HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000/10/17 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES
1
TUESDAY OCTOBER 17, 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
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.
(Rudy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-53 -
NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. - A request to
construct single family residences on 11 in-fill lots in the Low Residential District
(2-4 dwelling units per acre) within the Northtown area along Center Avenue, 24th
Street, and 25th Street, east of Hermosa Avenue -APN: 209-101-18, 209-101-24,
209-103-06, 209-104-06, 209-104-34, 209-104-35, 209-112-17, and 209-121-22.
Related files: Development Review 95-03 and 97-35.
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.
7:10 p.m.
(Brent) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-56 —
SACRED HEART CHURCH —The expansion of the existing Sacred Heart Church
with Phase one consisting of a new 20,000 square foot sanctuary building and
Phase two consisting of an additional 2,200 square feet of sanctuary space and
5,400 square feet of additional classroom space on 11 acres of land in the Regional
Related Commercial district of Subarea 4 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan
located at 12704 Foothill Boulevard—APN: 227-211-02,24,25 and 227-221-01 and
02.
7:30 p.m.
(Kirt) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW 00-61 —SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION—A request to construct
a 49 unit, three story, 39,533 square foot senior housing facility on 1.31 acres in the
High Residential District (24-30 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest
corner of Salina Street, and Malvern Avenue — APN: 209-041-47. Related files:
General Plan Amendment 00-02B, Development District Amendment 00-03 and
Development Agreement 00-02.
DRC AGENDA
October 17, 2000
Page 2
7:50 p.m.
(Doug) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-60 —
NORTHTOW N HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP.—A request to construct 96 senior
apartments on 3.2 acres of land in the Mixed Use District, with a Senior Housing
Overlay District, located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, between La Grande
Street and Lomita Drive —APN: 202-151-12. Related files:General Plan Amendment
00-01 A, Development Code Amendment 00-01, Development District Amendment
00-01, and Development Agreement 00-01.
8:10 p.m.
(Doug) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-04 — AMS
CONTRACTORS—A request to construct a 10,800 square foot industrial office and
warehouse building contractors building with yard area on 2.3 acres of land in the
General Industrial (Subarea 14) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located along
west side of Hyssop Drive, approximately 300 feet north of 6th Street—APN: 229-
271-31, 32 and 37.
8:30 p.m.
(Rudy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00-31-
LEGENDS BURGERS-The development of a 3,671 square foot fast food restaurant
with a drive-thru, on 1.25-acre of land in Office Professional District, located on the
south side of Base Line Road, east of Carnelian Street -APN: 207-031-29.
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
CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS
i
i 7:00 p.m. Rudy Zeledon October 17, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-53 - NORTHTOWN
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. -A request to construct single family residences on
11 in-fill lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) within the Northtown area
along Center Avenue, 24th Street, and 25th Street, east of Hermosa Avenue -APN: 209-101-18,
209-101-24, 209-103-06, 209-104-06, 209-104-34, 209-104-35, 209-112-17, and 209-121-22.
Related files: Development Review 95-03 and 97-35.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Rudy Zeledon
The Committee reviewed and approved.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7 7:10 p.m. Brent Le Count October 17, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-56—SACRED HEART
CHURCH—The expansion of the existing Sacred Heart Church with Phase one consisting of a new
20,000 square foot sanctuary building and Phase two consisting of an additional 2,200 square feet
of sanctuary space and 5,400 square feet of additional classroom space on 11 acres of land in the
Regional Related Commercial district of Subarea 4 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan located at
12704 Foothill Boulevard —APN: 227-211-02, 24, 25 and 227-221-01 and 02.
Design Parameters: The site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard across from the
Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center. The main entrance to the site is the shared signalized entry
for the shopping center(Marketplace Way). The Sacred Heart Church has occupied the site since
1958. The facilities are arranged in a campus like fashion and include the main sanctuary building,
a multi-purpose building, an administration building, classrooms and playgrounds, and three
residences. These buildings will remain. The site also contains a small teen center and garage
building both of which will be demolished. While old, neither building has historic status. The
existing buildings have an eclectic mix of materials including stucco, precision block, metal roofing,
mission-style tile roofing, and asphalt composition shingle roofing.
