HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000/08/15 - Agenda Packet - (2) DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES
.j
TUESDAY AUGUST 15, 2000 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Larry McNiel Pam Stewart Dan Coleman
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.
(Debra) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-23—LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS-The development of
two retail pad buildings totaling 9,000 square feet on 0.84 acres of land within the
Terra Vista Town Center, in the Community Commercial District of the Terra Vista
Community Plan, located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center
Drive. APN: 1077-421-87. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit 99-26 Sav-On.
7:40 p.m.
(Brent) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15866—FIELDSTONE
—A residential subdivision and design review of detailed site plan and elevations for
24 single family lots with a separate lot for future expansion of GTE facilities on 8
acres of land in the Low Residential District(2-4 dwelling units per acre)located at the
southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Vintage Drive -APN: 225-251-47. Related
File: Variance 00-05.
8:10 p.m.
(Brent) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00-15 —
FARMER BOY'S RESTAURANT—The development of a 2,827 square foot fast food
restaurant, with a 630 square foot outdoor eating area and a drive-thru, on 1-acre of
land in Subarea 7 (Industrial Park)of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the
south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Milliken Avenue. APN: 229-011-25, 31,and
32.
8:40 p.m.
(Kirt) TENTATIVE TRACT 16105 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00 —34 - FORECAST
HOMES - A residential subdivision and design review of building elevations and
detailed site plan for 147 single-family lots on 28.74 acres of land in the Low-Medium
Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of East
Avenue, southwest of the 1-15 freeway, south of Base Line Road in the Etiwanda
Specific Plan —APN: 1100-031-08, 1100-061-02 and 09, and 1100-071-01 and 02.
Related file: Variance 00-04, Tree Removal Permit 00-25.
j
DRC AGENDA
August 15, 2000
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.
9:10 P.M.
(Rudy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-77—CABOT
—A request to construct a 600,078 square foot industrial building on 27.75 acres of
land in the General Industrial District(Subarea 5)of the Industrial Area Specific Plan,
located at the southeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and Sixth Street—APN: 210-072-
14, 25, 30, 37 and APN: 210-371-08.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the
Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may
receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five
minutes per individual.
ADJOURNMENT
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Debra Meier August 15, 2000
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-23—LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS—The developmentof two retail pad
buildings totaling 9,000 square feet on 0.84 acres of land within the Terra Vista Town Center, in the
Community Commercial District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the southeast corner
of Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive. APN: 1077-421-87. Related Files: Conditional Use
Permit 99-26 Sav-On.
Design Parameters: Pad Buildings G and H are the final components of the northwest quadrant of
Terra Vista Town Center. The pad buildings are situated immediately south of Sav-On(Conditional
Use Permit 99-26),westerly of Target(Conditional Use Permit 99-40 Target expansion),and south
and westerly of Polar Ice (Conditional Use Permit 00-21). With the approval and eventual
development of these projects this entire northwest portion of Town Center will be complete. This
will also complete the parking, landscaping and pedestrian circulation connections between the Pad
A to the south (Big 5 Sporting Goods, et al.), Edwards Cinema to the east, and to both Haven
Avenue and Town Center Drive.
With the approval of Sav-On, Pad G was offset to the south of Sav-On. That concept has been
modified with Pad G now proposed abutting the south elevation of Sav-On. During plancheck for
Sav-On,the City Planner allowed Sav-On to proceed through plancheck and obtain building permits
by requesting that the applicant post a cash deposit for the value of the architectural detail, as
approved by the Planning Commission, that will be withheld in the hopes that Pad G will be
approved and constructed in the near future. When Pad G is constructed the cash deposit will be
released to the applicant.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion. Both buildings G and H will be expected to be consistent with the various building
materials and colors, including the random stacking of tiles,tile wainscot, plaster patterns, and the
specific design details of the cornices, corbels, etc. All street furniture, trash enclosure design,
hardscape and landscaping shall also match and/or be consistent with the Terra Vista Town Center
Guidelines.
1. BUILDING G ELEVATIONS—The west and south elevations incorporate small-scale tower
elements and covered walkway along the storefronts. The design incorporates the tile
wainscot and rafter details typical of Terra Vista town Center.
The rear elevation (facing east) requires some additional attention to detail,particularly at the
southeast corner, which has exposure to the circulation aisle, which provides access both
northerly toward Sav-On,and easterly between Polar Ice and Target. It may be appropriate to
consider a raised roofline near the building corner with increased shadow line from the
building face, to accentuate this corner.
