HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/01/06 - Agenda Packet - (2) DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY JANUARY 6, 2009 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Lou Munoz Pam Stewart Corky Nicholson
Alternates: Richard Fletcher Frances Howdyshell Ray Wimberly
CONSENT CALENDAR
NO ITEMS SUBMITTED
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.
(Michael) SIGN PERMIT DRC2008-00806 — AKC SERVICES on behalf of TNT Electric Sign - A
request to install three "XPress Lube" signs at an existing auto service facility in the
General Commercial (GC) District, located at 10075 Arrow Route - APN: 0209-041-52.
7:20 p.m.
(Adam/Cam) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2008-00829 - WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL
CALIFORNIA - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for
73 single-family lots on 26.53 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling
units per acre) in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the north side of
Day Creek Boulevard, east of the Southern California Edison Corridor —
APN: 0225-071-47. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16227. Staff has found
the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental
Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City
Council on August 1, 2001) and does not raise or create new environmental impacts
not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the
Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may
receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes
per individual.
ADJOURNMENT
1, Melissa Andrewin, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true,
accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December 31, 2008, at least 72 hours prior to the
meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga.
in a)
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS �Y
7:00 p.m. Michael Smith January 6, 2009
SIGN PERMIT DRC2008-00806 — AKC SERVICES on behalf of TNT Electric Sign - A request to install
three "XPress Lube" signs at an existing auto service facility in the General Commercial (GC) District,
located at 10075 Arrow Route - APN: 0209-041-52.
Background: The 1.87-acre project site is located at 10075 Arrow Route, on the southwest corner of
Arrow Route and Hermosa Avenue, and consists of three buildings: 1) a 4,162 square foot service
station; 2) a 1,840 square foot auto lube facility and 3) a 1,400 square foot self serve drive-thru car wash.
This project site was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on April 22, 1998, (Conditional
Use Permit 97-41). Although all three buildings and the parcel are under one ownership, each business
is operated by three different owners.
Design Parameters: The Sign Permit for an oil change facility has been submitted by AKC Services on
behalf of TNT Electric Sign. The proposed sign permit consists of three signs:
1. The first sign, identified as A-1 (Exhibit A), is proposed to be located on a pre-existing rock feature
that covers the entire northeast side of the lube building. The sign will be constructed of internally
illuminated channel letters. The area of this sign will be about 40 square feet (Exhibit B). This sign
will replace one that is currently installed at the same location that reads "EXPRESS LUBE." The
new replacement sign will read "XPress Lube" and include a "T" logo box (representing Texaco).
Note that the sign area on the plans and the sign area calculated by staff differ because the
applicant did not include the area between the "T" logo box and the remainder of the text.
The applicant proposes to install the new sign on an exposed raceway similar to that of the current
sign. Exposed raceways are inconsistent with the policies and goals of the Design Review
Committee and are generally discouraged, except in unusual circumstances where the materials
used or architecture do not allow any other alternative. Staff believes that the raceways could and
should be located inside the building. Based on a site inspection, these unusual circumstances are
not present. The applicant could install the raceway inside of the building and drill additional holes
in the building wall as needed for each letter — a reason for doing otherwise is not apparent. The
building wall is constructed of concrete masonry units and the rock feature is made of concrete (or
similar material). Furthermore, the rock feature is thinner and flatter like a regular wall, i.e. it does
not have a rounded, rock-like cross-section with significant curvilinear recesses projections that
would preclude the sign from being flush-mounted on the wall (Exhibit E). Therefore, drilling
through it should not be difficult. Staff recommends the applicant to re-design the sign to include
the raceway inside of the building and drill additional holes in the building wall as needed for each
letter.
2. The second sign, identified as A-2 (Exhibit A), will be placed on the northwest elevation, above the
garage opening of the lube building. This sign will be internally illuminated with channel letters
flush-mounted to the building face. The area of this sign will be about 40 square feet (Exhibit C).