Tree Removal: The site contains a number of mature trees including a remnant Eucalyptus windrow
along the Foothill Boulevard frontage. Most of the trees will be removed to accommodate the
proposed improvements with the exception of the majority of trees surrounding the existing
sanctuary building, which will remain.
Variance: The new sanctuary is proposed with a building height of 50 feet and a 59-foot curving
parapet. The maximum building height permitted by the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan is 35 feet
high with 45-foot high towers. The increased building and tower height will require the filing of a
Variance application. The increase in height is necessary to accommodate the architectural design
preferences of the church for the sanctuary building. The parapet element is 60 feet wide, which
staff believes goes well beyond the.Code intent to be flexible for"towers,campaniles and rotundas."
There is nothing unusual about the shape or size of the property and no apparent hardship to justify
issuance of the Variance. The applicant will also needs a Variance to allow a 6-foot high wall with a
33-foot setback where a 45-foot building setback along Foothill Boulevard is required. This is
necessary to accommodate an existing home on the site, which will be preserved. Variance
application has not been submitted yet.
Sound Wall: The site is subject to excessive noise from the 1-15 Freeway. A noise study was
conducted which recommends a 240 foot long, 12-foot high sound wall along the northbound on-
ramp for 1-15 Freeway. The off ramp is elevated above the site and the applicant is proposing that
the sound wall be located at the top of slope along the off-ramp to maximize sound attenuation.
Past experience has shown that Caltrans will not allow sound walls to be built within their right-of-
way when other reasonable alternatives are available (i.e., building wall on church property line). If
the wall were to be built on the church property, it would have to be as high as 38 feet to effectively
attenuate noise.A 12-foot high wall along the off-ramp would obviously be aesthetically preferable to
a 38-foot high wall on-site. The applicant has had preliminary meetings with Caltrans and claims
that Caltrans is willing to accept the wall along the shoulder; however,two other developer requests
have been denied by Caltrans in the last 12 months.
DRC COMMENTS
CUP 99-56— SACRED HEART CHURCH
October 17, 2000
Page 2
Planning Commission Workshop: The project was reviewed at a Planning Commission workshop in
January of 1999 (see attached minutes). The Commission had the following comments/concerns:
1. The Master Plan should show points of ingress and egress for properties to the east and
west and allow reciprocal access. The Master Plan has a point of connection to the property
to the west. The applicant believes that the property to the east has sufficient access from
Foothill Boulevard so it is unnecessary for the church to provide access. Properties to the
east have right-in and right-out access only because of median island. If these commercially
zoned properties to the east were to access through the church property there could be
vehicle and pedestrian conflicts; therefore, staff recommends against reciprocal access.
2. Ensure that there is adequate parking on-site to accommodate the expanded sanctuary.
Adequate on-site parking is provided. However, about half of the parking spaces are located
more than 300 feet away from the sanctuary building. The church proposes to have church
visitors drop off family at the main entry and then park. Also, there is a pergola-covered
walkway proposed to connect the northern parking area to the sanctuary building. The
parking areas are scattered because they will serve the sanctuary as well as the existing
school and church administration at different times.
3. Gated intersections will need to be moved. The gate at the main entry allows for tum around
movement in front of the gate.
4. Establish campus architecture for the site. The proposed sanctuary uses stucco and
mission style roofing consistent with the other buildings on-site. Also, a long colonnade is
proposed along the north side of the church similar to that on the existing multi-purpose
building and church administration building.
5. Where there are heritage trees, preserve where possible. Many of the trees are proposed to
be removed to accommodate the project. The trees around the north,south,and west sides
of the existing sanctuary will be preserved and some of the larger trees in the southeast
corner of the site are intended to be relocated on-site. Planning Commission approval of a
Tree Removal Permit is necessary to remove or relocate mature trees.
6. Consider an alternative to standing seam metal roofing. The current design has concrete
mission-style roof material.
7. Provide the City with a Phasing Plan. Phase one will include the main sanctuary building
and Phase two will include a small addition to the sanctuary and some additional classroom
space.
8. Air quality is a concern. Consider reforestation in playground areas to provide a buffer for
children along Foothill Boulevard and the 1-15 Freeway. The playground areas have been
relocated away from the 1-15 Freeway frontage. There are two rows of trees along the west
edge of the main play area to provide a buffer from the freeway. The overall plan includes
preservation/relocation of 78 existing trees plus planting of 446 new trees. Sound
attenuation wall may also assist in improving air quality.