2. BUILDING H ELEVATIONS—Building H is a stand-alone pad;therefore,exposed to view on
all sides. The northeast corner forms a focal point at the westerly end of the drive-aisle
behind Target and Polar Ice.The colonnade should extend 3/4 the width of the north elevation.
3. SITE PLAN — Relocate the trash enclosure on the east side of Building H, to the
southeasterly corner of the Building H pad. This will allow the applicant to develop a more
appropriate landscaping focus at the end of the drive aisle. This space will then allow
building architectural elements to wrap the building corner and provide landscaping at this
DRC COMMENTS
DR 00-23— LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS
August 15, 2000 .
Page 2
4. LANDSCAPING—Landscaping around Buildings G and H is minimal (see attached). There
are only 4 trees proposed along the 340 linear feet between the northwest corner of Sav-on
Drugs to the southwest corner of building H, 11 trees should be provided consistent with the
Development Code standard of one tree every 30 feet. Trees may be clustered in groups.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to the above modifications.
Attachment
Design Review Committee Action
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Debra Meier
Building G—The architect presented a design solution based on staff comment of the rear elevation
that was acceptable to the Committee.
Building H — The architect presented the modifications to the north elevation of Building H as
suggested by staff. This alternative was acceptable to the Committee.
Site Plan — The applicant agreed to the relocation of the trash enclosure as suggested by staff
comments.
Landscaping—The applicant acknowledged the landscape requirements along the building face as
identified in the staff comments. The Committee recommended that the applicant work with staff to
resolve the remainder of the landscape details.
There were no further comments by the Committee, and the Committee recommended City Planner
approval of the retail pad buildings.
a
o
a cc r N so
cr
a�
ra
cc Q 1►C
op : r.
Q W LL N
Q
o U `n c"
o � c
N
N r
r N N _
� LL
1 r �
1 rn U o
LL
U m
m �
p
clj
N N
1
J 1
� O+
p N O _ cn LL h N
� N
y O N m
12 N ;
1
1
! � 11Y N (7
LL V J
V rj1 JE
m '7 c —
c U eh
H N y C7 In i
47
cn
n
N
to
r
c,
tL) ° ° ---
ch
--� z
§ C .O U ------ ® zw
2 w
Q� _
r rn
c ~ _
f
� V
LL
N
_
C7
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Brent Le Count August 15, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15866 — FIELDSTONE — A
residential subdivision and design review of detailed site plan and elevations for 24 single family lots
with a separate lot for future expansion of GTE facilities on 8 acres of land in the Low Residential
District(2-4 dwelling units per acre) located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Vintage
Drive - APN: 225-251-47. Related File: Variance 00-05.
Desiqn Parameters: The site is located on the east side of Milliken Avenue between the future
Route 30 Milliken off-ramp to the south and Vintage Drive to the north. The site is surrounded by
existing single-family homes in the Caryn Planned Community to the north and east, and single-
family homes to the west. There is a GTE facility at the southeast corner of the tract, which will be
parceled out to.GTE with the subdivision for future expansion of their facility. Up to a 10-foot high
sound wall is required along the south tract boundary to mitigate noise from the Route 30 Freeway.
The applicant has submitted a Variance request for the increased wall height.
The applicant, Fieldstone Homes, intends to use the same home product, as they are currently.
building within Tract 15814 at the southwest corner of Rochester and Highland Avenues. This home
design was the subject of significant negotiations through the design review process. The proposed
homes are larger and feature more architectural enhancements than the adjoining Caryn
developments. The Tentative Tract 15814 project was built under the Innovative Standards of the
Victoria Community Plan,which required architectural enhancements such as front porches,trellis
covered courtyards near the front door, and garaged tucked behind the front porch/entry in
exchange for reduced lot size and reduced setbacks. The current project retains the architectural
enhancements but is being built under Basic Development Standards so no reductions in setbacks
or lot size are being requested. The side and rear elevations do not have quite the same level of
architectural enhancement as the fronts but they still represent an upgrade over existing surrounding
homes by using window surrounds, divided light, and second story balconies, which allow the
developer to achieve the front enhancements.
Code Inconsistencies: The following are technical issues that staff will address through the
Technical Review Committee. Adjust home plotting for Lots 11 and 17 to provide minimum 27-foot
corner side yard dimension. Adjust home plotting for Lots 2 and 9 to provide minimum 20-foot deep
rear yards. Adjust frontage of Lot 10 to provide minimum 40-foot lot frontage at the front property
line (right-of-way line).
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. Replot house on Lot 10 to provide greater setback from property line and the adjoining GTE
facility. Although the proposed 5-foot setback complies with Code standards, it does not
meet the intent to provide adequate light, air and open space for the residents. One
possible replotting is shown in Exhibit "A."
2. Provide a decorative view fence at right-of-way line along Street"B"to secure Lot 25 for the
purpose of discouraging dumping, graffiti or other undesirable activities until such time as
GTE expands. If left open, Lot 25 could become an attraction for nuisance. Open "view"
fencing is preferred for police and public surveillance. Also, developer should provide
written notice to potential buyers that Lot 25 is intended for expansion of the GTE facility.
DRC COMMENTS
TT 15866— FIELDSTONE
August 15, 2000
Page 2
i
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major-issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. There is a 22-25 foot high slope between Lots 15/16 and 22/23, which will be visible by
northbound traffic on Milliken Avenue. The.developer is proposing substantial tree planting
on the 20-foot high slope and decorative masonry block for the rear yard fencing of Lots 15
and 16.
2. Provide at least two trees per each home's front yard exclusive of street trees.
3. The 10-foot high sound wall along the south tract boundary should have the tan split faced
block with fluted block accent to match the remaining Route 30 Caltrans walls.
4. All walls shall be stuccoed on both sides and all pilasters shall have natural river rock
application on all sides.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Corner side yard fences/walls should be setback 5 feet behind sidewalk to provide a planter
strip. Lots 11 and 17 must be revised.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to the above comments.
Attachment ,
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff.Planner: Brent Le Count
The Committee reviewed the project and recommends approval subject to staff's comments with the
following revision:
1. The rear and side yard fencing for Lots 15 and 16 may be translucent glass to permit views
from these lots at the discretion of the developer. The glass fencing must meet the
requirements of noise mitigation per the noise study for the project.
r .
� r
GTE �
Sol
I
i
ITT' i°
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:10 p.m. Brent Le Count August 15, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00-15—FARMER BOY'S
RESTAURANT—The development of a 2,827 square foot fast food restaurant, with a 630 square
foot outdoor eating area and a drive-thru, on 1-acre of land in Subarea 7 (Industrial Park) of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Milliken
Avenue. APN: 229-011-25, 31, and 32.
Background: On June 20, 2000, the Design Review Committee requested that the project be
redesigned and brought back for further review (see attached minutes). The applicant agreed to
explore design revisions accordingly. The applicant's revised design incorporates many of the
architectural features of the Lowe's building, such as a colonnade around key portions of the
building. It also includes a substantial trellis feature and a porte-cochere over the drive-thru lane.
The main east-west drive aisle between the Farmer Boys site and the Union Bank site to the east
has been eliminated (this will help avoid a short vehicle stacking distance on the north-south entry to
the site east of Union Bank). It is staff's opinion that the revised design successfully incorporates
the direction provided by the Committee and recommends approval.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Major Issues: The following items will be the focus of Committee discussion:
1. Provide a planter wall (heavy wall with planter on top) surrounding the outdoor eating area
on the north side of the building to buffer the outdoor eating area from cars in the drive thru
lane and to mitigate high seasonal winds.
2. Provide planters with trees and shrubs between parking lot and building, flanking entry. No
Conceptual Landscape Plan was provided to clarify what areas are hardscape or
landscaping.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Change base of building to a Sawteel 12-inch by 12-inch tile material to match Lowe's.
2. Signs -Ancillary information such as, "World Famous Hamburgers"or the like is prohibited
by the Sign Ordinance. Business name only is allowed.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. All roof and ground-mounted equipment and utilities shall be fully screened.
2. Surround trash enclosure and Edison box with dense shrub planting.
3. Provide a double door vestibule at the main entry to mitigate strong seasonal winds.
4. Trash enclosure should feature overhead shade trellis and roll-up door.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project
subject to the above conditions.
Attachment
DRC COMMENTS
CUP 00-15— FARMER BOY'S RESTAURANT -
August 15, 2000
Page 2
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Brent Le Count
The Committee reviewed the revised plans and recommends approval subject to staff's comments
and the following additional comments:
1. The content and final design of the wall sign shall be resolved through the Uniform Sign
Program pending City review.
2. The Committee is willing to accept an alternative to the sawteel tile wainscoting to match the
Lowe's wainscoting. The buff colored tile with teal colored accents that Farmer Boys
showed the Committee are acceptable.
3. A double door foyer for wind protection was strongly recommended.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
6:00 p.m. Brent Le Count June 20, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00-15— FARMER BOY'S
RESTAURANT—The development of a 2,775 square foot fast food restaurant with drive-thru on 1-
acre of land in Subarea 7 (Industrial Park)of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the south
side of Foothill Boulevard east of Milliken Avenue. APN: 229-011-25, 31, and 32.
