The final map is almost ready for recordation. Rough grading plans have also been submitted for plan check. Once completed, a Grading Permit can be issued for the project. Desien Parameters: The project is located adjacent to the future Route 30 freeway. With the original application, the applicant was required to submit an acoustical analysis addressing potential noise impacts from the freeway. Over the past year, the Route 30 Ad Hoc Committee has been meeting to review the design of the freeway through Rancho Cucamonga. As a result of these meetings, the freeway profile has changed dramatically in this area of the City. Originally, the freeway was designed to cross over Sapphire Street, resulting in a partially elevated profile. That design necessitated up to a 10-%z foot high noise attenuation wall along the south property boundary. The recent design, however, calls for a depressed freeway profile roughly 30 feet below the pad grade elevations. As a result of the redesign, a revised acoustical analysis has been prepared. The new study indicates that a 6-foot garden wall will now satisfy the noise mitigation requirements. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. The driveway on Lot 22 should be relocated to the west side of the lot to avoid conflict with the catch basin(s). The catch basins are located in a sump condition and, without changes in the street grade, can not be relocated. The driveway shift can be accomplished by reversing the plan proposed or using Plan 2R. Plan 2R would allow the driveway to be relocated to the west side of the lot while leaving the garage in the same location. 2. The house plans on Lot 8 should be modified so the drive approach can be located a minimum of 50 feet from the curb return. This will minimize conflicts between the property owner backing out of the driveway and blind right turn movements from Sard Street. 3. Driveways should be paired wherever possible to provide larger landscaped areas along the street frontage. 4. Provide variation in the garage door detailing. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the application subject to conditioning the above-referenced items. DRC COMMENTS DR 96-04 - DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES April 16, 1996 Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Scott Murphy The Committee recommended approval of the application subject to the following conditions: 1. Plan 2R should be used on Lot 22. Plan 1 may be used on Lot 21 in order to maintain the appropriate unit mix within the model complex. 2. Plan 313 should be used on Lot 8 to pull the driveway as far from the corner as possible. Plan 2R may be used on Lot 10 to maintain the unit mix within the subdivision. 3. Plan 2R should be used on Lot 11 instead of Plan 2 to orient the unit towards the subdivision. The applicant indicated that they were not able to provide the required 20-foot perimeter setback and provide sufficient separation between the living area and the sideyard fencing (5 feet) with the Plan 2. The Committee recommended the applicant work with staff on alternative layouts. 4. Plan 2 should be used on Lot 19 to maintain the number of standard and reverse-plot units. 5. Variation should be provided in garage door treatments. 6. Return walls should be constructed of block and receive a decorative finish consistent with the building designs. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 5:40 p.m. Nancy Fong April 16, 1996 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-05 - WESTERN DEVELOPMENT CO. -The design review of detailed site plan and elevations for Building 12, a 10,000 square foot restaurant within the Town Center Square, in the Community Commercial District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue - APN: 1077-421-58 and 63. (Continued from April 2, 1996). This item was continued by the Committee so that the applicant could devise the west elevation to address their design concerns. Plans will be available at the meeting for review. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee reviewed the revised west elevation and recommended approval of the project. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:10 p.m. Brent LeCount April 16, 1996 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-13 - MAX WILLIAMS ARCHITECTS - A request to re-use an existing vacant single family home for a church and school in the Low Density Residential district, located at 9244 19th Street. - APN: 201-341-04. Associated with this application is Variance 96-03. Back round: The applicant originally submitted on March 31, 1994, which was deemed incomplete. The application was resubmitted several times and deemed complete for processing on March 26, 1996. Design Parameters: The applicant proposes to remodel an existing vacant single family home (former Wise Oak School) and provide on-site parking improvements to accommodate a church(100 seat chapel) and preschool/day care facility (classrooms for up to 23 children). He intends to perform as little modification to the existing building as possible in order to keep costs to a minimum and preserve the single family character of the building while upgrading to meet current Codes. He has provided a total of 33 parking spaces (27 required), and sufficient landscaping in conformance with the Development Code requirements. The applicant has requested a Variance from the required 10-foot landscape setback along the east side of the property because of the narrowness of the lot width. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Restudy the design of the church and preschool entries to provide a more formal entry statement. Consider the following design elements: a. Architectural treatment such as entry framing,color or material variation at entry, or a trellis or small pergola leading to entry. b. Landscape treatment such as the use of plants and/or colored/textured paving to define the entry and/or the pedestrian pathway leading to the entry. 2. Consider use of deciduous tree species along the west and south sides of the building to provide shade in summer and sun exposure in winter. 3. Provide 2" by 6" trim around all windows. 