HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005/07/19 - Agenda Packet ACTION AGENDA
• DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY JULY 19, 2005 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Dan Coleman
Alternates: Rich Macias Richard Fletcher Larry McNiel
CONSENT CALENDAR
7:00 p.m.
(Doug/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DRC2004-01013 - ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS, INC. - A request to develop a
113,015 square foot retail center, on 18.27 acres in the Industrial Park District
(Subarea 12), located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue, and fronts
along 4th Street-APN: 0229-263-49 thru 53. Related File: Tentative Parcel Map
SUBTPM16926.
(Doug/Willie) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2004-00379 - TACAZA, INC. - A request to
. develop a 6,196 square foot Famous Dave's Restaurant with bar on 1.4 acre of
land within the General Industrial District(Subarea 12), located on the north side of
4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue - APN: 0229-263-48. Related Files:
Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770; Tentative Parcel Map SUBTT16300.
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.
(Doug/Mark) DESIGN REVIEW DRC2004-01166-GEORGE SEITZ-A request for a two story
office building in the Industrial Park District(Subarea 12), located atthe southwest
corner of 6th and Pittsburgh Avenue -APN: 0229-341-01.
7:30 p.m.
(Mike D./Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT17455 -
RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOUSING PARTNERS-A residential subdivision of 64
condominiums on 5.5 acre portion of said subdivision, located at the northeast
corner of Madrone Avenue and 9th Street -APN: 0207-262-18 and 27. Related
File: Development Review DRC2005-00220.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2005-00220-RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOUSING
PARTNERS - The design review of building elevations and site plan related to
Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17455 consisting 64 condominiums on 5.5 acres of
• land in the General Industrial zoning district, located at the northeast corner of
Madrone Avenue and 9th Avenue — APN: 0207-262-18 and 27. Related
File: Tentative Tract SUBTT17455.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
July 19, 2005
• Page 2
8:00 p.m.
(Doug/Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DRC2005-00013 - WF CONSTRUCTION, INC. - A request to build 2
industrial/warehouse buildings totaling 21,650 square feet on 1.27 acres in the
Industrial District (Subarea 3), located at 9359 Feron Boulevard -
APN: 0229-032-12 - Related File: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17063.
8:40
(Mike S./Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DRC2004-01 1 25-PANATTON I DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC-A request to
construct a commercial and office complex comprised of three buildings with a
combined floor area of about 49,000 square feet, with a portion of about 10,000
square feet to be developed by others, on a vacant parcel of 5.31 acres in the
Industrial Park District, (Subarea 7), located at the southwest corner of Foothill
Boulevard and Milliken Avenue -APN: 0229-011-69 and 0208-961-05. Related
Files: Development Review DR99-11, Development Review Modification
DRCDR99-11 MOD and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM15630. Staff has found the
project to be within the scope of a previously adopted Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted by the Planning
Commission on April 28, 1999, and June 28, 2000, respectively, and a Negative
Declaration adopted by the Planning Commission on February 13, 2002. This
project does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered
• in the previous Negative Declarations.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no comments.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
•
• CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
Doug Fenn July 19, 2005
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-01013 -
ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS, INC. - A request to develop a 113,015 square foot retail center, on
18.27 acres in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12), located between Richmond Place and
Buffalo Avenue, and fronts along 4th Street-APN: 0229-26349 thru 53. Related File: Tentative
Parcel Map SUBTPM16926.
A COMPLETE SET OF PLANS WILL BE PROVIDED AT THE DESIGN REVIEW MEETING.
The applicant has addressed every previous and secondary issue of the previous staff report. A
substantial amount of primary material has been added to every building that creates a project
that has a lasting look of quality and permanence.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the
• revised project as submitted.
Attachments: Reductions of elevations.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Fletcher, Coleman
Staff Planner: Doug Fenn
The Committee recommended approval subject to staff verifying parking.
•
• CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
Doug Fenn July 19, 2005
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2004-00379 - TACAZA, INC. - A request to develop a 6,196
square foot Famous Dave's Restaurant with bar on 1.4 acre of land within the General Industrial
District (Subarea 12), located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Pittsburgh Avenue -
APN: 0229-263-48. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00770 and Tentative Parcel
Map SUBTT16300.
A COMPLETE SET OF PLANS WILL BE PROVIDED AT DESIGN REVIEW MEETING.
The Design Review Committee directed the applicant to go back and address the outstanding
elevation major issues with staff. The applicant has adequately redesigned the building with the
following items:
1. The paint scheme has been toned down with more subtle hue colors that are not too bright
and distracting.
