The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010/07/20 - Agenda Packet ACTION AGENDA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY JULY 20, 2010 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Lou Munoz Ray Wimberly James Troyer Donald Granger Alternates: Frances Howdyshell Richard Fletcher Francisco Oaxaca 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. (Tabe/Tasha) HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW - HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-01016 - JING GONG - A request to construct a 6,568 square foot single-family residence with an attached 787 square foot 3-car garage on a 20,075 square foot lot within the Hillside Overlay District, located on the north side of Reales Street and west of Delphin Place - APN: 1061-801-18. 7:20 p.m. (Mike) POLICY REVIEW DRC2010-00514 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Discussion to determine if metal roofs can be permitted on existing residential structures and the review criteria and process for metal roofs. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag July 20, 2010 HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW - HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-01016 - JING GONG - A request to construct a 6,568 square foot single-family residence with an attached 787 square foot 3-car garage on a 20,075 square foot lot within the Hillside Overlay District, located on the north side of Reales Street and west of Delphin Place - APN: 1061-801-18. Protect Background: The applicant originally submitted the project on December 18, 2007. The project planner reviewed the submittal and sent an Incompleteness Letter to the applicant on February 6, 2008. The applicant resubmitted updated plans on May 29, 2008. The project was deemed complete and a letter was sent on July 17, 2008, to the applicant requesting that 20 sets of plans be submitted for review by the DRC, TRC, and GRC Committees. Plans were not submitted, and over the next two plus years the applicant requested a number of time extensions. The 20 sets of plans were finally submitted in June of 2010, and the project was scheduled for DRC, TRC, and GRC Committees. Project Review Guidelines: The proposed single-family residence is located in the Very Low (VL) Residential District within the Hillside Overlay District. The intent of the Hillside Development Regulations is to minimize grading and ensure that the form, mass, profile, and architectural features of the house are designed to blend with the natural terrain, preserve the character and profile of the slope, and give consideration to the size and configuration of the lot. Recommendations by the Committee will be forwarded to the Planning Director for review and action. Site Characteristics: The project site is located on the north side of Reales Street on a 20,075 square foot lot. The lot drains roughly from north to south, with an approximate grade change of 28 feet from the north to the south,property lines. The lot is bordered by existing single-family residences to the north, south (across Reales Street), east, and west. Project Design Overview: The applicant proposes constructing a 6,568 square foot two-story residence with an attached 787 square foot garage. The house is architecturally compatible with the neighborhood and conforms to the design guidelines outlined in the Development Code, including carrying materials and architectural features to all elevations and stepping the house to reduce the grading. The project meets the height, setback, and cut-and-fill limitations of the Hillside Overlay District. The lot coverage will be 24.6 percent, which is just below the maximum 25 percent permitted in the Very Low (VL) Residential District. Major Issues: None. Minor Issues: 1. The use of window shutters is inconsistent. Many of the shutters are too small to cover the windows to which they are adjacent. Staff recommends removing the shutters from the larger windows and adding the shutters to all of the smaller windows. 2. The gable roof line cuts through the hip roof plane above the entrance balcony, which is not in keeping with the architectural style of the house. Staff recommends that the architect provide an explanation for this design. 3. The 2-foot wide stucco belt below the roof eaves of the garage and the wrought iron decorative elements above the garage doors are out of character with the architecture of the house and should be removed or modified as appropriate. DRC AGENDA DRC2007-01016 - JING GONG July 20, 2010 Page 2 4. The elevations show a Spanish style tile roof, while the plans call-out shake style tile (shake style tile is more appropriate for the architectural style of the house). The plans should be drawn correctly for architectural clarity and consistency. 5. The final approval letter will include a condition that requires the equestrian trail to be fully improved, including adding a decomposed granite base and a drainage facility outside of the trail easement and grading the trail to have a cross-slope of no greater than 4 percent. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the issues outlined above and provide input and direction as necessary. With above minor issues satisfied or conditioned by the Committee, staff recommends approval. Design Review Committee Action: The Design Review Committee recommended approval of Hillside Design Review DRC2007-01016 with the following changes: a. Eliminate the current stucco band around the roof eaves of the garage to be replaced with wood siding. b. Add wood shutters to the majority of the windows on all of the elevations. c. Add red brick veneer to the elevations of both chimneys. The red brick will have a weathered appearance. d. Enlarge the size of the roof gable over the front entrance. e. Use a shake-style tile roof on the house. Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner Tabe van der Zwaag DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Mike Smith July 20, 2010 • POLICY REVIEW DRC2010-00514 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Discussion to determine if metal roofs can be permitted on existing residential structures and the review criteria and process for metal roofs. PLANNER WILL GIVE ORAL PRESENTATION. Design Review Committee Action: The applicant gave a detailed presentation regarding metal roofing material for residential structures. The applicant included information regarding the aesthetic characteristics and structural composition of metal roofs. The applicant stressed that not every roofing contractor is experienced in the installation of metal roofs and that the installation requires additional training in order to achieve the same aesthetic quality as conventional materials. The Committee reviewed the literature presented by the applicant and asked several questions. The Committee did not approve the metal roof material as presented for the following reasons: • The City does not have the ability to control the quality of workmanship and ensure that each contractor possesses the additional training that is required to ensure that each metal roof installation achieves and maintains the design quality of traditional roofing materials. The Committee indicated the importance of maintaining the design integrity of neighborhoods and how quality re-roofs are a prominent component of residential structures that must meet the same standards as the originally approved materials. • The Committee indicated that the quality Of metal roofs vary substantially with respect to the traditional material that it is mimicking. For example, the Committee indicated that the imitation of a composition roof is moderately good, but the imitation of a Spanish barrel tile is substantially lacking authenticity. As such, the Committee informed the applicant that the City cannot approve one type of metal roof and deny another solely on the basis of degrees of quality. The Committee indicated that metal roofs must have a uniform quality for all types of residential materials. • The Committee indicated that they are open to the concept of metal roofs on residential structures if the material can meet the design standards of the City. The Committee indicated that the applicant is welcome to bring alternative metal roofing materials to the Committee for review. Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS July 20, 2010 ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director •