Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997/09/02 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Bill Bethel Rich Macias Dan Coleman Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Dave Barker 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. (Brent) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-15 - TMP HOMES - A request to eliminate decorative brick entry portals for a previously approved tract and design review for 42 single family homes within Tract 13566 in the Low Residential District(2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located south of Wilson Avenue and west of the I-15 Freeway - APN: 226-311-27 and 226-321-01. 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. 7:15 p.m. (Alan) DESIGN REVIEW 97-12 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 15727 - GRIFFIN INDUSTRIES INC. - The review of the building elevations, detailed site plans, and grading plans for Phases I and 2; the master plan of walls and fences; and the landscaping plans for a previously approved tentative tract map consisting of 342 single family lots on 82 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) between Fourth and Sixth Streets, adjacent to the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel - APN: 210-062-02, 11, 13, 17, 18, 19, 26, 32, and 33. Related File: Lot Line Adjustment No. 404. 7:55 p.m. (Tom) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-19 - CASTILLO COMPANY. INC. - The development of a commercial shopping center consisting of a 65,155 square foot grocery/drug store, two satellite buildings totaling 6,000 square feet and 6,200 square feet, and two drive-thru pads totaling 3,500 square feet and 2,500 square feet on 9.82 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-102-03, 05, 08, 15, 20, 21, and 49. DRC AGENDA September 2, 1997 Page 2 8:30 p.m. (Tom) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15783 - G&D CONSTRUCTION - A residential subdivision of 29 single family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Residential District(8-14 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT 1, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 21, 1997, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center rive, Rancho Cucamonga. CONSENT CALENDER COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Brent LeCount September 2, 1997 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-15 -TMP HOMES -A request to eliminate decorative brick entry portals for a previously approved tract and design review for 42 single family homes within Tract 13566 in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located south of Wilson Avenue and west of the I-15 Freeway - APN: 226-311-27 and 226-321-01. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Bill Bethel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Dan Coleman The Committee continued this item to the next Design Review meeting and requested documentation from Engineering Division Maintenance staff regarding specific problems and frequency they have experienced. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:15 p.m. Alan Warren September 2, 1997 DESIGN REVIEW 97-12 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 15727 - GRIFFIN INDUSTRIES. INC - The review of the building elevations, detailed site plans, and grading plans for Phases 1 and 2; the master plan of walls and fences; and the landscaping plans for a previously approved tentative tract map consisting of 342 single family lots on 82 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) between Fourth and Sixth Streets, adjacent to the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel - APN: 210-062-02, 11, 13, 17, 18, 19, 26, 32, and 33. Related File: Lot Line Adjustment No. 404. Desien Parameters: The applicant has requested that the Master Plan of walls and the Conceptual Landscape Plan be reviewed, and if possible, approved, to expedite the final Tract Map (Phases 1 and 2) approval. Planning Commission approval of the walls and Landscaping Plans are conditions of Tentative Tract 15727 for final map approval. The site, grading and architectural elevations are also part of this design review, but it is the wall plan and landscaping that the applicant requests be given priority at this point in the process. The 82-acre site lies at the juncture of the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel and Fourth Street, and bordered on the north by Sixth Street. The project site gently slopes southward at less than 2% gradient, and consists of fallow fields of annual grasses and forbs and vineyards that are in decline. Remnants of Eucalyptus windrows border the project site, and specimen trees associated with existing residential landscaping. The site was rezoned early in 1997 to Low-Medium Residential and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was completed to assess impacts of the land use change and the residential development potential. As part of the EIR process, certain mitigation measures were identified that are design related. These measures included the following: 1. Increased setbacks from, and special landscaping adjacent to, industrial zoned properties. 2. Minimize the number of windows facing industrial zoned properties. 3. Eight foot high solid perimeter walls to help attenuate off-site generated noise. 4. Inclusion of historic themes in the project design. 5. Adequate storage space shall be provided for each dwelling unit to ease the separation of recyclable materials. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Street Landscaping: The landscaping along Fourth Street and the interior spine street will be maintained by the Landscape Maintenance District. Because of recent State initiatives that limit districts' ability to levy exactions, the Engineering Division is requesting landscaping that significantly reduces maintenance costs. Engineering favors 40% hardscape while the applicant requests a lower percentage. The issue of hardscape and maintenance costs were recently reviewed by the City Council Public Works Subcommittee with the objective to keep landscape districts "revenue-neutral" to avoid assessment increases. The Subcommittee agreed that the 40% DRC COMMENTS DR 97-12 - GRIFFIN INDUSTRIES, INC. September 2, 1997 Page 2 hardscape should be a target for all projects, however, with flexibility allowed as determined from a design standpoint. Applicants should present strong justification or alternate funding programs for designs with less than 40% hardscape. Planning staff believes a design incorporating significant amounts of hardscape can be as visually appealing as the more standard plant material only designs. The key, naturally is the how well the design is executed. Planning recommends that expansive areas should not, however, be without some plant material. Hardscape area should include shrub and tree pockets to provide relief to expanses of hardscape. The overall hardscape percentage could still be 40%. Also, variation in materials (cobble stone, stamped concrete, colored concrete, etc.) can also reduce the perceived expanse of the hardscape. The plant palette and plantings may need to be adjusted to fully incorporate a 40% hardscape design. 2. The Fourth Street entry is proposed to have two cobblestone pilaster monuments with matching cobblestone walls top the comer slopes. Planning staff believes this feature presents an attractive entry statement and satisfies the EIR historic theme mitigation requirement. Engineering has concerns regarding the potential cost of maintenance and would prefer that the monuments be located outside of the Landscape Maintenance District. 3. Site Plans: Phases 1 and 2 generally satisfy the minimum front setback variations and model variations required by the Development Code for the Low-Medium Residential District. All of the rear yard retaining walls are provided to comply with City policy requiring 15 feet of level back yard area. Staff suggests the following adjustments to improve the lot configurations: a. Lot 41, Phase 2 has two large side yards, both larger than the back yard. It is recommended that the house be shifted easterly 15 feet to-provide a more efficient consolidated west side yard and back yard. b. Shifting the house on Lot 8, Phase 2 to within 5 feet on the west property line would more easily allow for RV parking along the easterly side yard. 4. Architecture: The applicant is proposing 3 basic floor plans of 1412, 1565, and 1658 sq. ft., each with four model elevations for Phase 1 (Series A). Phase 2 (Series B) has 3 basic floor plans of 1758, 1916, and 2315 sq. ft., each with four model elevations. With reverse floor plans and two side garage variations, each phase has eight possible floor plan configurations. Generally staff believes the various .model elevations satisfy minimum City standards with the following exceptions: a. The side and rear elevations do not exhibit sufficient front elevation details to satisfy 3601 architecture policy. The following treatments are recommended to improve the overall designs: 1) Provide double fascias along all eaves. Eave overhangs should be at least 18 inches all around. 2) Provide secondary accent material in the gables or add gable frieze bands on all side street elevations. 3) All major windows on second floors should be provided with decorative s, if shutters are provided on the front elevations. "Addenda Elevation" notes limiting DRC COMMENTS DR 97-12 - GRIFFIN INDUSTRIES, INC. September 2, 1997 Page 3 shutters to exposed conditions missed the intent of 360°. Side and rear elevations are to exhibit enhanced features for neighboring residents as wells as for people viewing the structure from the public right-of-way. b. Series A, Plan 1, the porches exhibit excessive heights that seem to be out of scale with the rest of the front elevation elements. It is recommended that the openings and roofs be lowered. The same is also recommended for Plan 2, Elevations "A" and "B." C. Series B, Plan 1 does not exhibit much of a uniform design concept. The front window on each model does not relate well to any other feature on the front or any other elevation. An alternative would be to have the window treatment more closely combine with or mimic the porch entry opening, or vice versa. d. Series B, Plan 3B shows two front facing garage doors. No lots within Phase 2 have this feature. If this model is to be used, a driveway design must be submitted for review before approval of this variation. 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 Master Plan of walls and fences calls for slump block with cobblestone columns/pilasters facing Fourth Street; slump block along the remaining project perimeter and along side street property lines, and interior lot line wood fences. Staff supports the master plan with the following conditions: a. The battered column/pilasters along Fourth Street shall be provided at every other property line and at each "step back" realignment of the wall. The wall shall step back only at the junction of property lines. b. The column/pilaster shall extend beyond the exterior wall face (Fourth Street and wrap around side property lines) by at least 3 inches. C. The cap shall extend beyond the wall face by at least 2 inches. 