4. Provide decorative treatment for property line walls such as slump stone block or stucco with a brick cap. 5. Provide a pilaster at the ends of the property line walls. 6. Provide decorative colored driveway paving at entry. 7. Provide a minimum 2-foot planter along perimeter wall directly east of house by reducing driveway width to 24 feet in this area if allowed by the Fire District. This would be consistent with previously approved plans for Wise Oak School (CUP 90-25). DRC COMMENTS CUP 94-13 - MAX WILLIAMS ARCHITECTS April 16, 1996 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval with the above modifications. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Brent LeCount The Committee recommended the following changes: 1. Enhance the main entries to the church and school to provide a more formal entry statement. It is recognized that such enhancement may require construction phasing; however, the Committee wishes to review the entry design with the overall project. 2. Provide decorative/colored driveway paving at the entry up to the north end of the landscape planter island adjacent to the front parking area. Submit sample of decorative material for City Planner review and approval, prior to issuance of Building Permits. 3. Provide vine pockets along property line walls and specify that vines will be trained to grow up sides of walls. 4. Show where a trash enclosure would be located. It is recommended that the trash enclosure location be away from property lines and hidden from view of the street. 5. Eliminate wheel stops. Instead design planter curbs to function as wheel stops. 6. Provide mature/specimen size trees (24" box to 36" box) within front yard area and specify trunk size. 7. Provide berm and landscaping within front landscape setback area to buffer views of parking as much as possible. Also, raise front parking area as necessary to avoid sloped parking lot and provide further separation between parking and street. 8. Specify deciduous trees species along the west and south sides of the building to provide shade in summer and sun exposure in winter. 9. Provide 2" by 6" trim around all windows. 10. Provide decorative treatment for property line walls such as slump stone or stucco with brick cap. 11. Provide pilasters at ends of property line walls. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:40 p.m. Brent LeCount April 16, 1996 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-32 - REX SHAFFER - A request to add 3,112 square feet of body shop/office space to an existing auto body facility in Subarea 3 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 9777 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 208-282-03 and 04. Design Parameters: The site is adjacent to some small commercial buildings to the west, auto repair to the east, the "Millers Outpost Plaza" to the north, and single family homes across an unpaved alley to the rear. There is a frontage road between the site and Foothill Boulevard which would ultimately be removed and replaced with sidewalk and landscaping. The frontage will remain at this time and the applicant required to post bonds for future construction. The west half of the site is designated as an "Activity Center" by the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and the easterly half is designated "Parkway."These designations have different development standards such as building front setbacks (25 feet in the Activity Center and 45 feet in Parkway) and landscape/hardscape standards such a double row tree planting in the Activity Center (see attached excerpt from a previous Completeness Comments letter for more details). Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: I. Restudy building form and massing to avoid movie-set/false-front character which appears on the side and rear elevations. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed , and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following: 1. Provide decorative block wall materials such as split-face block or stucco. 2. Provide a view obstructing gate at the alley entrance to the rear. The gate shall be sensory activated so that it automatically opens on closes/locks as vehicles enter/exit the site. 3. Provide additional landscaping at the rear of the site. Policv issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. Provide 360-degree architectural quality by enhancing the large expanses of blank walls on the east and west elevations. 2. Design rear elevation to be visually attractive by providing articulation to the building plane, and vertical variation in roof line. 3. Paint roll-up doors and service doors to match the building. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee review the application and direct the applicant to revise the plans in accordance with the above-referenced comments. DRC COMMENTS CUP 95-12 - REX SHAFFER April 16, 1996 Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Attachment: Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Brad Buller Staff Planner: Brent LeCount The Committee recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide reveals/score lines on side elevations to add visual interest and breakup blank stucco walls. 2. Provide coping treatment along the top of the 6-foot high stucco wall along the west elevation. 3. rtion of east elevation to match windows on front elevation or Use arched windows on rear po eliminate window on east elevation. 4. Use at least 1-inch square wrought iron for trellises on front elevation. 5. Provide as much landscaping as possible within angular projected portion of site mid-way back along the west property line. 6. Provide vine pockets at base of property line wall to allow vines to grow on both sides of wall. 7. Provide a view obstructing gate at the alley entrance to the rear. The gate shall remain closed and locked and be open only as long as is necessary to enter and exit the site. 8. Provide a sample of proposed stucco texture for City Planner review and approval, prior to installation. 9. Provide decorative block wall materials such as split face block or stucco. 10. Paint roll-up doors and service doors to match the building. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Scott Murphy April 16, 1996 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-33 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS:A request to establish a lube facility within an existing commercial retail center in the Regional Related Commercial designation (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Interstate 15 - APN: 229-031-37. (Continued from April 2, 1996). Design Parameters: The site is located to the southwest of the In-N-Out Burger facility. The drive-thru lane for In-N-Out extends to the northeast corner of the site. The pad was previously planned as a retail pad. The pad has been rough graded and landscape improvements have been installed along the south side of the lot, adjacent to the drive aisle. Background: On December 5, 1995, the Design Review Committee reviewed the application and recommended that the project be referred to the Planning Commission. The Committee felt there were significant issues with the location of the facility, the ability to screen the bays from surrounding areas, and the potential conflict with the stacking for In-N-Out Burger that warrant consideration by the full Commission prior to any discussion on the architectural design. On January 10, 1996, the Planning Commission considered the application. While having no objections to lube facilities in general, the Planning Commission felt that the location proposed was not appropriate. First, the Commission expressed concern about the impact any development would have on the existing on-site traffic congestion. The second concern of the Commission centered on the potential conflicts between the application and In-N-Out Burger. In order for a vehicle to exit during these times, the drive- thru lane must be stopped by an attendant to allow the lube facility customers to exit. The Commission felt the potential conflict was unacceptable. And, the final area of concern was the visibility of the work area from the surrounding areas. As a result,the Planning Commission could not support the application. On February 21, 1996, the City Council considered an appeal filed by the applicant. After concluding the public testimony,the City Council determined that the application was appropriate for this location and directed the item back to the Planning Commission. The City Council indicated that a condition of approval should require the realignment of the drive aisle to create a four-way intersection as was required for Price Club. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. The applicant should review the site plan to determine if the entry and exit locations could be reversed to allow exiting without the conflicts with In-N-Out's stacking. 2. Detailing proposed at the entry and to cantilever the trellis members is inconsistent with previous approvals. All details used for the building should be consistent with the approved architecture for the center. DRC COMMENTS CUP 95-33 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS April 16, 1996 Page 2 Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Because of the location proposed for the facility, the service bays will be visible from the surrounding drive aisles, the existing freeway off-ramp, and the future freeway off-ramp. Extensive screening should be provided. 2. As indicated on the site plan, the operational realities of this type of facility is that vehicles will be parked at the bay entries waiting their turn for servicing. The staging of the vehicles is comparable to a drive-thru lane and should be screened. 3. The 2:1 slope on the southeast side of the building should be minimized/eliminated by exposing the exterior basement walls and providing additional architectural treatment. Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All roof-mounted equipment shall be screened by the parapet or secondary roof screen. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the application and direct the applicant to revise the plans in accordance with the above-reference comments. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Heinz Lumpp Staff Planner: Scott Murphy Because of a lack of quorum, the Committee was unable to make a formal recommendation to the Planning Commission. The alternatives provided by the applicant at the meeting included the following: Alternative Site Plan No. 1 reorients the access to the facility with the entry on the east side of the building and the exit on the east side. A drive aisle is provided from the main entry throat into the facility. The drive aisle is designed to accommodate approximately 8 cars queuing outside the facility. An access is available between the lube facility and the In-N-Out Burger site in the event a customer enters the wrong facility. Concern was expressed about the potential queuing back into the main drive aisle. Alternative Site Plan No. 2, like Alternative 1, reorients the building entry to the east and the exit to the west. Access to the facility is obtained from a separate drive aisle parallel to the In-N-Out drive-thru lane. The lane would be striped to delineate it from the drive-thru lane. Entry to the building does require a rather tight turning radius. Alternative Site Plan No. 3 is a combination of Plans 1 and 2. The design would provide for the facility entry off the main circulation drive with additional queuing available. The location of the building, however, provides an opportunity to reconstruct the access from the north should the waiting cars impact the main circulation drive. DRC COMMENTS CUP 95-33 - FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE PARTNERS April 16, 1996 Page 3 Alternative building elevations were also presented by the applicant. To address concerns about the corbel feature originally proposed, the applicant provided a redesign of the entry area using the precast columns. The applicant preferred the original design, but the alternative was acceptable. The applicant also requested that the columns and trellis feature on both sides of the building be designed to pull the columns in tighter to the building. This would eliminate concerns about vehicles hitting-the columns, the trellis would be slightly shorter, and the stantion ties (cables) would be eliminated. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS April 16, 1996 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /1- 15 Brad Buller Secretary