• 2. A substantial amount of stone material has been on all sides four of the building.
3. The primary entrance faces 4th Street and the central pitched/timbered gable has been
significantly raised and widened over the doorway. In addition, a commercial like chimney
element is recessed behind the entry covered with stone to help add a focal point to the
entryway.
4. Additional windows, awning and a more diversified and eclectic paint scheme have been
added to create stronger contrast.
Staff Recommendation: The only additional recommendation that staff would require,would be to
increase the height of the stone base by at least three more feet on all side of the building.
Attachments: Reductions of elevations
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Fletcher, Coleman
Staff Planner: Doug Fenn
The Committee recommended approval subject to adding stone veneer on all pop-outs and adding
full height stone columns at both gables.
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:10 p.m. Doug Fenn July 19, 2005
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2004-01166 -GEORGE SEITZ-A request for a two story office building in
the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12), located at the southwest corner of 6th and Pittsburgh
Avenue -APN: 0229-341-01.
Design Parameters: The subject site is located at the southwest corner of 6th Street and Pittsburgh
Avenue. The site is situated in a professional office/industrial corridor of the City; therefore, it is
surrounded by industrial and professional offices. The street frontage of 6th Street and Pittsburgh
Avenue has full street improvements along with mature street trees. The site is vacant, and is not
cultivated with a vineyard. Other than the existing mature street trees, there are no other trees on
the subject site. There are a few small trees dispersed on the site. The sight gently slopes from the
north to the south.
The project is proposed as a concrete tilt-up building. The building is oriented to face 6th Street and
Pittsburgh Avenue at the northeast corner of the property. Access to the site will be via and shared
ingress and egress to an existing parking lot to the south off of Pittsburgh Avenue. The applicant
proposes an abundant amount of 144 parking spaces with the handicap spaces located in front of
the primary entrance.
• Overall, the project has adequate 360-degree architecture with a well-defined "pseudo" building
entry element that fronts 6th Street. There is a subtle interplay along the building fagade that is
primarily a rectangular shaped building. There is a sandblasted concrete band on all sides of the
building. The building has reflective glazing and uniform colored paint scheme. An employee
outdoor eating area is located at the southwest corner of the building.
Staff Comments:
Maior Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project:
1. Stone work or similar like material should be incorporated on the colored sandblasted concrete
on all of the pop-out elements, "especially' on the primary and pseudo entryways. This is a
professional building and the stonework will give it a finished and enhanced look.
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 two pop-out elements that are provided on the north side of the building should be
extended out at least 3 feet (1 foot is shown).
2. The width of the vertical anodized aluminum support columns should be doubled. They
appear too narrow for the scale and size of the building.
• 3. The decorative foam trim cornice must be wrapped around on all sides of the building. The
provided foam trim should be higher than that requested to maintain the look of enhancing the
primary and pseudo entryways.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2004-01166 — GEORGE SEITZ
• July 19, 2005
Page 2
4. A 3-foot high seating wall should be provided on the perimeter of the outdoor-eating area that
is adjacent to the parking lot.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Any service or secondary access doors should be painted to match the paint scheme of the
buildings.
2. The trash enclosure should match the architecture style and requested materials of the
project.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval with the above modifications.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Fletcher, Coleman
Staff Planner: Doug Fenn
• The Committee recommended approval subject to the following revisions agreed to by the applicant:
1. Replace integral colored sandblasted concrete with stone veneer on facade panels.
2. Facade panels should project 18 inches out from building panels (as an architectural feature
into setback).
3. Aluminum columns should be increased in diameter.
4. Cornice should wrap entire building (and may be painted foam).
5. Add seat wall to outdoor employee eating area.
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:30 p.m. Michael Diaz July 19, 2005
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT17455 - RANCHO
CUCAMONGA HOUSING PARTNERS-A residential subdivision of 64 condominiums on 5.5 acre
portion of said subdivision, located at the northeast corner of Madrone Avenue and 9th Street -
APN: 0207-262-18 and 27. Related File: Development Review DRC2005-00220.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2005-00220 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOUSING PARTNERS-
The design review of building elevations and site plan related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17455
consisting 64 condominiums on 5.5 acres of land in the General Industrial zoning district, located at
the northeast corner of Madrone Avenue and 9th Avenue —APN: 0207-262-18 and 27. Related
File: Tentative Tract SUBTT17455.
Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to develop 64 new condominium units on Lot 1 of
Parcel Map 17156,tentatively approved by the Planning Commission on May 25, 2005. The subject
site is approximately 5.54 acres in size and is located approximately 600 feet east of the northeast
corner of 9th Street and Madrone Avenue. On July 6, 2005, the City Council approved a General
Plan amendment and zone change for the property to Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling
units per acre). Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17544 has been filed to create the proposed 64
condominium units on the subject site.
• The project site has a gradual slope to the southwest with trees generally concentrated along the
south and north boundaries of the project. Surrounding the project site are apartments and
single-family homes on large lots to the north; vacant land zoned for Industrial Park uses (Subarea
17) to south (across 9th Street); non-conforming industrial uses to the east; and townhome and
single-family development to the west (across Madrone Avenue).
The proposed project consists of 64 two-story condominium units located within three building types
(mostly in groups of 3 and 5 units) dispersed throughout the site, with recreation building and
amenities, and on-site visitor parking. The buildings are placed on axis to 9th Street and are
accessed by an internal loop drive. Each unit will have three bedrooms and come in two sizes:
1,429 square feet and 1,552 square feet. Attached two-car garages are provided for each unit. The
design of the project appears to be a contemporary interpretation of the Mediterranean architectural
style.
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.
Staff has previously met with the applicant and the architect to discuss the design for the new
condominium units. At that time, staff requested that the project design be further studied to add
further architectural detailing and/or building materials to all sides of the proposed buildings and to
better delineate the individual units. The applicant has made a number of changes including the
addition of accent stonework, two colors and textures of stucco, and details to better define the
windows and doorways. While the design of the units has been improved, staff believes that further
enhancements are necessary to address the overall size of the buildings and their strong horizontal
massing of the structure.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2005-00220 — RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOUSING PARTNERS
July 19, 2005
. Page 2
Staff suggests that the following enhancements be considered to further enhance the design of the
project:
1. Clarify what "stone" material will be used on the units. The elevations indicate an "ashlar"
(square like shape) masonry unit, while the perspective drawings and color board indicate a
"ledge stone"material and application. Staff also requests further clarification of the masonry
block type to be used for walls (planters, perimeter, retaining, etc.) around the site. The two
masonry materials must be architecturally compatible; particularly when they are used together
such as they are at the entry gates.
2. Provide details on how the proposed "stone" veneer will be applied to the buildings,
particularly the garage sides of the buildings. The "stone" veneer should be designed to
appear as integral part of the design rather than merely an applique material. In some cases,
there is no break in the wall plane where the stone veneer and stucco material of adjoining
unit meet. Further, the details should clearly show where the stonework veneer begins and
ends.
3. Modify the design of the exterior side elevations of the end units on all three buildings to
provide more visual interest and balance of elements. Staff believes these sides of the
building will be more visible than the interior sides of the building and require a stronger
design. For example,the design for the end unit in Building Type 2 relies too much on the two
colors of stucco to make up for a weak design. On other end unit elevations,the pop-out wall
• section at the stairwells appears awkward and oddly proportioned in relation to the height and
width of the other elements on this side of the building.
4. Consider different ways to architecturally treat the pedestrian pathway between the Units B
and B-Rev in Building Types 1 and 3, and address what will be a long and narrow walkway
(only 5 feet in width) that is also partially enclosed by two-story wall planes. Some items to
consider are a solid roof, decorative trellis, etc.
5. Eliminate the small roof cover element sitting on top of the large plaster wall on the entry side
of the Community Building. Staff believes this element is unnecessary and detracts from the
appearance of the building.
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 are no secondary issues.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
1. All private yards are required to be landscaped with ground cover, shrubs, and one tree per
150 square feet of area. A concrete patio, tree, hydroseed lawn, and irrigation are proposed
for the private yard area of each unit.
2. No wood fencing is allowed. Construction of block walls between the units (i.e. along interior
side and rear property line) is required for permanence, durability, and design consistency.
3. Access gates to private yards of each unit and the recreation buildings/amenities shall be
constructed of a material more durable than wood. Acceptable materials include, but are not
limited to, wrought iron and PVC. All gates and fences will be constructed of powder-coated
metal.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2005-00220— RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOUSING PARTNERS
July 19, 2005
• Page 3
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Major Issues identified in this report and those
identified by the Committee be discussed with direction being given to the applicant as to what
should be addressed to obtain Design Review Committee recommendation of approval to the
Planning Commission.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Fletcher, Coleman
Staff Planner: Michael Diaz
Staff identified five minor design issues for discussion regarding the project. The applicant agreed
to staffs recommendations and to further enhance the design of the units. The changes include:
• Provision of details on the installation of stone veneers on the buildings;
• Better treatment of second story windows to add a sense of depth;
• Adjustment of the architectural design for the ends of the buildings (i.e., Building Type 2);
• • Restudy of the design and architectural treatment of the narrow walkway between units B2
and B2 Reverse to make it less alley like; and
• Removal of the small roof cover element on the recreation building.
