HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996/05/14 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES
TUESDAY MAY 14, 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.
(Steve) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-25 -
RODRIGUEZ - A request to construct a 2,900 square foot drive-thru facility and a
5,548 square foot restaurant on 3.7 acres of land in the Community Commercial
designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southwest comer
of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-211-12 and 13. (Continued
from May 1, 1996).
5:40 p.m.
(Brent) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-07 - ALTA LOMA CHRISTIAN CHURCH - A
request to install 3 temporary buildings to house educational activities associated with
an existing church on 4.99 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District , located
at 6386 Sapphire Street - APN: 1062-332-25.
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.
(Miki) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-12 - PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SERVICES - A
request to construct a 40-foot high unmanned monopole within a 360 square foot
leased site generally located west of the I-15 Freeway and north of Base Line Road at
7179 East Avenue in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre)
of the Etiwanda Specific Plan - APN: 227-141-14.
DRC AGENDA
May 14, 1996
Page 2
7:10 p.m.
(Miki) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15726 -
DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES - A request for a 17 lot subdivision on 4.61 acres
generally located south of Lemon Avenue and west of Hermosa Avenue in the Low
Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) - APN: 201-251-28. (Related File:
Development Review 96-07).
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-07 - DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES - Review of
the detailed site plan and building elevations for Tentative Tract 15726 consisting of
17 single family lots generally located south of Lemon Avenue and west of Hermosa
Avenue in the Low Residential District(2-4 dwelling units per acre) -APN: 201-251-
28.
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 May 2, 1996, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting
per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive Ranch ucamonga.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
5:00 p.m. Steve Hayes May 14, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-25 - RODRIGUEZ -
A request to construct a 2,900 square foot drive-thru facility and a 5,548 square foot restaurant on 3.7
acres of land in the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located
at the southwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-211-12 and 13.
(Continued from May 1, 1996)
Desien Parameters: The site is currently developed with a single family residence that has been
converted to commercial uses. The Klusman House is designated as a Local Landmark. The balance of
the site is undeveloped with a gradual slope from north to south. The intersection of Foothill Boulevard
and Vineyard Avenue is designated by the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (FBSP) as an activity center.
Background: On October 25, 1995, the Planning Commission conducted a Pre-Application workshop
on the application. The Commission considered a site plan almost identical to the plans submitted with
the current application. The Commission felt that the location of the drive-thru facility adjacent to the
Klusman House was not acceptable. Also, the Commission did not believe introduction of a drive-thru
facility within the activity center was appropriate. The complete minutes of the Pre-Application are
attached for the Committee's reference.
Related Application: In conjunction with the Conditional Use Permit application, the applicant has
submitted a Variance application to address building and parking setback deficiencies along both Foothill
Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue. The Variance application was originally scheduled for Planning
Commission consideration on March 27, 1996, but was continued to April 24, 1996, at the request of the
applicant. If the variance application is denied, the project site plan would have to be significantly
modified.
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 comer of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue is designated by the FBSP as an activity
center. The intent of the activity center is to allow buildings to be pulled closer to the street to
create a pedestrian friendly environment. The FBSP encourages public entrances to be oriented
toward Foothill Boulevard. Also, buildings should be designed and sited to minimize
pedestrians/vehicular conflicts and avoid locating driveways and service areas which interfere with
the flow of Foothill Boulevard pedestrian movements. The design provided by the applicant
introduces the drive-thru lane for Burger King in the middle of the activity center block. Not only
is the access to Burger King oriented away from Foothill Boulevard, but the wall necessary to
screen the drive-thru lane inhibits pedestrian access across the frontage to specific points.
2.. The Klusman House is designated as a Local Landmark. The exterior of the house has been
improved over the past few years and many improvements were made to the interior to
accommodate commercial uses. As a local landmark, staff believes that the site should be
designed to "show off' this local feature. The area west of the building has been maintained open
to the drive aisle and, ultimately, to the street. A 40-foot landscaped setback is provided between
the drive aisle and the structure. The applicant, however, has introduced a drive-thru lane and 4-
foot high wall within 25 feet of the east side of the building. Also, the proposed Burger King is
sited 15 feet closer to Foothill Boulevard than the existing house. The combination of the wall
and the building location obscures visibility of the historic structure. The site should be
redesigned to open up visibility of the Klusman House.
DRC COMMENTS
CUP 95-25 - RODRIGUEZ
May 14, 1996
Page 2
3. The current drive-thru policies adopted by the Planning Commission require drive-thru lanes to
be screened from public view. The drive-thru lane can be screened through building orientation,
a combination of Low walls, and/or landscaping, and trellis work. While the applicant is
proposing walls and a trellis, the drive-thru stacking area is located parallel to the street, resulting
in the highest visibility. The drive-thru lane is also located adjacent to the activity center which
is designed with hardscape and formal tree planting - little opportunity for landscaping exists. As
suggested in the Pre-Application workshop, the drive-thru facility could be located to other areas
of the site where the stacking lane could be screened by the building and/or more extensive
landscaping.
4. While the Design Review Committee does not review the Variance application, it is important to
note the design implications of the reduced setbacks requested by the applicant. Along both
Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue the formal hardscape/landscape treatment required by
the FBSP is interrupted. The double row of Crape Myrtle trees is reduced to a single row along
the drive-thru lane and the restaurant building. The colonnade feeling of the double tree rows will
be eliminated.
5. The current drive-thru policy requires the drive-thru lane to be setback 45 feet from the face of
curb. As proposed,the drive-thru lane is only 20 feet from the Foothill Boulevard curb. The plans
should be revised to comply with the policy.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee
will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. The architecture proposed vanes between the drive-thru facility and the restaurant. The drive-thru
facility is designed with stucco walls, large roof overhangs with exposed rafter tails, vertical wood
siding on the roof screen parapet, and a brown, flat concrete tile. The restaurant is designed with
stucco walls, large roof overhangs with exposed rafter tails in some areas, clipped eaves in other
areas, and a terra cota barrel tile roof While, individually the styles may be acceptable, the
building(s) should be redesigned to provide a consistent architectural theme for the center.
2. Additional architectural treatment should be provided to the south elevation of the drive-thru
facility and the east elevation of the restaurant to break up flat stucco walls.
3. The Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan calls for the formal landscape/hardscape treatment used for
the activity center to extend from Vineyard westerly to beyond the Klusman House. Logically,
the activity center treatment would stop at the Foothill Boulevard drive approach.
4. To accentuate the Klusman House, the formal landscape/hardscape treatment of the activity center
should extend from the public sidewalk to the house entry. Pedestrian amenities (benches, a
fountain, etc.) can be incorporated into the hardscape area.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. A decorative cap should be provided on the 4-foot screen wall adjacent to the drive-thru facility.
2. Where river rock is proposed, native stone should be used as the veneer (as opposed to
manufactured stone).
DRC COMMENTS
CUP 95-25 - RODRIGUEZ
May 14, 1996
Page 3
Recommendation: Staff recommends that revised plans be provided to address the concerns listed
above. The plans should be resubmitted for additional Committee review.
Attachment: Pre-Application Workshop Minutes dated October 25, 1995
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Heinz Lumpp, Larry Henderson
Staff Planner: Steve Hayes
The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff to revise the Site Plan to address the following
concerns:
1. The plotting of the Burger King building, as shown on the proposed Site Plan, was not acceptable
to the Committee as previously stated in the October 25, 1995 Pre-Application Workshop. The
building should be relocated to another area of the property such as west of the Foothill Boulevard
driveway access or along the Vineyard Avenue frontage, possibly "swapping" locations with the
proposed Zendejas Restaurant.
Because it does not appear that the applicant has responded to the October 25, 1995 comments and
because of time constraints other issues were not discussed by the Committee. Therefore,the Committee
recommended that the applicant work with staff to address this concern and revise the plans accordingly
for further review of the Committee. The Committee agreed to hear this item again at the next regular
Design Review Committee meeting if the applicant desired, however, the preference of the Committee
was for the applicant to work with staff to address the Committee's concerns prior to further review of
the Committee.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
5:40 p.m. Brent LeCount May 14, 1996
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-07 - ALTA LOMA CHRISTIAN CHURCH - A request to install
3 temporary buildings to house educational activities associated with an existing church on 4.99 acres
of land in the Very Low Residential District , located at 6386 Sapphire Street - APN: 1062-332-25.
Design Parameters:
The pad area for the modulars is graded and turfed. The south portion of the site is developed with a
multi-purpose/assembly building, a single family building that has been converted to an office, a parking
lot containing 55 parking spaces and a storage container. The remainder (approximately 2/3) of the site
is undeveloped with a gradual slope from north to south. The site is surrounded on all sides by single
family homes.
Back round:
In 1984, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit and associated Master Plan for
development of a church on the property. The existing buildings represent a portion of the first phase
of the Master Plan. The proposed temporary buildings are not part of the approved Master Plan and
require a new Conditional Use Permit. The temporary buildings and storage container are proposed to
occupy the site for five years and be replaced with a permanent building. The project includes a
temporary 27 space parking lot and a temporary driveway both of which would be paved with compacted
gravel.
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 Development Code requires temporary buildings to have a look of permanence. The proposed
buildings have skirting to cover the foundations, wood siding, and glass windows. Staff
recommends that the project include as much landscaping as possible around the temporary
buildings, associated utility boxes, storage container, and temporary parking. This would be
appropriate as a condition of approval.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Larry Henderson
Staff Planner: Brent LeCount
The Design Review Committee reviewed this project and recommended approval subject to the following
conditions:
1. Provide as much landscaping as possible around the temporary buildings, associated utility boxes,
storage container, and temporary parking.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:10 p.m. Brent LeCount May 14, 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. Related File: Variance 96-03.
Background:
The Design Review Committee (Lumpp, Buller)reviewed this project on April 16, 1996, and requested
that it be brought back before the Committee with a revised entry design. The applicant was unable to
finish the requested revisions in time to distribute plans for Committee review. Staff will present the
revised design with comments at the Committee meeting.
Attachment: DRC Action dated April 16, 1996
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Lary Henderson
Staff Planner: Brent LeCount
The Design Review Committee reviewed this project and recommended approval of the project subject
to the following additional conditions to be added to those from the April 16, 1996 meeting:
1. Specify that the entire building will be repainted as part of the initial remodeling (first Phase).
2. Specify that dimensional (thick butt) asphalt shingles will be used for the new roof.
3. Revise awning design to blend better with the building architecturally.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:40 p.m. Miki Bratt May 14, 1996
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-12 - PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SERVICES - A request to construct
a 40-foot high unmanned monopole within a 360 square foot leased site generally located west of the I-15
Freeway and north of Base Line Road at 7179 East Avenue in the Medium Residential District (8-14
dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan - APN: 227-141-14.
Design Parameters:
This section should be used to explain the site context and those major issues or constraints which affect
the project's design.
The underlying 8-acre property is vacant and undeveloped except for one single family residence. The
lease site is behind the residence and partially screened from East Avenue, but will be visible along East
Avenue between the residence and the railroad right-of-way, as well as from the I-15 Freeway. This
is the third monopole application which has been submitted to the Commission. Additional applications
for screened roof top installations have been reviewed and approved. The applicant considered alternate
sites, but because of site line constraints was virtually limited to the subject site. The applicant will fully
screen the ground-mounted equipment with irrigated landscaping and proposes to aesthetically soften the
impact of the monopole with Eucalyptus and three 45-foot high fan Palms. The attached computer
enhanced photograph illustrates the pole with Palms, but does not include proposed Eucalyptus trees.
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. Staff believes that the three proposed Palm trees in conjunction with eight Eucalyptus trees (15-
gallon size) will adequately mitigate the aesthetic impact of the monopole. Conditions of
approval will require that the landscaping be maintained in good condition. Also, a condition will
specify that when the underlying property is developed all the trees will be retained or, if
necessary, relocated or replaced.
Attachment: Photograph
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Larry Henderson
Staff Planner: Miki Bratt
The Committee recommended approval, as presented by staff, to the Planning Commission.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:10 p.m. Miki Bratt May 14, 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15726 - DIVERSIFIED
PACIFIC HOMES - A request for a 17 lot subdivision on 4.61 acres generally located south of Lemon
Avenue and west of Hermosa Avenue in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) -
APN: 201-251-28. (Related File: Development Review 96-07).
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-07-DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES -Review of the detailed site plan
and building elevations for Tentative Tract 15726 consisting of 17 single family lots generally located
south of Lemon Avenue and west of Hermosa Avenue in the Low Residential District(2-4 dwelling units
per acre) - APN: 201-251-28.
Design Parameters:
This is a 17 unit infill development. The primary access will be from Lemon Avenue, but two streets,
Bristol and Orange, will connect to an existing tract. The proposed elevations are generally compatible
with the existing neighborhood. A neighborhood meeting was held: increased traffic was the primary
concern expressed.
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 proposes front-on garages for all units. To improve the appearance of the street
scape, staff recommends side-on garages for approximately a third of the units (a minimum of 5).
Further, the applicant has proposed one garage door design. Staff recommends that a minimum
of three garage door designs be provided, with a "window" variation for at least one plan.
2. Applicant proposes to place west perimeter wall 1-foot east of property line in order to provide
drainage swale to accommodate storm runoff. Staff recommends an alternative solution for cross
lot drainage with perimeter wall on property line in order to avoid future problem establishing
property line between properties and/or dead space of 1-foot between fences.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee
will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Side elevations lack design treatment. Staff recommends the addition of a minimum of one
window to garage side elevation, either a bedroom or garage window; for two story plans, the
addition of a second window on the upper story.
2. Heavy cantilevered garage-front design features on Plans 101 and 102 appear awkward. Staff
recommends the heavy elements be "supported," or example on Plans 101 A and 101A3 by abeam
above the garage door; on Plans 102A and 102A3 with pilaster features.
3. On Plan 102 the garage side roof presents an unbroken mass which should be relieved, for
example by a gable or other element.
DRC COMMENTS
TT 15726 & DR 96-07 - DIVERSIFIED PACIFIC HOMES
May 14, 1996
Page 2
Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Window details on side and rear elevations must continue design motif from front elevation, for
example double boards beneath windows.
2. Perimeter block walls required and side yard return block walls are recommended. Indicate all
block walls on Site Plan as well as precise Grading Plan and concept Landscape Plan.
J. Indicate front walkway connecting driveway and entry on Site Plan and concept Landscape Plan.
4. On site plan, provide side yard dimensions for Lots 6, 7, and 8.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Larry Henderson
Staff Planner: Miki Bratt
The Committee referred the Tract Map to Technical Review Committee to resolve the west perimeter
drainage issue and recommended design approval to the full Planning Commission with the side-on
garage issues unresolved. Mr. Henderson urged the applicant to make a contact (preferably in writing)
with adjacent property owner to the west. Hopefully, the neighboring owner will express concurrence
with the proposal as submitted, or work out any conflicts prior to the Planning Commission hearing.
Commissioner McNiel supported five side-on garages to vary the streetscape. Commissioner Lumpp
concluded that since the tradeoff was between front porches and garages, he was in favor of porches.
Plan 102 roof massing is adequate.
The Committee recommended approval of the design subject to applicant revising the plans to reflect the
following:
1. A one-story plan on Lot 14.
2. Three garage doors designs without windows.
3. Windows on the side elevations of garages for Plans 102, 103, and 104.
4. A second-story round window for Plan 103 left.
5.. Corbels supporting cantilever elements for Plans 103 and 104 rear, other front, side, and rear
design elements are adequate.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
May 15, 1996
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
J Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
Secretary