9. Staff and the Design Review Committee will work with the applicant on architecture.
DRC COMMENTS
CUP 99-56— SACRED HEART CHURCH
October 17, 2000
1 Page 3
10. Provide adequate screening to the parking lot with landscaping and berming. The Foothill
Boulevard frontage is proposed to have densely landscape berms(double row of trees with
15 to 20-foot spacing) with low masonry walls.
11. Renovate the Bell Tower to be compatible with the sanctuary that is proposed. The
application proposes to stucco the existing sanctuary building to match the new sanctuary.
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. Although the building design is attractive, it does not meet height limitations of Code.
Variances can only be granted where there is something unusual, such as topography that
warrants design flexibility. The Committee should discuss whether or not the excessive
building height could be justified. The earlier design shown at the Commission Workshop
had a lower overall height but was still in excess of code requirements. Elimination of the
large parapet-like wall on the south elevation would reduce the building height by 9 feet.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Columns for the pergola connecting the northern parking lot to the sanctuary should match
those of the sanctuary.
2. Parking lot landscape islands should have the typical oval shape rather than a sharp,
crescent shape. The sharply pointed planters leave less room for plants to grow and can
result in irrigation over spray onto the parking area.
3. Provide mostly Sycamore trees along the Foothill Boulevard frontage with some African
Sumac trees mixed in consistent with Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan' Sycamores and
African Sumacs are Foothill Boulevard theme trees that Caltrans has typically not allowed
within the Foothill Boulevard right of way so they must be shifted on-site.
4. Augment the berm/low wall/trees along the Foothill Boulevard frontage with shrub planting to
further screen views of the parking area.
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. Trash enclosure should feature overhead shade trellis and roll-up door.
4. Avoid having a double fence condition along the project perimeter. Church should make a
good faith effort to work with adjoining property owners to remove existing chain link fence
and replace with single fence.
DRC COMMENTS
CUP 99-56— SACRED HEART CHURCH
October 17, 2000
Page 4
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned in light of the above
comments and brought back for further review.
Attachment
Desiqn Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Brent Le Count
The Committee requested that the project be revised in light of staff's comments and provided
the following additional direction:
1. The excessive building height is an issue. Restudy the building to lower it as much as
possible while still meeting the functional necessities of the church.
2. Have the noise consultant analyze the possibility of providing noise mitigation directly
along the JMA"round edge. This could be in the form of a combined berm with sound
wall on top. The east side of the berm could act as informal stadium seating for the
playground.
• ;�✓� .
L�
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
January 13, 1999
Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission to order at 10:20 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho
Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, John Mannerino, Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart,
Peter Tolstoy
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner;Dan James,Senior Civil Engineer;Brent Le Count,
Associate Planner; Betty Miller, Associate Civil Engineer; Rebecca
Van Buren, Associate Planner; Cecilia Williams., Associate Planner; Rudy
Zeledon, Assistant Planner
NEW BUSINESS
A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 98-12 - SACRED HEART CHURCH - The proposed
demolition of an existing church sanctuary and two additional buildings and the construction
of a new sanctuary along with the development of a Master Plan for the 10.6 acre site
located in the Regional Related Commercial District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard
Specific Plan, on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Interstate 15-APN: 227-211-
24 and 25 and 227-221-01 and 02.
Brad Buller, City Planner,explained the purpose and goals of the Pre-Application Review process.
The project architect Ted Woods and Father Porter introduced the project and gave a brief history
on why they are choosing to stay on Foothill Boulevard and not pursue the Etiwanda site. Mr.
Woods described the various design solutions to the church campus and architecture of the new
church building.
Cecilia Williams, Associate Planner, reviewed staffs comments, noting staffs support for the use
remaining on site and the proposed expansion. She highlighted issues of street access and
circulation, architecture, master planning for adjacent properties, and tree preservation.
Chairman McNiel stated the architecture is eclectic, but that it is unique and he likes it. He
expressed concems about the sheet metal roof and indicated they should consider different type
of roof material, more resistant to wind.
Commissioner Mannerino liked the idea of a campus setting for the site. He noted the side view
looks different from the front view. He liked the building. He indicated he would like to see the
church stay at its present location and expand.