This new sign will read "XPress Lube" and include a "T" logo box (representing Texaco). Note that
the sign area on the plans and the sign area calculated by staff differ because the applicant did not
include the area between the "T" logo box and the remainder of the text. This sign is proposed to
be installed at a location where there is currently a set of decorative tile-like projections arranged in
a 3-foot by 3-foot pattern (compare Exhibits C and F). As this feature is present at various
locations throughout the site, staff believes that removing them to accommodate the sign would be
inconsistent with the original design as approved by the Planning Commission. Staff recommends
that the applicant pursue an alternative location or reduce the size of the sign.
DRC AGENDA
DRC2008-00806— AKC SERVICES
January 6, 2009
Page 2
3. The third sign, identified as B (Exhibit A), will be a non-illuminated, flush-mounted foam sign
located on the northeast elevation of a separate garage (that is part of the business), facing the
back wall of the carwash building. The area of this sign will be about 45 square feet (Exhibit D).
This new sign will read "XPress Lube" only. As with sign A-2, this sign is proposed to be installed
at a location where there is currently a set of decorative tile-like projections arranged in a
3-foot by 2-foot pattern (compare Exhibits D and G). Staff recommends that the applicant pursue
an alternative location.
All signs are less than 150 square feet in area and have an area less than 10 percent of the face of each
building to which they are attached, as required by the City's Sign Ordinance.
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. All raceways shall be mounted in the interior of the building consistent with the Design Review
Committee's policies and goals.
2. The decorative tile-like projections shall be protected in-place. The applicant shall reduce the size
of the signs to accommodate the tile-like architectural element or find another location for the signs.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant revise the submittal and resubmit it for
review and action. If the Committee agrees with staff's above-noted solutions, staff can verify the
changes once they are made and it will not be necessary for the application to be reviewed again by the
Committee.
ATTACHMENTS
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
Members Present:
8 /
• Y
~ a aL
••
e
z<— 311N3A11 VSOWb3H 11
•
•
---7 !lie Fta .
ilig ,.. ir I 1 .
r
i le iii)(ii. i .
IC
O W ...
1 .
..
..„>\„<„, .
, Z\\I 0
41;$ 1 I I I k... H
a
[ 1 - 1 g ...
CZ ti
1 s; g m 4—
ill
c I �s
o
\ \<1/ 7. i 1 CC a
CC
41
all;\>\ / te k •-"*.j .
. n
1
,... r .
g i, rt 3 g
4 KO
3
V
V IC In
v.
9 v4 ! ,
1 / / \ °IgcN
HIh
s
C {:,,
rN la N va r •
H L • eu
W O W CC
0 O O N-.1 daft ~ - ..
ii
H N W C • K . r i
�Oj� y C y
3 jrj !.� tC Y�.am.y O fdt a 0 W s 'y i
W W■
i W E.r... .: � s.,
a
3
II
•
i0 —� �L.. ♦ �I 8 o
•YlI\..,LIj `b
Cr
p i1 0 - N g
:a, b
m 3. .al
/�
i
p Ira t 1.
\..!.4• •
b t j'
Tw �'' b O 1 1 y �f it i �''�a.
V�
a
to ; o I It
EI1 z
CA le
y n
0 r
El d P ` . I rt, c m 1
.zns ,z -1 ■ 1t t� .E . W
1 044v
= 2 S
-4 ,
t,` �
�ppL,,V} 7.„' . L . .
..
y lc`Y9`{
7
N
C
; a \
y x%
YJ d
Et _ 4 H so
e s 41 5 5 8
M — O F >
5
a
S
= 6 Z
b
NJ
F
O
H
cc 2
00 = Y
+� 9� s€ s o _ a W e c a gi
i_„r O el a @ @1 E i @ 9 € 'g a :ice
0 S 0 000 0000 0 = 2e 3 .�,.
Me ? -m Ee of s m W
OpIr ; = err 9 4u' o m
�i hI ! iiI O 5 : i Fo j9 ° m .
00000000 H so._ na 4= \ ;
[ I
n 4°
��
..£-.L o
a g
N • • II s al c
ti
L1s W c
-ir 0 g n Q E
O =�' y
x
La E
yid
i :
Y 111 q H
W
y IC W egfb O Y N
la n
3 w m - •- f m
s m !.1g,- i.,.. m 57
w
;
u
i_.. �\ as '.r. - 3
W N i
a.