• Vary garage door designs and add windows to provide added visual interest to drive aisle.
The Committee supported the overall design concept for the proposed condominiums, and
recommended that the item be forwarded to the Planning Commission for final approval when the
above changes have been incorporated.
•
• DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:00 p.m. Doug Fenn July 19, 2005
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2005-00013 - WF
CONSTRUCTION, INC. -A request to build 2 industrial/warehouse buildings totaling 21,650 square
feet on 1.27 acre in the Industrial District (Subarea 3), located at 9359 Feron Boulevard -
APN: 0229-032-12 - Related File: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17063.
Design Parameters: The subject site is an industrial infill property located at the terminus
intersection of Onyx Avenue and Feron Boulevard. Onyx Avenue and industrial buildings are to the
north; an existing flood control channel and the A.T.and S.F. Railroad line to the south;an existing
industrial building is to the east; and vacant land and an industrial building are to the west. The site
is vacant with partial asphalt improvements. The site has a slope of less than 2 percent and has a
north to south fall. There are no mature trees on the subject site.
The infill industrial development contains two single-story industrial buildings with mezzanines,
which total 21,650 square feet. The buildings are rectangular shaped, which is conducive for the
intended use. Three of out four sides have articulation,and only the service side of buildings is flat.
Access into the project site will be off of the terminus of Onyx Avenue and Feron Boulevard.
Additionally, the applicant has provided centralized and convenient outdoor eating areas for each
building.
• The buildings have a nominal amount of 360-degree architectural elements. The building designs
indicate an adequate use of two primary materials. The buildings evoke a unique design that will be
an improvement over some of the other existing buildings in the area. Each building will have a
mixture of spandrel and vision glass with a foam trim type cornice over the window areas. The
primary entryways are recessed with a metal canopy overhang.
Easement Issue: The easement notes on the lower left corner of the Parcel Map depict four
easements. However,three of the easements,which were for a pipeline,telephone line, and water
pipes, cannot be located on any ALTA reports or any other recorded record. The applicant notes
that these easements will be vacated, but it is unclear at this time with the City of the proper
procedure to do this. Staff has no issue with the vacation, however, the intent is to verify with
counsel from the City's legal division as to best address this issue. Because of this,the project was
held up for a couple of days, and thus the late delivery of this project for the July 19, 2005, Design
Review Committee meeting. Project approval will be contingent upon vacation of these three
easements, prior to issuance of grading permits.
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. Parking was calculated assuming both buildings would only be used for warehousing (one
space per 1,000 square feet), excluding any manufacturing. Manufacturing requires twice as
much parking (one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area). Staff has strongly
• encouraged the applicant to consider providing more parking to be able to accommodate a
broader range of tenants. In staff's experience, small industrial buildings like these are
typically occupied by manufacturing companies.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2005-00013 —W F CONSTRUCTION, INC.
July 19, 2005
• Page 2
2. Staff is concerned that the site is being overbuilt because of the lack of sufficient parking for
manufacturing use, and numerous technical non-conformities with minimum City standards
(see Code Issues below). One possible solution would be to attach buildings to create more
efficient use of site.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Site Plan:
a. Parking spaces 14 through 17 may be underutilized between the two buildings.
Although easy to get into, they would require drivers to back up and make an awkward
three-point turn to get out of spaces. Further, they would also be blocked any time
trucks are using the Building A roll-up doors.
b. Provide sidewalk connections from both buildings to both outdoor employee eating
areas, including from Building B access doors on the west elevation.
C. Landscaping should be provided around the trash enclosure of Building B, and Parking
Space 21 will interfere with access to the trash enclosure.
2. Architecture
• a. The rear elevation of Building B, which is visible from the railroad, needs more
architectural detail elements.
b. The south side of Building B should have the decorative light sconce as depicted on the
other vertical elements.