Av4u1 -
• •
Commissioner Stewart thought there are too many design styles happening on the main church
building. She liked the Foothill Boulevard facade shown because it looks "Mission" style. She
preferred more of the Mission style architecture with more compatible colors. She felt the east
elevation is too high. She encouraged the church to master plan for the lot to the west.
Commissioner Tolstoy expressed concerns regarding having children attend school on a street
as busy as Foothill Boulevard for environmental reasons, but he supported the use. He advised
the applicant to work with the neighbor to come up with a good plan for the west parcel. He did
not feel that a gas station would be a good use for the vacant lot west of the church site. He
thought the building should have some coherence in architecture to look coordinated rather than
eclectic. He liked the front of the church, but felt the east elevation has too much roof and the side
elevations look industrial. He requested landscaping along Foothill Boulevard to hide cars in the
parking lot with a combination of berming, low walls, and landscaping. He did not think the sheet
metal roof lends itself to a church. He suggested they soften the industrial look on the east side.
He commented that the existing church building has a nice flavor.
Commissioner Macias felt the church expansion is a great thing for the community. He asked that
the applicant address the traffic and circulation comments outlined by staff. He thought it is
interesting architecture, but he preferred Mission architecture in the historic winery tradition. He
questioned if the existing bell tower is compatible with what is being proposed. He agreed with
Commissioner Tolstoy regarding enhanced landscaping and berming to hide cars parked in the
parking lot.
Father Porter stated the buildings along Foothill Boulevard are brick and cannot be moved. He
said the renovated buildings will be stuccoed to match the sanctuary architecture with compatible
colors to create a cohesive Catholic flavor and the tower will be renovated to match new building
with stucco to match.
Mr. Buller summarized the meeting, noting that the following items are to be addressed when the
church submits a development application:
1) Master Plan to show point of ingress and egress for properties to the east and west
and allow reciprocal access.
2) Ensure that there is adequate parking on-site to accommodate the expanded
sanctuary.
3) Gated intersections will need to be moved.
4) Establish a campus architecture for the site.
5) Where there are heritage trees, preserve where possible.
6) Concern expressed for the standing seam metal roof proposed. Consider an
alternative roof material.
7) Provide the City with a phasing plan
8) Air Quality is a concern. Consider reforestation in playground areas to provide a
buffer for children along Foothill Boulevard and the 1-15 Freeway.
9) Architecture-Staff and the Design Review Committee will work with the applicant on
it.
10) Provide adequate screening to the parking lot with landscaping and berming.
11) Renovate the Bell Tower to be compatible with the sanctuary that is proposed.
PC Adjourned Minutes -2- January 13, 1999
u •5
U
< < U U V
U <
O o
3 u <
x W 3
fp 3 c 3 > S
O< . s
1� s a~ 2; {OjN.: U;FU r
uV 43 Oe"
O f Ouo�u` U<p o F u �»`Yo<`O�wp O s
t
O OR -Z— - <Eeu = -i F Z ;:
O
O
O .<bI-r.<o
° yW � OUOJ°.U—w�O3:�••pN<uO�u C .
W Z =
O
W Y x«OU-.°.U- p�Or S�,x�ZUS
=LL W 100 -roe
c Y wUUi<siij<U.`...:=-U«UXI
Ix
u. ! W h-
._;. z t7
.-awryo / O O
LL
wx
VJ -r•.�n ] � p
.�� d3
a O .
Y/l'epC...-,NM.l M14+r:/btilX° w � I
x✓1Nifww•rr.:1l. w .��:j��j•� ......
JM. uP W
au
cn 93
V• ,..N•V l Q ce
�1!j� (n
00
ai
tkr
•n ae � a '• !::I
�j {rt �1►�
} vtAti 4f1:: iiiif:!
00
I fV-NA 4t9,J6A4ep 5ff�
V -�iD
a� a j^
i z `
o u
F u u pa
5 n — i V „X
u = p o @t LL
u
i o N N i
Z < x ,<Y'., > 3 9 1
f 3 n
p .. N30
f= -0 0 < w
z i
5 z O° p �
Y i .u.i u»» 03=.0.
i uu^ <o °•p
0—. r O
rc
u
=t.out..u�u Zu
Ji <oO�iG�io-Me"G°<`°
z` v
_............ ..........�.