•
2/l 5-.Z —.1 ,j
• _
�
x
�`<' To 5
ft ' mA A
It}1 Q
li
N
'„
w 4 it
.... ti
7 W y ai p' 3.�F .. O
NC
7 Q Nm lf . > . p p ig■t.e,, Fa
n
y ``� . N 4� J - • r jr7. 6 - v
p} m rrU. 23
o
Ne W
9
N p•T
m� y� :i : <
W \ .1
d Ois N ..
a ' •
E
9
C
•it
c,- a 3 U
W 3 v = i O 3 W
=vs W O_, p ■F Y G • z i 0
O C N • : z u
x N■- _. #O p
N e? .. O SH r n o
0 0 0 IL CC U. f
id H'` W m
m F
O 0
Z 0 f M m N .,..,,rth
3 talk" o N e : W° H
,
O'
s M i ' ua a
c\ m m ill f m f s
`, sJ.
n 17W W 3 ° =m m
Q « , m um d
m 0 xw
7-7--fir' Y1.. feS.--, 1 ,D .r ,tt
" 7 :'
9.
} fs .• / :2 � � / � �r
r "t y4'
� � '4
s.�,j \ €, , f' t , =7 �t if}E■ ,•.�. Y it77JJ ';
. ;_ 3;{
3 � r � i'
ry J�
M I -S �" �t"ri li
f'tom +. \ h„c ��r
jjeiti /
�4y 1
l.4 f
� . s.,
t: \��"'� y Y g k p p , P 4
;e 1/4,0
n >h " '
ter, 7j
tip. ! b �
4; 44,dglr R
f i! r '. .c
Jmtit'.
211 f �
� . �f 4 s r y
4 x t;F .yam
. t 'mot
eji r Yl / xtv[g°x�
r ` `' v v x x r �4 aJ 5a3
3p y•
E H 1
EXHIBIT E
i � 'i
((( ;j
� 1t
( ,( . ,i ® -� ' , . 4-
((((fit(
, 'Vi y
F l rk ��
l _
it
t� 'S y
j
ems ;. �r t
r
F r M . .�,
1fi` EY Sb � � 1 t -"91 � 3i�� 4.
111 IF ¢ a r '
ty Fy ' a,' c
I .. q-- ttl fj di4 ..-...
t2„, r f ,� _ 4 5� 1'. II':'tx L',�>. f r j%0 t y'
'° § t, y }
yB } �J�
� ' vJR Pb + 9 hV- $'"%x
-
t f
}
F A d F
4
4 d, iii. r rur ? ,r '
` ms -t r
4 y
sli a.
r / , � t .m . r = #i ci
4
,..,
,.
, . . .
, ,.. . .......t..,.... .
1 .... -
....
. . ...-
. .
tt, .. •
. '
, t. •
'.. .
' t.
•:,;',., ..• ' 7'.; '4 : • .--:
, •((t II itil 1 4,—
,. .
. t
. ...
....., •..
-.•••'. 1°4%;:'
# , i.- '- (( t";‘
r.i.,; 1: 1,
_
nt. '''' ' 1.0(t(((i((‘ i.\\l' 111,11,t 1111 1
.
. , ,.
' (4 (((ii • a' '
,•'(.1(((i ',?..'',i' t ,
, ,....
\ 1- ' { 4 ' 1 IIIP'
, kl(1 .. .,-,,•,J i ti..::
.. '11((• . 4., :- ‘.
(ii(i (q iti.„1-,;,<' qt•.'". ',....,„„,..... • .. ., —.„,_.,,., . ., . ,.
,"'tt 't,-'
t. /(t,( 4ri I'''''
1411711141'qx't
:
, 11 _
. - . .
. . . ..
.... ,
k 1 k ,,
• • 2 , - — -2-
. S 1 k v•,,
_
• •
. .
...„.... _
N. . .... '•• ,_ ,
li li „ il
, . .
•
„ .
, ...,...;,„ . ,.... .1,
,1 --:" . , -. -5,.'•--
4v2,.... ''• 2-"e.4...,--:.. J-2;:st • •:-..,,,,;-.,--;:-.4.2.:2,tc,•-•. :,.1...,......,2„...i.„.•2:2z.....-• i•
°••k ... • . 'f2,,,,,...,, ,,,...,-.• .,..,,,,•;,20.-.2.;„:„*„ ' ,,,, . .....,,,,--.2„2„-,,,,,.;.-,.., .„ 1 , . .
-2,,, ..,4•41•71‘,..•.*.•:11, i.',','7, ,42.,42,-.1...;,..r-.-......er...,..,.,?-2.,,4,- -'2 .
2•\-:?.v.-:-.;•,c.,. -..' ,-- .. • -f.,-/.v..,20. ,,
7,..i.,
. .
, ... - , . -••• ...•
. .
'1 1
•
'. .„--.•'• 4 .
' .t,I.,, --,'":-''':-.. - iii •
--...• _
k,k
,.... ,,. . ,..
,-..-,..... . • ir, ,.... . , ,
,-_ .. . ..
,...
,..
•. . 4.• t
.,...., . .,. ,
';. • ' 1- t•-,•'2 k ®
''-- • , t ,- .: ,11:•'g•2r. •
. . 2 v., , 2.25,2•,.., .: .,,i
.., . .-, .' . g.22''.--•-,, . --. .;',.: ..,.. -, '-1. .
' ' 22 •--f2.!'''' ;'11. • '.., .-- •-• '.
.., , .. ,..„:., „ , . •, ,
••••.•,...V(•:,:•2 ,4„ ,
' •42•••'--_:-........1,,, ,t, \
./.....•• • • . :2-k ..0 H. , ,6, ,
--•,-i..:.4...,..-.... --. • • . \ vil ,•,.. .
,-.^."'r.,;•, ,:r.:--„--v-' . . ' \ .. \ .
- . -
rill-•-•
\ ,
--.2-4/'.-iliV-;•.•-`'..- ... \
' n: ..efl,;!---;!:::'...'"'.- „..4W61. 4—_,-ii.ii- "‘"'''.',.;•::.;,. ."';
''.•'''. -"'''.-' ' '- - ''''.qti'''', i \
\
..T . -. .
..._
EXHIBIT F
. _.„ ..,....,
EN
...*1 i.., ... .,,
1\. •
\
..., ... . I •
It -tea . r
'
, s
dt ; °
4
tl
•
PR
t f xa � r �•
/. 4,
Y' �.t
1 I i .
- r
°
t
1
y„ +`' ;u I 4,4 I •
r.
. .
C.-
4 az rim... t
S .
4- l- _�.ura_
I. 3 °" J Ve ,
k . t '
3
•
4
d t
.2 4r Pz "I 1 _
x''71l w •/�j !Y i; tb- 1 x311
. . . ,
. 0 I
. , .
- ;;. •
. • .
• •
. . .47-;•/. ',....: _.
. •
-• ' .
PI . ..,-- , _ _.,
'11 • . --- -
1 • ..; ..1- of
t '
, r .
, ■rE -, .
. r 5
i • r ri'. • ,i r
•
•:::.. ..•
. I i
- f
.7*
At
'sq • 1 •
..
. _
• ' '; ,-- II
_
L ii.
; i - •
• 1. .
1 _ .
•-•,-- tqr - -
,(A 1- ' • '4. -
, •
. ,
. ,
....
•
"N k
.
. .
ti.
1
) .
. . ,
. ,
i_ .
. ,,‘. •
. :
,
N.
.. ... •
,...
1 ,ii.7 .
.. ... .
,
a ,
1 .
- Int. i
. 1 •
, A ?•, f, . ......
• .•
. .
.
• . •
•
. . A .
:. -4.
. . .
•
./ .!Ti i
....,
4
_ ' St3c I- .:
.
>1 ,., . 4'' '''1...::::.41..:'• ... ••••_,--tadgri • • ••••Tht•••1-, ' ,
,.. ..• 4•4,47.-••:.4•-••',4-:••
EXHIBIT G 1 .,. . ....,:...,, ...,. .fi.t. .;:..,. .
. i�
( 2% - , ;, .
1 if
r ;x
•1. a , .. •
h' —
_
2,--,'¢ dY _� C. „.„,...,.•-(I „it,
•
A 4%te t .k.IttkiNik‘k ...'X T' ..
.
T r , `F': - e. .
*-1
. 3 4
_ M ry e t I
• i..
1' P
. 5
-
' Q” y , ice' y % - ;t.
r LJ .rL '1',--,-:i44-ti
L W . .L
1 .:' -? 1 ! 4 J t..
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:20 p.m. Adam Collier January 6, 2009
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2008-00829 - WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL CALIFORNIA -The design
review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 73 single-family lots on 26.53 acres of land in the
Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the
north side of Day Creek Boulevard, east of the Southern California Edison Corridor —
-APN: 0225-071-47. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16227. Staff has found the project to be
within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse
#88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City Council on August 1, 2001) and does not raise or create
new environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report.
Background: Warmington Residential California is requesting approval for the development of 73 single-
family lots previously entitled by K. Hovnanian Homes under Development Review DRC2005-00885.
Because of the downturn in the housing market, K. Hovnanian Homes has discontinued construction on
their remaining lots and have since been acquired by Warmington Residential California. The applicant
is required to develop within substantial compliance with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP),
incorporating the architecture and design details of the Etiwanda area. Requirements include side-on
garages, recessed garages, heavy timber, and specific architectural styles.
A Development Agreement was approved in 2001, which allowed for the Low Residential development
standards for all lots within the tract. The property was rough graded in June of 2004 and infrastructure
was installed. The master developer has installed the main access of the gated community, as well as
the slope landscaping and decorative perimeter walls. These walls will be consistent throughout the
entire master-planned community. The site is bordered by vacant land to the north and east; by Day
Creek Boulevard to the south; and a portion of Tract 16227, being built by Meritage Homes, to the west.
Design Parameters: The project site is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood which has its
own unique architectural design guidelines per the ENSP. The ENSP requires that a mix of the following
primary architectural styles be used for at least two-thirds of the units: Bungalow, Ranch, Monterey, or
San Juan. Up to one-third of the units may use these styles: Country, Victorian, or Santa Barbara
Revival.
The proposed homes are consistent with the required architectural styles and include downsized floor
plans and larger yard areas to meet the demand of the current housing market. The new plans are a
combination of one- and two-story homes and range in size from 2,661 square feet to 3,183 square feet
of livable area. A total of 15 (20.6 percent) of the proposed homes will be a "mock single-story" that has
a roof pitch and front elevation that appears substantially as a single-story home. The two-story plans
have been designed with three floors plans and four architectural styles.
The proposed architectural styles include Santa Barbara Revival, Country, Ranch, Monterey, San Juan,
and Santa Barbara. The Ranch incorporates full-wrap heavy timber rafter tails, board and batten at
gable ends, and ledgestone veneer. The San Juan proposes corbel accents, adobe veneer, and full-
wrap heavy timber rafter tails. The Monterey features decorative shutters and corbels, full-wrap heavy
timber rafter tails, and potshelves. The San Juan features tile vent details, decorative tile around
entryway, brick pavers, and decorative shutters: The Country incorporates wood trim around the entry
porch with knee braces, decorative shutters, and recessed windows. The Santa Barbara elevation
includes decorative clay vents, iron potshelves, and decorative shutters.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
•
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2008-00829 —WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL CALIFORNIA
January 6, 2009
Page 2
entryway, brick pavers, and decorative shutters. The Country incorporates wood trim around the entry
porch with knee braces, decorative shutters, and recessed windows. The Santa Barbara elevation
includes decorative clay vents, iron potshelves, and decorative shutters.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project:
1. The applicant has worked diligently with staff. Based on discussions with each department, there
are no major issues.
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 applicant has worked diligently with staff. Based on discussion with each department, 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. Boulders from the project site shall be utilized and integrated as part of the front yard Landscape
Plan, per the Master Plan Resolution of Approval.
2. Driveways shall be scored in a horizontal or diagonal pattern for additional entryway detail.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval
the project subject to the above revisions.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Adam Collier
Members Present: