The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1999/09/14 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES TUESDAY September 14, 1999 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Larry McNiel Pam Stewart Nancy Fong Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias John Mannerino 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. 7:00 p.m. (Rebecca) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 16021 - RBF ASSOCIATES: A residential subdivision of 16 single family lots on 7.53 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way-APN: 227-121-30 and 43. Related File: Tree Removal Permit 99-23. 7:40 p.m. (Rebecca) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15955 - LEE - A residential subdivision and design review of detailed site plan and elevations for 23 single family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of San Bernardino Road, east of Vineyard Avenue - APN: 208-091-08. 8:20 p.m. (Sal/Duane) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-40 - DAYBREAK PROPERTIES(AIRPORT CORPORATE CENTER)-The development of two office buildings totaling 50,900 square feet and a 20,800 square foot health club building on 8 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 16) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street-APN: 210-062-13. 9:00 P.M. (Brent) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-33-MAPLE PLACE PARTNERS - The development of four industrial buildings totaling 59,930 square feet on 2.4 acres of land in the General Industrial District, Subarea 8 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of Arrow Route and Maple Place -APN: 208-961-11. DRC AGENDA September 14, 1999 Page 2 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 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 Il for the City of Rancho Cucamonga,hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 9, 1999, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. i DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Rebecca Van Buren September 14, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 16021 - RBF ASSOCIATES: A residential subdivision of 16 single family lots on 7.53 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre)of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way-APN: 227-121-30 and 43. Related File:Tree Removal Permit 99-23. Design Parameters: The project consists of a subdivision map only; no house plans are proposed. The project site is located on the west side of East Avenue, with the abandoned railroad right-of- way along its southern boundary. The site wraps around three "out parcels" on East Avenue, which are under separate ownership outside of the project boundaries. These out parcels contain existing single family residences - the southernmost residence is on the Historical Site List as a potential local landmark. The project contains an awkward strip of land between two southerly out parcels. This remnant land area is shown as tentacle-like projections of Lot 16. The applicant is attempting to transfer the remnant land to the adjoining out parcels. The Etiwanda Specific Plan restricts access on East Avenue, which leads to the single access design. The applicant lined up the proposed entrance to this tract with the street approved for the tract across the street. A future street stub-out is provided in the southwestern portion of the tract to provide secondary access upon development of property to the west. Lots range in size from 13,003 to 25,507 square feet, with an lot average lot size of 15,188 square feet. There are 114 trees on or near the subject site. In general, the trees form 5 windrows located on the north,west,and east boundary lines. The windrows to the west and in the northeast corner are outside of the project boundaries and should not be damaged by this development. An arborist's report recommends removal and replacement of the on-site windrows. The project will provide the East Avenue theme wall as the tract boundary wall (stone pilasters with stucco walls and river rock planters). Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. The remnant land area should be reserved for a lot line adjustment with the adjoining out parcels such that the out parcels may acq uire the land and have access and frontage to the new local streets. The Technical Review Committee will review appropriate mechanisms; i.e., easement or lettered lot as an interim condition. 2. In order to preserve the notable windrows, wrought iron fencing should be used along the western boundary and the northeastern corner of the tract. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. A minor exception has been submitted for the southern boundary wall, which ranges in height from 6 to 8 feet due to a retaining situation. The lots are elevated to drain to the street to avoid draining onto the railroad. 2. Replacement windrows are required by the Etiwanda Specific Plan and Tree Preservation Ordinance. Replacement windrows should be planted along the north boundary. DRC COMMENTS TT 16021 - RBF ASSOCIATES September 14, 1999 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Rebecca Van Buren The Committee concurred with staff that the remnant land area needs to be resolved and indicated wrought iron fencing along the west property line to preserve healthy windrow is acceptable. The Committee continued the item to a date uncertain to allow the street layout, master plan, and the remnant land issues to be resolved. i DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Rebecca Van Buren September 14, 1999 i ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15955 - LEE - A residential subdivision and design review of detailed site plan and elevations for 23 single family lots on 4.39 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District(4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of San Bernardino Road, east of Vineyard Avenue -APN: 208-091-08. Background: In 1992, the Planning Commission approved a tentative tract and design review on this site for a 20 lot project (Exhibit "A"). Earlier this year, the Commission granted a time extension which extended the approvals for the 20-lot project until December 9, 1999. At this time, the applicant is proposing an alternate street configuration with 23 lots. Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to shift the tract entrance from the from the site's west edge to its mid-point along the San Bernardino Road frontage. The lots range in size from 5,010 to 13,230 square feet. The applicant is proposing four floor plans, ranging in size from 1,782 to 2,002 square feet. 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. There are two flag lots (Lots 9 and 14) and a "difficult" lot, which does not meet lot depth requirements (Lot 12). Eliminating one lot would provide better site design and flexibility to satisfy all code requirements. Lots should have sufficient room to provide varied setbacks along street frontages. 2. There is a lack of variation in the proposed Floor Plans and Elevations. Of the four Floor Plans,three are nearly identical,with only one elevation each. The Planning Commission's Residential Design Guidelines indicate for 23 lots, there should be five floor plans with 3 elevations each. 3. All lots are proposed to have two-story dwellings, using an architectural style that emphasizes vertical massing. The surrounding neighborhood is predominately single story. A revised architectural approach, and introduction of single story plan(s)on corner lots and in strategic locations abutting existing single story neighborhoods is recommended to address neighborhood compatibility. 4.- Plan D rear elevation forms a long (48 feet), two-story wall plane at the minimum rear yard setback on Lots 9, 1.2, and 13. Revise to break up the wall plane, incorporate single story elements, and avoid "walling off' existing residences to the north. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Increase decorative paving in shared driveways and provide more artistic pattern (banding is monotonous). Remove decorative paving in the proposed public street. 2. Upgrade the quality of submittal package: include dimensions, colors, and materials on each elevation, insert Floor Plans and Elevations in sequential order, add details to Site Plan. DRC COMMENTS TT 15955 - LEE September 14, 1999 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Design Review Committee continue the project to allow revisions. Attachment Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pan Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Rebecca Van Buren The developer requested a continuance to allow time for his development team to address major issues identified in the Design Review committee comments. The Committee agreed to continue the project and provided the following direction: 1. The proposed street layout is acceptable. 2. Plans should be revised to address all major and secondary issues listed above. 3. Single story plan and/or single story elements are needed to address neighborhood compatibility. 4. A neighborhood meeting is recommended. i •oa.••] Ah�r't)•O.I Ir= I Ile tW•Kt••r fia•ttt•,rt mi Itit,r, •Ar D.—A f^I S ^� W.t-t/�l ••t J NpLyt ayf N( {Mr•JM 1'[WINNYy s�wott vo�;Owvo•..,oldtwd 'dHOO NOw-iffld-L � OJ Vi Kod Imcf+00 le � 015 rl 2' 4y T, 1 l ` .. ... . .i ..r I '.. (� ►�--1 i` �1 -'-•,. � •`i_ �, /-�\ `• � Ili j Zq'I 9� IB _ r. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:20 p.m. Sal Salazar/Duane Morita September 14, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-40 - DAYBREAK PROPERTIES (AIRPORT CORPORATE CENTER) - The development of two office buildings totaling 50,900 square feet and a 20,800 square foot health club building on 8 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 16) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street -APN: 210-062-13. Design Parameters: The site is vacant and is relatively flat. It contains a row of street trees along Fourth Street frontage and several mature trees behind the City's Entry Gateway at the immediate corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street. The Cucamonga Cornerpointe residential subdivision, which was approved by the City in 1996, is located immediately to the west of this project. 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. Building Design: The building design consists of painted tilt-up concrete buildings with light sandblasted surface for accent material, painted metal trellises at main building entries, green reflective glass for windows, and cornice treatments for the roof. Overall, there are no major design issues with the elevations,however,the following recommendations would further enhance the building design: a. The curvilinear parapet feature above the entrance of each building is an attached flat facade. This design feature needs to be better integrated to the overall building design. The entries with the curvilinear parapet could be unified by a single material such as medium sandblasted surfaces. Will the back side of the curvilinear parapet be treated architecturally? b. Change the light sandblasted surface to a medium sandblasted surface. 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 a bus turn lane at Fourth Street and the setback for Building 1 (two-story)needs to be adjusted to meet the 45-foot setback. 2. Provide a dense row of trees, planted at 10 feet on center, along the west property boundary to provide further buffering from the residential development. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project with the above changes. DRC COMMENTS DR 99-40 - DAYBREAK PROPERTIES September 14, 1999 Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Sal Salazar/Duane Morita The Committee recommended approval with the following requirements: 1. The curvilinear parapet feature above the entrance of each building should have greater depth and better integrated into the building design. The final concept should be submitted for Committee review under consent calendar agenda. 2. Change the light sandblasted surface to a medium sandblasted surface. 3. Outdoor eating area for Building No.2(Health Spa)be moved closer to Building No.4. The building materials for the carports must be of steel. The color for the carports and the trellises must be painted earth tone or a light gray color. J DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 9:00 P.M. Brent Le Count September 14, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-33 - MAPLE PLACE PARTNERS-The development of four industrial buildings totaling 59,930 square feet on 2.4 acres of land in the General Industrial District, Subarea 8 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of Arrow Route and Maple Place -APN: 208-961-11. Design Parameters: The site is surrounded to the north by the Fisher Mills industrial building and a rail spur, to the east by a multi-tenant industrial building respecting a 6-foot setback from the common property line (east property line of site), to the west by industrial buildings across Maple Place, and to the south by industrial buildings across Arrow Route. The site slopes from north to south at approximately 2 percent. There is an existing row of Pine trees along the north site boundary which provides a visual screen for the Fisher Mills tanks to the north. Arrow Route is considered a Special Boulevard with enhanced design criteria. Variance: The applicant is requesting a variance from the 5 foot interior rear setback requirement applicable to Building 4. The applicant contends that the setback will result in unuseable area given that the existing building to the east has a 6-foot setback. To the contrary, staff's opinion is that the 5-foot setback,in tandem with the existing 6-foot building setback,provide an 11-foot overall setback landscape opportunity. This would be visible from Arrow Route. 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 building design consists of painted tilt-up concrete with reveal lines. It lacks a second primary building material as required by Planning Commission Policy No. 89-158. Use of sandblasted concrete or brick veneer as a second primary building material to comply with and enhance the elevations. 2. Provide additional articulation to the office entries for variety and visual interest. 3. The northeast corner of Building 1, southeast and southwest corners of Building 4 should receive the same level of design enhancement as the other elevations given their visual exposure. 4. Provide employee outdoor eating/plaza areas in front of the building/office entries instead of placing them within parking area. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Provide landscape planters around the perimeter of building walls exposed to public view. Previous Development Review approved for the site showed substantial landscape areas around the buildings. See attached Landscape Plan. 2. Provide enhanced landscaping such as, but not limited to increased number of trees, specimen sized trees, accent trees, and larger shrubs at driveway entrances, around employee outdoor eating/plaza areas, at the corner of Maple Place and Arrow Route, and along the Arrow Route frontage given its status as a Special Boulevard. DRC COMMENTS DR 99-33 - MAPLE PLACE PARTNERS September 14, 1999 1 Page 2 3. Provide minimum 25-foot deep, on-site driveway throats to allow adequate vehicle stacking distance. Driveway throats shall have decorative paving. 4. Relocate employee outdoor eating area for Building 1 away from railroad utility boxes at northwest corner of site. 5. Provide meandering berms within landscape setback areas to screen parking and loading areas from street. Note that Arrow Route is a Special Boulevard requiring further enhanced landscaping, meandering sidewalk, and rolling berms. 6. Provide textured pavements such as interlocking pavers, textured or patterned colored concrete, etc., across driveways Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without.discussion: 1. Screen railroad control boxes and any other above ground equipment through the use of low walls and landscaping. 2. The following landscaping density is required cumulatively: 1 tree per 30 linear feet of building wall 1 tree per 30 linear feet of property line (each parcel) 1 tree per 3 parking spaces Note that landscaping comments under Secondary Issues above are in addition to the minimums noted here. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant revise the development plans to address the above identified issues and submit for further Committee review. Attachment Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Brent Le Count The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to staff's comments with the following revisions: 1. Increase the amount of sandblasted concrete on the office/entry portions of the buildings-for emphasis. Sandblasted concrete shall have either medium or heavy finish. 2. Use glazing to match the office entry treatment on the southeast corner (south and east elevations) of Building 4 to provide visual interest relative to Arrow Route. 3. The employee eating area locations are acceptable as proposed by the applicant. DRC COMMENTS DR 99-33 - MAPLE PLACE PARTNERS September 14, 1999 Page 3 4. Instead of providing landscaping within truck loading areas, screen loading areas with decorative, opaque gates. 5. The driveway throat depths are acceptable as designed. 6. The applicant agreed to provision of meandering berms, decorative driveway treatment, rail control box screening, and landscape enhancements. 1 J \ 3 � L ^ t i i � ; Rl i;• j j ; � -- �i �' :� � °,� • raj II I I � i z is 9 j � ��; ;! 3? ��• / i t � � Ili !' � �► � � . UP _ 1'. , Z • 1 •I r r r it t> DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS September 14, 1999 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bra Buller Secretary