2. The Landscaping Plan contains the following special treatments: a. Certain perimeter lots are to have drainage easements that follow the entire side property line. To help ensure that these easements will not be ignored by the homeowner, special landscaping, irrigation, and garden walls will be installed with the house. Staff believes these features will help the future homeowners integrate the drainage easements into the landscaping for each lot. b. Wall graffiti deterrent is incorporated in the perimeter tract wall. Vine plantings along the inside wall base are provided with spaces through the wall to allow growth up the outside of the wall. These plantings should be provided with a drip irrigation system from each lot backing up to the perimeter walls. C. All rear and side property lines bordering industrial parcels are required to have 8 feet of landscaped planters as part of the EIR mitigation measures. These planters are to be provided with an on-site irrigation system. Staff recommends, however,that a substitute tree species be used as Carrotwoods are susceptible to frost damage in this area DRC COMMENTS DR 97-12 - GRIFFIN INDUSTRIES, rNC. September 2, 1997 Page 4 d. Lot slopes of 5 feet in height are identified to receive planting and irrigation as required by City Code. 3. Phasing (Final Tracts): An eight-phase development plan has been included for the City's consideration. After some adjustments, the phasing and accompanying construction programs (staging, materials storage, resident notification, etc.) are satisfactory. The City Council approval of the Tentative Tract requires that the neighborhood park be completed when 30% of the units are occupied or 70% of the building permits issued. 4. Model Homes Sales: Three model home sales areas are proposed, one for each house product. Two are on each side of the Fourth Street entry and one mid-way off the central spine street. Staff believes these locations are appropriate with the construction and phasing programs. 5. To further enhance the historic theme, staff recommends that cobblestone bases be provided with mail box stands throughout the project, similar to the Etiwanda North Specific Plan design (attached). 6. Each residential lot shall be provided with an improved space for three 100 gallon automated recycling refuse containers. These spaces shall be shown on the house or site plans. 7. Approval of Phase 2 lot and street configurations is dependent on the ability of the northern most lots of Phase 4 to be a minimum of 75 feet in width, as required by Resolution 96-165. Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission or City policy, or Development Code issues and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All walls, including retaining walls in rear yards potentially visible from the streets, should consist of a decorative exterior material or finish including a decorative cap (as provided in the Master Plan of walls). 2. Provide minimum 5-foot setback between fencing on comer side yards and sidewalk. 3. Wood fencing exposed to public view shall be treated with stain, paint or water seal. 4. Chimneys and caps should be integrated and treated to be consistent with the house design, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 5. Decorative paving in individual driveways should consist of various pattems/textures of concrete, as well as the walkway leading to the front door, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 6. Native rock should be used where cobblestone is called out. Other forms of stone/masonry may be manufactured products. 7. Eighteen feet of driveway area should not exceed 5% slope. The grades should be adjusted or the garage slab lowered on those lots where the driveways exceed the maximum slope (26 feet in Phase 1, 27 in Phase 2). 8. The house on Lot 14, Phase 1 must be shift forward to allow for the minimum 15-foot rear yard setback. DRC COMMENTS DR 97-12 - GRIFFIN INDUSTRIES, INC. September 2, 1997 Page 5 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Master Plan of Walls, Phasing Plan, and Conceptual Landscape Plan, with 40% hardscape (excluding sidewalks), be approved, subject to the recommendations contained in this report and final City Engineer and City Planner approval. The Elevations, Grading, and Site Plans still need clarification and staff recommends that they be brought back after modification. Design Review Committee Action: Member Present: Bill Bethel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Alan Warren Of the times discussed in the staff comments, the applicant agreed include in the project the following numbered items listed in this report, as conditions of approval: Major Issues - 2. Entry Monuments; 3a and b Site Plan; 4a.1 and 2, b and c Architecture (items b and c were changed and presented at the meeting. The changes as presented were determined satisfactory by the Committee. Secondary Issues - La, b and c Master Plan of Walls; 2.a, b, and d Landscaping Plan; 3. Phasing; 4. Model Home Sales; 5. historic theme mail box base; 6. Recycling Container Space; 7. Phase Four Lots at 75' wide; Policy Issues - The applicant raised an issue only with item 7. Driveway Slopes. The applicant agreed to limit the slopes to 7 %%. The Design Review Committee recommended approval with the following changes: 1. The conceptual landscaping plan with 40% hardscape is approved with the following conditions: a. The 40% hardscape includes the sidewalk area. b. The planting along the west side of Golden Oak Road, opposite the park site, shall be planted with self sustaining shrub plantings due to the significant off-site slope immediately adjacent to the public right-of-way. C. The plantings behind the sidewalk along Golden Oak Road may be adjusted with smaller tree and shrub species, ground covers and hardscape, subject to City Planner and City Engineer approval, to accommodate the limitations of narrow planter areas. 2. All driveways shall not exceed 7 ''/z% slope. 3. The architectural elevations where approved with the following conditions: a. Window surrounds shall be provided on all windows and all surrounds shall be painted an alternate complementary color. DRC COMMENTS DR 97-12 - GRIFFIN INDUSTRIES, INC. September 2, 1997 Page 6 b. Shutters shall be provided on all major second story windows that side-on or back on to streets and on all first major story windows that side on to a street. This applies only to those models that have front elevation shutters. C. All single story front elevations are approved as amended by the revised designs presented at the meeting (revised sheets 2, 6 and 17). d. Expanded porch elements shall be provided on those front elevations where it can be easily added to the satisfaction of the City Planner. e. In response to Major Issue 4.d, the elevation Series B, Plan 3B shall have french doors instead of a garage door for the storage room option. 4. Retaining walls along Golden Oak Road shall have cobble stone elements at each end to tie in with the cobble stone hardscape theme. 5. The recycling container areas shall be provided to accommodate three containers of a size appropriate to the City's anticipated recycling program. The applicant agreed with the above listed changes. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:55 p.m. Tom Grahn September 2, 1997 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-19 - CASTILLO COMPANY. INC. - The development of a commercial shopping center consisting of a 65, 155 square foot grocery/drug store, two satellite buildings totaling 6,000 square feet an 6,200 square feet, and two drive-thru pads totaling 3,500 square feet and 2,500 square feet on 9.82 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-102-03, 05, 08, 15, 20, 21, and 49. This project was reviewed at the August 19, 1997, Design Review Committee meeting. Revised plans addressing comments from that meeting will be submitted to staff on August 28, and staff will be prepared to discuss the project at the September 2, 1997, Committee meeting. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Design Review Committee consider the proposed changes and either direct the applicant to revise the project and return for additional committee review or proceed to the Planning Commission for consideration. Attachment: DRC Action Comments dated August 19, 1997 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Bill Bethel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Tom Grahn The Committee recommended that the applicant work with staff to revise the project by addressing the following design issues and return to the Design Review Committee, on a Consent Calendar basis, for review. 1. Screen the Luckys loading area from public views, including views along the main access from Foothill Boulevard, consistent with the loading area screening that was provided for the previous project. This screening would entail the continuation of the trellis element along the south and west sides of loading area. 2. Provide an additional architectural element to the north elevation. For example: repeating the pop- out parapet tower similar to the ones at the east elevation at the northeast and northwest corners of the building. _ .. 3. Revise the massing of the pop-out parapet tower on the east elevation. Suggested narrowing tower to eliminate "top heavy" feel. 4. The elevations submitted for Pad C are conceptual and elevations will be subject to further design review prior to construction. 5. Pads A, B, C, and D will be subject to a detailed analysis of grade relationships, landscaping, screening, building design, etc., upon development. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:30 p.m. Tom Grahn September 2, 1997 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15783 - G&D CONSTRUCTION - A residential subdivision of 29 single family homes on 335 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. This project was previously reviewed by the Design Review Committee on May 6, and May 20, 1997, and November 19, 1996. At the last meeting the Committee did not support the proposed architectural style or the proposed colors, however, it was determined that the applicant could proceed to the Planning Commission for consideration. The following comments were presented by the Committee on May 20, 1997. 1. The architectural style appears dated and the proposed colors appear cartoon like. The committee was not opposed to a craftsman architectural style, but did not support the proposed architecture. 2. The street scheme is dominated by garage doors, massive dark roofs, and a heavy wood feet to the front elevation. 3. The massive dark roof elements need to be lightened up with different roof tile color. 4. The applicant should explore the use of alternative roof massing to provide additional variety. The Committee felt there was too much of a box design to the elevations and suggested a gable roof facing the street to soften the street scheme. 5. The use of roll-up garage doors may be considered. If utilized, they should provide variation in the garage door patten. 6. Explore lighter accent colors. The applicant did not want to proceed to the Planning Commission without a favorable recommendation from the Design Review Committee, and therefore, submitted for additional review. The following architectural modifications were provided to the front elevations. These modifications should be the basis of Committee discussion to determine whether or not the elevations are acceptable or will require further modification. 1. Variation in the roof pitch to decrease the box like design. 2. Variation in the roof line through additional gable roofs. 3. Reduction in the heavy wood feel of the elevation. 4. Providing a brick veneer as an accent material on all elevations. This material will wrap around the side elevation to a logical termination point. 5. The modification of awkward, box like unfunctional dormers into a functional element. 6. Revised color and roof tile samples will be available for Committee consideration. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for their consideration. DRC COMMENTS TT 15783 - G&D CONSTRUCTION September 2, 1997 Page 2 Attachment: DRC Action Comments dated May 20 and May 6, 1997 and November 19, 1996. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Bill Bethel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Tom Grahn The Committee appreciated the effort the applicant went through to revise the elevations and concluded that the applicant may proceed to the Planning Commission for their consideration subject to the following. 1. Delete the proposed elevation 1 B. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS September 2, 1997 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary