Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007/01/16 - Agenda Packet ACTION AGENDA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY JANUARY 16, 2007 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Mike Diaz Alternates: Lou Munoz Richard Fletcher Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR (All consent items heard at 7 p.m.) (Vance/Vicki) HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00254 - RODRIGUEZ - Request to construct a 3,858 square foot single-family residence on .59 acre of land in the Very Low Residential District (.1 to 2 dwelling units per acre), located at the northwest corner of Hillside Road and Ram Court - APN: 1061-381-17. 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. (Tabe/Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18210 - MARK ALLISON - A request to subdivide 4.76 acres of land into 7 lots for the purpose of developing single-family homes in the Very Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located on the south side of Banyan Street between Greenwood Place and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0225-171-04. 7:20 p.m. (Mike S./Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00438 - MICHAEL CHAI - A review of a proposed master-planned retail and office complex comprised of two 2-story office buildings of 28,000 square feet (each), three single-story retail buildings of 17,500 square feet (combined), and three single-story restaurant pad buildings of 17,000 square feet (combined) on three parcels (combined area = 8.4 acres) in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue - APN: 0208-961-05, 06, and 07. 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. DRC ACTION AGENDA January 16, 2007 Page 2 ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Vance Pomeroy January 16, 2007 HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00254 - RODRIGUEZ - Request to construct a 3,858 square foot single-family residence on .59 acre of land in the Very Low Residential District (.1 to 2 dwelling units per acre), located at the northwest corner of Hillside Road and Ram Court - APN: 1061-381-17. Design Parameters: This project was previously reviewed by the Design Review Committee on May 3, 2005. The Committee continued the item (as a future Consent Item) to give the applicant an opportunity to work with the planning staff in addressing several design concerns including the selection of roof material and colors, resolving several .massing issues, and the extension of the roof elements over the deck areas. The owner of the property has worked closely with staff to work out all the design issues and the selection of a more conventional color and materials palette that is appropriate to the architectural style. As such, the quality of the project has been significantly improved overall. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. None. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. This project will be conditioned to have slopes planted per City standards as follows: All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope, shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 square foot of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 square feet of slope area, and appropriate ground cover: In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 square foot of slope area. The trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary the slope plane. The slope planting shall include a permanent irrigation system. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved as presented. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: McPhail, Stewart, Diaz Staff Planner: Vance Pomeroy The Committee approved the project as presented. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Tabe Van der Zwaag January 16, 2007 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18210 — MARK ALLISON - A request to subdivide 4.76 acres of land into 7 lots for the purpose of developing single-family homes in the Very Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located on the south side of Banyan Street between Greenwood Place and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0225-171-04. Design Parameters: The project site is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area. The parcel is generally rectangular in shape with an overall depth of about 630 feet from north to south and a width of 330 feet from east to west. The lots to the east, west, and south are zoned Very Low Residential and developed with single-family residences. The lots to the north are zoned Estate Residential and are undeveloped. The existing topography slopes from about 1,545 feet at the north property line to about 1,512 feet at the south property line. The applicant proposes subdividing the site into 7 lots for future development of one single-family residence per lot. The parcels will be accessed from a new cul-de-sac off of Banyan Street. The proposed lot sizes are as follows: Lot 1 - 26,155 square feet, Lot 2 - 24,735 square feet, Lot 3 - 24,830 square feet, Lot 4 - 24,670 square feet, Lot 5 - 25,620 square feet, Lot 6 - 22,610 square feet, and Lot 7 - 33,050 square feet. A private "local feeder" equestrian trail will be developed at the rear of each lot to access the Community Trail that runs along the south side of Banyan Street. The development of the lots will require the removal of two short sections of Eucalyptus windrows. The applicant will be required to plant new Eucalyptus trees along the north, south, and west property lines of the site in a windrow configuration per Etiwanda Specific Plan standards. The proposed tract map and the parcels created by it comply with all City development standards for the district in which it is located. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Plant the street trees within the parkway along the east side of Street A. 2. Provide slope planting per the Development Code standards. 3. Provide 10-foot wide gates in the block wall at the rear of each lot for access to the equestrian trail. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the proposed parcel map as submitted to the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: McPhail, Stewart, Diaz Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag The Committee approved the project as presented. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Mike Smith January 16, 2007 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00438 - MICHAEL CHAI - A review of a proposed master-planned retail and office complex comprised of two 2-story office buildings of 28,000 square feet (each), three single-story retail buildings of 17,500 square feet (combined), and three single-story restaurant pad buildings of 17,000 square feet (combined) on three parcels (combined area = 8.4 acres) in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue - APN: 0208-961-05, 06, and 07. Design Parameters: The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue. Immediately to the east of the subject site is a commercial/office complex comprised of four buildings that is currently under construction. To the south are two manufacturing/office buildings. To the north is a commercial complex comprised of a gas station, a retail building, and a fast-food restaurant. The applicant proposes to construct eight buildings: two 2-story buildings (Buildings 6 and 7) and six one-story buildings (Buildings 1 A/1 B through 5). Although there is no specific design theme that prevails within the Corporate Park, the buildings of this project will incorporate relatively similar design attributes. The applicant contemplates multi-tenant retail in Buildings 1 A/B and 5, restaurants in Buildings 2 and 3, a bank in Building 4, and office and medical uses in Buildings 6 and 7. The buildings are situated around the 'perimeter' of the project site with the parking lot located in the interior, generally screened from the streets. There are five vehicle access points: one at the midpoint of the project site at Foothill Boulevard; one at the northeast corner of the project site that is shared with the commercial/office complex to the east (also at Foothill Boulevard); one at Elm Avenue; and two at Eucalyptus Street. Architecture: All buildings feature all, or some, of the following: tower elements (one or more), storefront glazing, colonnades, undulating parapets, metal awnings, horizontal metal trellises, and vertical vine trellises. The applicant also proposes a stone veneer which will be lighter in color than the stucco/plaster finish —a reversal of the typical color scheme where the veneer is darker than the surrounding plaster/stucco. The horizontal trellises, and the columns that support them, will be painted metal. The supporting columns for these trellises will be comprised of four posts instead of the typical square unit. • Building 1 A/1 B: These two multi-tenant buildings are located at the northwest corner of the project site and as such are a significant focal point. They are similar to each other with one having the reverse floor plan of the other. Between the buildings is a breezeway that diagonally links a large courtyard area (incorporating a decorative trellis) at the northwest corner of the project site with the interior parking lot. Although glass has been generously applied on the interior-facing elevations of both buildings, on the east elevation of Buildings 1A (facing Elm Avenue) and the north elevation of Building 113 (facing Foothill Boulevard) the application of glass is limited to the northwest and northwest corner towers. Instead, the applicant has proposed vertical vine trellises. • Building 2: This building is a single-tenant building with its entrance at the south elevation. At the entrance is a tiered tower element that will provide a focal point for the building. Glass has been applied generously on the interior-facing elevations of the building. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2006-00438 — MICHAEL CHAI January 16, 2007 Page 2 Similar to Building 1 B, glazing on the elevation facing Foothill Boulevard is limited to the northwest and northwest corner towers. However, the area between the towers, about two-thirds of this elevation, is extensively finished with a stone veneer. • Buildinq 3: This single-tenant building is a restaurant with its entrance at the south elevation. The south elevation features two towers: an undulating parapet and a colonnade along the entire south side of the building. There is also a tower element at the northeast corner. Like Building 2, although glass has been generously provided, on the north elevation facing Foothill Boulevard glass, is Iimited'to the northeast tower. • Building 4: This building is a bank with a drive-up window. The drive-up window is on the north side of the building while the primary entrance is on the west elevation. There is extensive use of glazing on all elevations except on the east elevation which faces a driveway that is shared with the commercial complex to the east. The applicant has provided a horizontal trellis over the drive-thru lane as an acceptable alternative. At the southeast elevation, there is a tower element while a raised tower-like parapet is provided at the north and west elevations. The majority of the north elevation and the area around the primary entrance are fully finished with decorative veneer. • Building 5: This building is a multi-tenant retail building with each tenant's primary entrances facing north. All elevations feature glazing and prominent tower elements. In addition, along the north elevation, the tower elements project from the primary building plane to allow pedestrians to walk beneath. In the areas between the towers, there are overhead trellises. • Buildings 6 and 7: These two-story multi-tenant medical and office buildings are relatively similar to each other. Although their primary entrances are on their north elevations, access to the individual office units will be through an interior lobby. Between the two buildings is a large plaza/courtyard. There is a substantial application of glazing on all elevations consistent with the design policies and standards of the City and the Planning Commission; the application of glass on these buildings firmly establishes these buildings as offices. Stone veneer has been fully applied, i.e. it covers the full width and height on the tower elements. Near the northwest corner of Building 6 is a decorative fountain which will serve as a focal point for the primary vehicle at Foothill Boulevard. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. 1. Building 1 A/1 B: a. Provide glazing along the elevations that face Elm Avenue (Building 1A) and Foothill Boulevard (Building 1 B). The glazing does not need to extend from the exterior finished surface to ceiling height, but instead can begin about 3 feet above the exterior finished surface. b. Provide additional stone veneer at the corners of the buildings closest to the breezeway. The veneer should be applied to the full height of the building elevation. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2006-00438— MICHAEL CHAI January 16, 2007 Page 3 C. Provide a stone veneer wainscot along the base of the north elevation. 2. Building 2: a. Horizontally project the tower element, located at the main entrance of the building, further out from the primary wall plane in order to add more definition to the entrance. b. Provide glazing along the north elevation facing Foothill Boulevard at two of the three locations where vertical vines trellises are shown. The glazing does not need to extend from the exterior finished surface to ceiling height but instead can begin about 3 feet above the exterior finished surface. C. Eliminate the glazing 'panel' at the west elevation nearest the north side of the building as the trash enclosure located nearby renders it non-visible. The glass that was to be used there can be used on the north elevation. d. On the east side of the building, provide a metal trellis instead of the metal canopies. 3. Building 3: a. Provide glazing along the north elevation facing Foothill Boulevard at two of the three locations where vertical vines trellises are shown. The glazing does not need to extend from the exterior finished surface to ceiling height but instead can begin about 3 feet above the exterior finished surface. b. Eliminate the glazing 'panel' at the east elevation nearest the north side of the building as the trash enclosure located nearby renders it non-visible. The glass that was to be used there can be used on the north elevation. C. On the west side of the building, provide a metal trellis instead of metal canopies. 4. Building 4: a. Horizontally project the tower element, located at the main entrance of the building, further out from the primary wall plane in order to add more definition to the entrance. b. Provide a horizontal trellis beginning at the tower at the northwest corner and 'wrapping' around the southwest corner of the building. 5. Building 5: a. Continue the colonnade around the northeast corner to the midpoint of the east side of the building. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2006-00438 — MICHAEL CHAT January 16, 2007 Page 4 6. Buildings 6 and 7: a. Provide canopies or equivalent at the primary and secondary entrances of these buildings. The structures should project at least 10 to 15 feet beyond the entrance doors. The design of these structures should be consistent with that of the buildings. b. Provide a raised landscaped area (e.g. tiered planters) with decorative overhead trellises in the area between the buildings. The area should not be dominated by concrete paving. C. Shift the trash enclosure at the southeast corner of Building 6 to a location that is better screened from view as seen from the north or provide intensive landscaping, including trees, so that it is not readily visible. 7. All buildings: a. Provide stone veneer at the base of all columns that support the overhead structures (canopies, trellises, etc.). Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. All horizontal trellis members immediately over pedestrian areas shall have a maximum spacing of 24 inches on center; the beams shall have a minimum dimension of 4 inches by 12 inches. 2. The color schemes used should be uniformly applied on all elevations of all buildings. 3. Provide decorative light fixtures. The design of these fixtures shall be complementary to the architecture. 4. Provide a direct pedestrian connection between Buildings Al and A2; C and D; along the drive aisle to the east of Building D that will connect the sidewalk at Millenium Court to the walkway that currently terminates near the northeast corner of Building D. Also, provide sidewalks between Building A1/A2 to the east west driveway that separates the project site and the properties to the north. 5. , All landscape areas, planters, and tree 'diamonds' shall have a minimum width of 5 feet, and include a 6-inch curb. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. 1. Decorative paving shall be provided at all vehicular access points on to the site. 2. Decorative paving shall be provided at the sidewalks located along the primary elevations of each building, in the plaza areas immediately in front of each primary entrance of the buildings, and in all open courtyard areas. 3. All roof equipment shall be screened by parapet walls. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2006-00438 — MICHAEL CHAI January 16, 2007 Page 5 4. All loading areas shall be screened with landscaping or, where possible, a combination of landscaping and walls. 5. All walls shall be constructed of decorative block or incorporate a decorative finish/veneer. 6. All trash enclosures shall be constructed per the City's design standard for commercial projects. 7. An amendment to the existing Uniform Sign Program that governs the Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park (USP#140) is required. Amendments are subject to the City's Sign Ordinance and all signs will-require review and approval of a sign permit application prior to installation. 8. Bicycle racks should be provided per City standard. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant revise the proposal as noted above and resubmit for Committee review as a Consent Item prior to scheduling for Planning Commission review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: McPhail, Stewart, Diaz Staff Planner: Mike Smith The project was reviewed, and the applicant indicated that they would comply with staff's requested changes as listed in the staff report. The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff to come up with a comprehensive design for the building elevation(s) and the hardscape/landscape elements between Buildings 1 A and 1 B at the northwest corner of the site. The item will be continued on the Consent Calendar for the next Design Review Committee meeting for a final review of the agreed changes. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS December 16, 2006 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. qectfully submitted Mike Diaz Senior Planner