Design Parameters: The site is located within the Catellus Master Plan area,which was approved
by the Planning Commission in April of 1999, and within the Lowe's Home Improvement center
approved by the Commission in May of 1999. The site slopes from north to south at approximately
3 percent. The site will be graded so that it sets approximately 3 to 4 feet below the level of Foothill
Boulevard. The building design incorporates some of the basic architectural features that were
established by the Lowe's building. The restaurant is proposed to have a drive-thru lane which will
wrap around the north and west sides of the building. The building and drive-thru lane will be
visually prominent from Foothill Boulevard and will contribute to the entry experience to the Lowe's
center. No outdoor dining is proposed.
The project represents a modification to the Catellus Master Plan,which did not include a drivethru
use in this location. However, the project meets the basic intent of the Drive-thru Design Policy in
that it is located 300 feet from an intersection and other drive-thru uses and the drive-thru lane
respects the 45-foot setback.
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.
i
1. Exterior should be completely redesigned, starting with the elimination of the mansard roof.
The building lacks a strong architectural statement,which detracts from the quality desired for
a building so prominently located on Foothill Boulevard at the entrance to Lowe's. The
strongest element is a tile mansard roof, which gives the building a dated appearance. This
style of mansard roof has become synonymous with the"corporate"design of fast food drive
thru chains. Suggest incorporating gable and/or hip roof elements, and curved arches,
consistent with architectural theme established by Lowe's (see Exhibit"A").
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
1. Eliminate or smooth out the awkward curve in main east-west drive aisle between Farmer Boys
and Union Bank to avoid potential head-on collisions.
2. Provide low screen wall to enhance screening of drive-thru lane. See Carls Jr. at Foothill
Boulevard and Masi Drive, orTexaco/Taco Bell at Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue.
3. Provide porte-cochere or large member trellis out over the drive-thru lane on the north side of the
building to help minimize the presence of the drive-thru lane and incorporate it with the overall
building.
4. East Elevation-Entry feature should project more by making columns same depth as width(i.e.,2
^� feet 9 inches) to provide a true covered entry.
5. Change base of building to a Sawteel 12-inch by 12-inch tile material to match Lowe's.
DRC COMMENTS
CUP 00-15—FARMER BOY'S RESTAURANT
• June 20, 2000
Page 2
6. Signs-Ancillary information such as,"World Famous Hamburgers"or the like is prohibited by the
Sign Ordinance. Business name only.
7. Plant trees between north side of building and drive-thru lane.
8. Extend enhanced paving into both handicap stalls at building entry.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
1. All roof and ground mounted equipment and utilities shall be fully screened. The low 15-foot
parapet height may not be sufficient to screen roof-mounted equipment from public views
along Foothill Boulevard because building pad is 3 feet below Foothill Boulevard. Restaurants
typically have larger/taller roof equipment because of cooking facilities. A detailed cross
section should be provided to demonstrate screening.
2. Surround trash enclosure and Edison box with dense shrub,planting.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned in light of the above
comments and brought back for further review.
• Attachments:
i
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: John Mannerino, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Brent Le Count
The Committee requested thatthe project be redesigned and brought back for further review subject
to staffs comments and the following additional comments. The applicant agreed to explore design
revisions accordingly. The Committee also recommended:
1. If the applicant wishes to include an outdoor dining area it must be protected with decorative
walls, etc., from strong seasonal winds out of the northeast and the outdoor dining area
must be included in overall parking calculation.
2. That a double door vestibule be provided at the main entry to mitigate strong seasonal
winds.
3. The drive-thru lane be screened either by the use of a low wall or a berm or a combination
thereof.
4. The applicant agreed to completely restudy the architectural design of the building to provide
• a higher quality architectural statement consistent with Foothill Boulevard design standards
and the remainder of the Lowe's development.
4Ra Y�
I Y� cnr
. j 1
�sEYA 1. va6•` �'F �' '�- i�„�� .°�a�� `,
iv
-lab-le��
1 I
t
Lr •'
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
h
8:40 p.m. Kirt Coury August 15, 2000
TENTATIVE TRACT 16105 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00 —34 - FORECAST HOMES - A
residential subdivision and design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 147 single-
family lots on 28.74 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per
acre), located on the west side of East Avenue, southwest of the 1-15 freeway, south of Base Line
Road in the Etiwanda Specific Plan—APN: 1100-031-08, 1100-061-02 and 09, and 1100-071-01
and 02. Related file: Variance 00-04, Tree Removal Permit 00-25.
Design Parameters: The site is vacant and relatively flat, with four existing stands of windrows on-
site that are proposed for removal. The site is bounded to the east by East Avenue and to the west
by the 1-15 freeway. To the north is a proposed C.C.W.D future water reservoir and to the south is
an approved single-family residential development, Tract 15711.
The site will be developed under the Low-Medium Residential Basic Development Standards of the
Etiwanda Specific Plan. Five house plans are being proposed, each having three different
architectural styles: California Ranch, Prairie, and California Bungalow. All plans have 2-car
garages broken into various configurations as follows:
Plan 1 is single-story, 1,910 square feet, and features a 2-car front-on garage and a front
porch. The plan is a two bedroom with a den/option bedroom three.
Plan 2 is two-story, 2,302 square feet, and features a 2-car front-on garage and a front
1 porch. The plan is a three bedroom with a loft/option bedroom four.
Plan 3 is two-story, 2,370 square feet, and features a 2-car side-on garage and a front
porch. The plan is a three bedroom with a den/option bedroom four and loft/option bedroom
five.
Plan 4 is two-story, 2,528 square feet, and features a 2-car front-on garage and a front
porch. The plan is a three bedroom with a loft/option bedroom four.
Plan 5 is two-story, 2,740 square feet, and features a 2-car side-on garage and a front
porch.The plan is a three bedroom with a loft/option bedroom four and den/option bedroom
five.
Variance: The applicant has submitted a Variance application requesting to increase the wall height
to 14-feet along the 1-15 freeway. The Development Code allows a maximum wall height of 6-feet.
The Variance for the wall is necessary to help mitigate freeway noise; however, Caltrans has
rejected allowing the sound wall at the freeway shoulder(on top of slope). The noise study must be
revised to determine the wall height necessary at tract boundary (toe of slope).
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 the Committee's discussion regarding
this project:
1. Special "enhanced architecture"should be given to lots that side(lots on eastern boundary)
or rear onto East Avenue. Consideration shall be given to include a mixture of second-story
pop-outs; greater use of window mullions, shutters, and pot shelves on lots that side or rear
on East Avenue.
DRC COMMENTS
TT 16101 & DR 00-34— FORECAST HOMES
August 15, 2000
Page 2
2. Front yard landscaping should include, at a minimum, one 15-gallon size tree,one 5-gallon
size tree, seeded ground cover, and a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the
developer. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees.
3. The high sound wall along the north and west tract boundary should have the t;�!o-tone tan
split faced block with fluted block accent to match the approved sound wall.for Tr act 15911
(Ryland) to maintain a uniform treatment along the 115 corridor. Also, plant trees and
climbing vines to soften appearance.
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 river rock stone pilasters should be placed at the most northern and southern ends of
the East Avenue perimeter wall.
2. The 6-foot split-face block wall (interior wall returns), and the southern boundary block wall
(proto type II precision block wall) should be developed with double-sided split face block.
Code Requirements:The following items are required by Ordinance,Development Code or Specific
Plan and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Plant new Eucalyptus windrows to replace those removed.
2. The decorative perimeter wall along East Avenue should incorporate large river rock stone
pilasters and a river rock planter wall in its design, developed at a minimum of 30 inches by
30 inches each.
Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval subject to the above comments
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Kirt Coury
The Committee reviewed the project and did not recommend approval. The Committee directed the
applicant to continue to work on resolving the major issues presented at the meeting(modify the lots
at ends of cul-de-sacs Street"E"and "F,"adjust awkward 5-foot side yard to rear yard relationships,
and enhance architecture to lots that rear onto East Avenue). The Committee supported adding
river rock stone pilasters to the ends of the East Avenue perimeter wall,supplementing double-sided
split face block to interior wall returns,as well as using accent treatment to the proposed sound wall.
The applicant should revise the project and return to the Design Review Committee on
September 5, 2000, as a Consent Calendar item. In addition, the Committee recommended the
following change be incorporated in the revised plans:
1. Provide landscape treatment to minimize concrete effect at the bulb ends of cul-de-sacs
Street "E" and "F."
CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS
9:10 P.M. Rudy Zeledon August 15, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-77—CABOT—A requestto
construct a 600,078 square foot industrial building on 27.75 acres of land in the General Industrial
District(Subarea 5)of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of Hermosa
Avenue and Sixth Street—APN: 210-072-14, 25, 30, 37 and APN: 210-371-08.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, DanColeman
Staff Planner: Rudy Zeledon
The Committee reviewed the project as a consent item and recommended approval and directed the
applicant to work with staff on the following issues:
1. Provide a driveway along the frontage of Sixth Street or create a turn around at the northeast
end of the parking area to help on-site circulation.
2. Provide landscaping along the northeast elevation.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
AUGUST 15, 2000
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
Secretary
J