DOM
El
Y
�n
C�J
I
1�'.1 z
El
W u
cr
MQF
.Y P.MYR �• � i
►- !`I" w
:aanue. O `n
�.4Ra':kra-K
Bars•.. _ � -
�� ��:a:i ��•:`r,Xl.,aV.NrC1r.OY StI..:Y:if'lw �y�'��, Q
�'' ❑ �www -yx v ''/ V
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:30 p.m. Kirt Coury October 17, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW 00-61 — SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — A request to construct a 49 unit, three story,
39,533 square foot senior housing facility on 1.31 acres in the High Residential District (24-30
dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Salina Street, and Malvern Avenue —
APN: 209-041-47. Related files: General Plan Amendment 00-02B, Development District
Amendment 00-03 and Development Agreement 00-02.
Design Parameters: The site is generally flat with a slight slope to the southwest. The site is
currently vacant with native trees and grasses present. Two Eucalyptus trees exist along the east
property line and are designated to remain in-place. To the north of the site includes the Rancho
Cucamonga Senior Center and a parking area used by the City for senior parking. To the east of
the site is an existing single-family subdivision. South of the site is the Cucamonga Elementary
School. A parking area for the Upland Assistance League exists to the northwest.
The project will include a three-story, 39,533 square foot apartment building consisting of a lobby,
corridors, multi-purpose room and office. A manager's apartment will be located on the second floor
and the building will be served by an elevator and three stairways.
Site amenities involve outdoor seating benches and game tables, a barbeque grill, a community
garden and rose garden, as well as a patio area and an outdoor fountain. The building will include a
pilaster finish, re-shawn rafter tails, beams, and outriggers, a stone veneer "field ledge", white
window frames and a concrete tile roof.
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. Replace stucco columns with wood at front lobby entrance of north elevation. Staff feels wood
columns will provide more visibility for lobby.
2. Staff would suggest using a two-tone color scheme, with darker color on base of building, to
reduce height of building.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project subject to the
modifications as recommended above.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Kirt Coury
The applicant provided an exhibit that displayed a varying use of colors that was satisfactory to the
Committee. The exhibit revealed a darker color along the base of the building, with lighter colors
above. The applicant also identified that the use of wood columns would not visually blend with the
proposed architecture and the roof structure in front of the lobby area. The Committee was satisfied
with the applicant's proposal and recommended approval of the project without modifications.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
i 7:50 p.m. Doug Fenn October 17, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-60 — NORTHTOWN
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP —A request to construct 96 senior apartments on 3.2 acres of
land in the Mixed Use District, with a Senior Housing Overlay District, located on the east side of
Amethyst Avenue, between La Grande Street and Lomita Drive —APN: 202-151-12. Related files;
General Plan Amendment 00-01 A, Development Code Amendment 00-01, Development District
Amendment 00-01, and Development Agreement 00-01.
Design Parameters: The vacant site is in the heart of the historic downtown Alta Loma and was the
site of the Alta Loma Citrus Heights Packing House. The site is mostly level, slopping gently to the
south, and it has several trees in the northeast and southeast corners of the site.The site has been
cleared under a previous demolition permit. The Alta Loma Elementary School is north of the
project site. To the south and east are small commercial shops, Pacific Electric Railroad corridor,
open storm drain channel, water tanks, and a multiple family residential complex. To the west are
small commercial shops and a single-family residential neighborhood.
The proposed density is 30 units per acre. The gated project consists of three building pods, each
surrounding a courtyard. The freestanding recreation center building will have a manager's
apartment on the second floor. The apartment units vary from 599 to 820 square feet. Most of the
apartment units are one-bedroom (86 units)and only 9 of the units are two-bedroom. The mangers
unit is a two-bedroom unit.All of the apartment buildings have elevator service. The units will have
washer and dryer, kitchen, living and/or dining area bathroom, storage areas, and private patio
areas.
The courtyard areas feature enhanced pavement, benches, and trees. A community rose and
vegetable garden is planned for the northeast corner of the site, including a pedestrian seating patio
with a shaded pergola. Behind the recreation building is a patio area with barbeque. The site is
surrounded with a perimeter block wall with pilasters along the north and southeast property line,
and a tubular steel fence with pilasters along Amethyst. The fence along the south property line
adjacent to the future " Pacific Electric Trail" is interrupted with a tubular wrought iron fence where
there are landscape pedestrian activity areas. The main access to the site is provided by a
centralized median island with enhanced paving, which to leads to a narrower four way internal
vehicular access (which also has accent paving). To the south of the property is a turf block
emergency vehicular access way that connects to an existing public alley out to Amethyst Avenue.
The neighborhood includes a range of architectural styles and older homes. The proposed
Craftsman architectural theme is compatible with the area. The buildings incorporate three different
building materials such as:stucco finish,siding,and stone finish. The buildings are well articulated
with vertical and horizontal changes and recesses to the building planes.
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:
1. SITE PLAN: a) orient 8 parking spaces from the northeast corner of the project to east of
the Recreation Building, and replace with landscaping.This would strengthen and enhance
patio and pergola landscape area. b) Replace turf block with other material acceptable to
Fire District, such as accent paving.
2. ARCHITECTURE: a) Increase amount of horizontal siding, or introduce new areas of fish
scale siding. Staff believes that the majority of the building wall should be sided.b) Replace
the stone veneer with real river rock. River rock is characteristic Craftsman style buildings in
the.
DRC COMMENTS
DR 00-60— NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP.
October 17, 2000
Page 2
3. RECREATION BUILDING: Provide elevations for Committee consent calendar review.
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 existing Development Agreement must be modified to reflect the reduction of the
average landscape setback along Amethyst Avenue from 45 feet to 21 feet. Otherwise a
Variance application is required. Staff believes the proposed setback is appropriate in
relation to other historic buildings on adjoining properties on both sides of Amethyst.
2. Provide gated pedestrian access from the Recreation Building patio to the future Pacific
Electric Trail.
3. Introduce citrus trees into landscape to reflect the history of the former "Alta Loma Citrus-
Heights Packing House.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend
approval subject to the above modifications.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Douglas Fenn
The Committee recommended approval of the project subject to staff's comments and subject to
more "siding" being added to the buildings. Additionally, the Committee agreed that river rock
did not have to be used and that the proposed stone veneer was adequate.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:10 p.m. Douglas Fenn October 17, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 00-04—AMS CONTRACTORS
—A request to construct a 10,800 square foot industrial office and warehouse building contractors
building with yard area on 2.3 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 14) of the Industrial
Area Specific Plan, located along west side of Hyssop Drive, approximately 300 feet north of 6th
Street—APN: 229-271-31, 32 and 37.
Desiqn Parameters: The site has frontage along the 1-15 Freeway. There are no mature trees on
the site nor is there other significant vegetation on the site. The site is currently cultivated as a
vineyard and indigenous vegetation. The site slopes from north to south at approximately less than
2 percent. The site is surrounded by vacant land to the north and across Hyssop Drive to the east.
To the south is an existing metal industrial building.
The proposed building is designed for a single story office and warehouse contractors building
(tenant is A.M.S. Paving Contractors). The building design is oriented to front Hyssop Drive with a
yard storage area to also front Hyssop Drive. The building will have office area(4,802 square feet)
and with corresponding warehouse(6,000 square feet). The yard area portion of the project will be
used to store such equipment as: pick-up trucks, dump trucks, several tanker trucks, and trailers
(see attached Exhibit"A"picture of typical equipment to be stored). The yard is surrounded by an 8-
foot high split face block wall with 24 inch square split face block pilasters 30 feet on center.
The building incorporates three different building materials; painted split face and precision block,
with horizontal stucco band accents. The building is articulated with vertical and horizontal changes
and recess to the building plane. An employee patio area is provided to the rear of the building and
is surround by a well-designed landscape area.
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:
1. Site Plan: Reorient building to mitigate severe Santa Ana winds.The roll-up doors are fully
exposed to seasonal hurricane force winds. Ideally, the building would be plotted along the
north property line with roll-up doors facing south.
2. Materials: Delete precision block because it is not considered a quality material and is
contrary to architectural guidelines of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The following
materials are recommended consistent with the architectural guidelines:different color split
face block, fluted block, tilt-up concrete or stucco. Delete painting over split face block and
allow the richness of the material to show.
3. Color: The building is white;with a dark red color trim that creates very strong color contrast.
The red accent color is used for all cornices, horizontal bands, and window surrounds.
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 sidewalk connection from warehouse lunchroom to employee picnic area.
2. Columns should project out 8 inches (not 4 inches as proposed) from main wall plane.
3. Provide decorative cap, with overhang, for the 8-foot high screen wall and pilasters.
DRC COMMENTS
DR 00-04—AMS CONTRACTORS
October 17, 2000
Page 2 }
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Landscape the freeway slope embankment along the property adjacent to 1-15 Freeway or
pay in-lieu of construction fee.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and return to Design
Review Committee.
Attachment
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Douglas Fenn
The Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the modifications the applicant
proposed to the Committee such as:
1. Revise materials (fluted block and deletion of precession block).
2. Building location agreeable with Committee
3. Toned down color scheme (of split face) approved by the Committee.
y7.
•`/S �. •,"A.'? r -.� t .yk +•-�"�� 1 ! .j +iJrt ,Yy'; )t •�- 1 `
ii Jill
VICE
i<'2. ,. F' ','1' , •y' t .`-• � � '� ,-ir'�'~' 'rit•'r.;1a�1-''�•JiY,1 .` li;;�� ,7� A ''.,"'- 1 ��4' ,
� -rk'•v� 3i� �
,�� � r, - _ �-✓ '.�T•''�- taw re t�,r ''_
�• .. — ._.._ -- � .^:4th ...y`•,::,`"'i..,�},•. '• `�' .."... ,•,. .ht:..z '-'
f..: ''� ..\ �.b' •�":.r�r !r '`' •� 'rt^..i`�.,.�-•. 4 �a�:•... fir'- .: �, �'� .
t ' •k 't'�l-
r
•�-fir.- T rl;! '%f. �f'e^'i •<"��� Y � �x -�(1••�?ti: i � r i L'. '� Lti� t+ .. YY .. .!.`
y 11 !y ' ..2r r. a �� Wit,� i`,.r,t...�, •�5.=� �. Y
SA'T'ISFACTION
�. :�ti ;'/y. yi, ,i 7;.1^ �.r..1+='r°r,i'4yi.. 1.'t�•``-•'1 '.y.`- :1; .+•t ,
al X
-�.:- ;•` t'- 4{-�: > fit: •'lye_{,r �1d y,/. ��.�1 •.u.,},. .>'. '� .t(.. 1. 1
e-•, 3u". � _�'�r ,{� _', 'S�,I4� ,> r •r.�7r.12k'�•.r ..r.r: � 1�1}1. '•.. / � J
j 1' ... �1• -1 .� '.`7l' ..2- :C�n•�. `fir � •
1.� � .. � � � 7 4 � .t1 r c •fir i l T - •: .
f+ �,a. ,:` ••,:�#. •i• ���{ RAN ;, � _. _, -
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
f 8:30 p.m. Rudy eledon
Y October 17, 2000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00-31- LEGENDS
BURGERS -The development of a 3,671 square foot fast food restaurant with a drive-thru, on
1.25-acre of land in Office Professional District, located on the south side of Base Line Road, east of
Carnelian Street - APN: 207-031-29.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Pam Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner: Rudy Zeledon
The project was considered by the Design Review Committee (McNiel, Stewart, Coleman) on
October 3, 2000, at which time the Committee requested that the project be revised and brought
back for further review. At that time, the building design featured an abstract assemblage of
geometric forms, black and white "checkerboard"tile wainscot, and stainless steel cornice around
dining area. The Design Committee Review reviewed revised plans on October 17, 2000. The
project was substantially redesigned to incorporate some of the architectural features of the
buildings within the Exchange office/professional center.The Design Review Committee (Stewart,
Coleman) recommended approval with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall work with staff to minimize conflicts with vehicles exiting the drive-thru
and vehicles trying to park in the parking island east of the building. All proposals shall be
subject City Planner review and approval.
2. Special paving shall be introduced where pedestrians cross drive aisles.
3. A combination of a low decorative wall and dense landscaping shall be incorporated around
the west leg of the drive-thru, to provide additional drive-thru screening.
4. The applicant shall work with staff in providing a sidewalk connection from Base Line Road
to the entrance of the building. All proposals shall be subject City Planner review and
approval.
'7
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
OCTOBER 17, 2000
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9 p.m.
Res p illy sub tted
Brad Buller
Secretary