C. The metal canopy detail that is utilized on the buildings could be designed over the
roll-up doors on the south side of Building B. Additionally,the south side of the building
must have spandrel glass to give the appearance of vision glazing.
d. All of the entire vertical detail elements should be sandblasted.
e. Call out the material of the decorative paving at all entryways into the project site.
f. Parapets are to be high enough so as to screen all roof-mounted equipment. Areas of
the building do not appear to have sufficient parapet to screen any HVAC units.
g. Transformers should be screened by decorative screen walls and landscaping.
h. Bike racks should be installed on a concrete pad of sufficient size to accommodate the
length of bicycles. The plan shows both bike racks in the middle of planters.
Code Issues:The following items are required by City Ordinance and shall be incorporated into the
proiect design without discussion:
• 1. A 25-foot average landscape setback is required along Feron Avenue. The applicant does
have additional landscaping along Feron Avenue that could be calculated as part of the
average, but it is deficient. The applicant has informed staff that they will have revised plans
at the DRC meeting, which will rectify this matter.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2005-00013—W F CONSTRUCTION, INC.
July 19, 2005
• Page 3
2. Provide landscape planters, per the Development Code standard,around the buildings except
at the storage loading areas. Planters are too narrow to plant trees required at a rate of one
tree per 30 linear feet of building. Some planters along the east elevations are as narrow as
2 to 3 feet.
3. Provide a minimum 5-foot wide (inside dimension) planter at the perimeter of the parking lot.
The west and south edges of the Building B parking lot do not comply.
4. Parking Space#14 at the southwest corner of Building A does not meet the 11-foot minimum
width requirement when abutting a building wall. Although, easy to get into, it would require
driver to backup and make an awkward three-point turn to get out of space. Further, it would
also be blocked completely any time trucks are using the adjoining roll-up door.
5. The parking along the south property line must be at least 17 feet in length (allowing for a
1-foot overhang).
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Paint roll-up doors to match the building elevations.
2. No exterior downspouts are to be visible on any of the buildings.
• Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends redesign of the project and return to Committee.
Design Review Committee Action:
l
Members Present: Fletcher, Coleman
Staff Planner: Doug Fenn
The applicant presented revised plans; however, they still did not resolve the issues. The
Committee did not recommend approval and directed the applicant to work with staff and return to
the Committee.
•
• DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:40 p.m. Michael Smith July 19, 2005
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-01125 -
PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC -A request to construct a commercial and office
complex comprised of three buildings with a combined floor area of about 49,000 square feet,with a
portion of about 10,000 square feet to be developed by others, on a vacant parcel of 5.31 acres in
the Industrial Park District, (Subarea 7), located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and
Milliken Avenue - APN: 0229-011-69 and 0208-961-05. Related Files: Development Review
DR99-11, Development Review Modification DRCDR99-11MOD and Tentative Parcel Map
SUBTPM15630. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of a previously adopted Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted by the Planning Commission on
April 28, 1999, and June 28, 2000, respectively, and a Negative Declaration adopted by the
Planning Commission on February 13, 2002. This project does not raise or create new
environmental impacts not already considered in the previous Negative Declarations.
Background: This project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on July 5, 2005.
Although the Committee approved the architecture of Buildings A and B on the condition that
several modifications be incorporated such as cultured stone finished wainscots,additional spandrel
glass at key locations,and increases in the height of some of the towers,this item was continued to
July 19, 2005, for further discussion to resolve issues with Building D. The Committee was not
satisfied with the architecture of Building D and requested that the applicant revise it. Also, its
plotting/orientation on the property in relation to Milliken Avenue remained unresolved.
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.
No new issues were introduced; see July 5, 2005, Design Review Committee comments.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
No new issues were introduced; see July 5, 2005 Design Review Committee comments.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
No new issues were introduced; see July 5, 2005 Design Review Committee comments.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Fletcher, Coleman
• Staff Planner: Michael Smith
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2004-01125 — PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC
July 19, 2005
Page 2
• Buildings A and B: As directed by the Committee,the applicant modified the details and finish
of these buildings and revised the alignment of the pedestrian connection between both
buildings. The Committee was satisfied with the results and no further discussion was
deemed necessary, and recommends approval.
• Building D: The applicant modified the architecture of Building D as requested and the
Committee accepted their revisions. Remaining to be resolved was its location on the project
site and its orientation in relation to Milliken Avenue. The Committee recommended placing
the building at the building setback line along Milliken Avenue with its primary axis located
parallel to the street while the applicant preferred that the building be positioned about 50 feet
further from the street with its primary axis parallel to, and entrance facing, Foothill Boulevard.
I
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
• July 19, 2005
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
Secretary
•
•