Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2011/12/06 - Agenda Packet - (2)
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY DECEMBER 6, 2011 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) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00688 - VERIZON WIRELESS — A site and architectural review of a 50-foot tall monopine wireless communication facility on the site of Sacred Heart Catholic Church within the Regionally Related Commercial (RRC) Development District, located at 12676 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0227-211-24 and 25. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as a Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15303) exemption which covers the installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures. 7:20 p.m. (Mayuko) UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2010-00944 - GIRON ENGINEERS INC. - Uniform Sign Program for Development Review DRC2008-00356, a proposed retail commercial center consisting of 3 buildings totaling 11,588 square feet on 1.08-acre of land within the Specialty Commercial District (Subarea 3) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located on the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Klusman Avenue - APN: 0208-153-12, 0208-153-13, 0208-153-24. Related files: Development Review DRC2008-00356, Preliminary Review DRC2007-00476, Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00943, and Variance DRC2010-00941. 7:40 p.m. (Donald) PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT DRC2011-00824 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A report on the use of metal roof material to simulate composition, tile and barrel tile roofs for dwelling units within Residential Development Districts. The report qualifies under State CEQA Guideline Section 15061(b)(3) because the report is for informational purposes and will not result in an intensification of environmental impacts. 8:00 p.m. (Steve/Carlo) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00577 - CALVARY CHAPEL OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - An amendment to the master plan to add additional building space for additional classrooms and add approximately 3,000 square feet of temporary modular trailer space on site until the new classrooms can be built at Calvary Chapel of Rancho DRC AGENDA December 6, 2011 Page 2 Cucamonga located within the Office Park District of the Terra Vista Community Plan at 10700 Town Center Drive - APN: 1077-422-14 Related Case: Minor Development Review DRC2011-00578. This action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, existing facilities. 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 I, Gall Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on November 23, 2011, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag December 6, 2011 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00688 -VERIZON WIRELESS —A site and architectural review of a 50-foot tall monopine wireless communication facility on the site of Sacred Heart Catholic Church within the Regionally Related Commercial (RRC) Development District, located at 12676 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0227-211-24 and 25. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as a Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15303) exemption which covers the installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures. Project Proposal: The applicant proposes constructing a wireless communication facility on the site of the Sacred Heart Catholic Church located at 12676 Foothill Boulevard. The facility will be in the form of a 45-foot high monopine (top of branches at 50 feet). The facility will be located approximately 450 feet north of the curb face on Foothill Boulevard and 55 feet east of the 1-15 Freeway sound wall, adjacent to an existing building. The related control equipment will be within two walled equipment shelters that will be located on either side of the existing trash enclosure, against the 1-15 Freeway sound wall. The facility will require the elimination of two parking spaces that will be replaced along the north property line. The height limit in the Regionally Related Commercial Development District is 35 feet. Development Code Section 17.26.020 classifies wireless communication facilities that are over the height limit as Major Wireless Communication Facilities, which require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Development Code Section 17.26.030 states that Major Wireless Communication Facilities may not be located within 300 feet of a residential development district unless they are collocated with a second wireless communication facility. The northern portion of the church parking lot is zoned Medium Residential and is within 300 feet of the proposed wireless communication facility. The applicant has been unable to find a second carrier to collocate on the facility, though the facility is collocatable. The applicant has submitted a Variance request to overcome the separation requirement. Staff Comments: Staff feels that the design and placement of the wireless communication facility is appropriate for the proposed location as there are other mature pine trees on the site, and the facility will be partially screened from public view. The facility is located behind the church sanctuary and 450 feet behind the Foothill Boulevard right-of-way. The facility will also be screened by the row a mature eucalyptus trees adjacent to the 1-15 Freeway sound wall and along the east property line, adjacent to the multi-family residences. A planter will be built around the monopine to help screen the base of the facility. The equipment shelters that will screen the related control equipment and emergency generator will have a stucco finish and overhead lattice structures to match the existing trash enclosure. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the proposed design as submitted. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima December 6, 2011 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2010-00944 - GIRON ENGINEERS INC. - Uniform Sign Program for Development Review DRC2008-00356, a proposed retail commercial center consisting of 3 buildings totaling 11,588 square feet on 1.08-acre of land within the Specialty Commercial District (Subarea 3) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located on the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Klusman Avenue - APN: 0208-153-12, 0208-153-13, 0208-153-24. Related files: Development Review DRC2008-00356, Preliminary Review DRC2007-00476, Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00943, and Variance DRC2010-00941. Background: On August 16, 2011, the Design Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the proposal for Development Review DRC2008-00356, a proposed retail commercial center consisting of 3 buildings totaling 11,588 square feet. The Committee recommended approval of the Development Review but directed the applicant to complete the Uniform Sign Program and bring it back to the DRC prior to staff scheduling the Development Review application for Planning Commission. Proposal: The applicant has completed the requested Uniform Sign Program. The wall signs will all be channel letters with non-illuminated signs on the north elevation where there are adjacent residents, and illuminated signs facing Foothill Boulevard. A Route 66 monument sign will be anchored at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Klusman Avenue. The owner has chosen not to incorporate any business identification monument signs at this time. The Sign Program complies with the current Sign Ordinance, and staff feels that the Sign Program is compatible with the buildings. Staff Comments: Staff has reviewed the Uniform Sign Program, and the following comments are intended to provide an outline for the Committee discussion regarding this project. Maior Issues: • 1. None. Minor Issues: 1. None. Staff recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of this Uniform Sign Program along with Development Review DRC2008-00356 to the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima Members Present: 4 ' Q a,� -` V co 0� O rc dielk Q 0 .co -�' • W . d in. u W Q iX la r 0. z u j� 1 .,� m tea// t/� ; as LL o F O - U 2 3 LL U aa LH o t 1 � V Illell 14 com) • �.. y 0 cec Q: i a =, . M fn �mowr. . V a. �_� O p ;, , m O W^ o n N :70 ( V`'y z j' ' 1 i' 'p� .,.� �'f 0 Lam.. ° t. f4t J � LL 0 ` ;# . ,...- W 17 L� a 1. I i {� W et I it 1,-- \i-:MA\; Cr ' O' I' O iiih ' O i t jilio Ei 1, ' .. O * N V t o; l; r ` y S ' +' a+ >. C a+ C a C a+ C Y .p C >. C C of aL+ C Cl‘ to U — a C •C O O' C O O L a L a O•.- m Yamam ° w H � v ea woaNO � vNVV � i2 a in ° Y '•caaa, -c u aa •+N-03iE aD C aL � myuu, Z UO a C o O a v, c to O 7 c - 0 -1 Y w 7 O c m O 0` m a 0 w mto � u o0Cutn O oa, T cr2LJy 't^ Ev, ,n ,6 Y .L-1 C m w Y v, H C c N Y C me I a, Y a, >• .O w -) •, ocC .o ` > CO a >,.N.N du o >, ° � '3Y ,Unowa F coa n 3 Y n 3 c > N C > Q a . a, ° N a, Y U v '-' •O >'v a, O co w 0 C a E O > ° � " w a LL ,--me o' " a O C L° U U U O Y _ N C— > Y Y .� a L E C m 0. w 0. D al .c u '3 a, c 3o ° O to -0Y > � av U v N 0 N t`o " c v Q H .1E' °. E a Y m o ° ` Y L 4 ._ Ca, a0a toga a, ,atom w ` v " at0ou3 a' Z m O U a U Y c > C O • r , C N to a, a w cNax, - 44-io oCO 0 o, o2c v ° ;° >'13 H m Y u t C m }, a r u t u in - - •0 m a, Z YcO � ac a, � m a a � ov Z Lca, moa .- f mm a m c < or ao•a Co C 13 N O.= H E v Y C U a tea a 7 C _ c o c o••° Z o'•u m 4-: ~ `m a a 3 w m � '� m y r arc .. $ O p v U L N o c Y w o' w c — C a a c to w • C ICY C C C N a O C m Y m to .0 a L > ocv acCu°i C °- E co " 1- 4C, 'ac I- w Y0Yuma J u E - �. 'v Z2Eo ( 'op ° > ^ Ec � v � r o and Via, � � a3a .. 0 m u L o O +- N U (a VI a> ° u d w • m O' C v, Y Y O C E o Y vt > y a L ° ea ° v, u a C ''' C o O.v m C O H•a in - m °.Y — a L. u U uC4, u_ JO t0 V CD Cm 'tyro (73 c > 0CCa' o m a min oa,> - O +CD CO • vi IV � aOECm N o' m cc = _ a, a3a'17 o•t L E a a, m ', ;. (U v, a v ap_ate. > to u c E a v E a to v, m Y a w a = E o o a o u v O a C — N " •- C u C a v, a o •- O` 7 '0 0 TA ° a3 t0 v, v d >. Hv 3 ',n u Ca 0 - C a s O m c a v `oa c r - au 0 CO L Y c 0"- o Y a o m 4, o m V1 c N Y _ a a 'N .0 y U . C O O C w ma' a) 7 a O a, c O` ayr a s O ° E - o.v to � m c ° HY 'w at aao ooa 3 m .` v, >. 0 V, xY > a- tn : ( L a as :` mrcEa � .- c m °: va' 0' m U ,nH O a m O a N N E Y - a C lr_ ` a of C Y 1'mm E ac, .- o :2> Cva, N0-� � cc3 O c •� > 7'm 0 O 0'— C O a O` a o a v O•V L v, m L — Y Vf •O ✓ U _ c a H a 0 u 'O U C •` N H a Ha '1- a ,: • 0 . o :; mUYam 7 U ..`_ v ¢ U v a � ccoy v c a C C a C C in C m a to a' t a (0 1- 4, H /I I II — (I) N Wrc, upcE o ° o E ° r► roo0 Z � � a 7 I a, V .p J `- c o ° ° a « a a� i E E t9 vJ L V a " Y Y_ ' p O ` J rn p Zy pat 71:1 E 3 p. p, a' axi E c } r1 �w o (.9 - - r° 7- —L O u 0 O` T N a+ - N V O m J ar J . au E m u) a, ra G J . Z �/1 0 m ac °-' E ; E o w V ~ o > 0 vi vJ " i °_ E N ova, a c va, a30 0 O a - IA 0 .+ N 0 V I- J C d II- r0 N > d L V r° Q - u a, a N C 0 C N p . V) ‘I w E ° a, ,E in o c a. a C a, m-O L O E c c c Y ,_ L J a1 •' N L. = p > C T a H ra 4 to C L a, '5 O O N C `, D w L ' aL-. a, N a ` A W NO L N 0 a 7 t 4 N W a L C C u a, C c o « ra p - >- L L m ra ... a p a, a •.. i,i '= inL N I_ L r CD a, J V .. k a, Z C w } a, pu in m a, °' 3 Eu in• a a, C u N J p O N d 'U - - ,- > G CF N U to to c 3 a, > ... i a u ELF a` ar c Eviv o 0 2 v 0 w a, U N • C ., U in Z CD O D 7 in > 4- J 0 cin u E ra a29 `c° 0, `0 rape a C a 3 :� _ _ r - ra V L J >' L •. CC E y ' nOC 5 C o is N V 3Z O at L C p co a N N ..- '" t0 - V N C .L„ ` H .p d O p c d' •N w N a, c j ro O a, O C a O J I- V VI N - y a, pL a, dE m V L ° o, a 3 a, - r p 'N L a, p. c - C m c _c o •- o : in V in 0 c C - - J pn j a in v., a O T O w O a, N N E 0 E x ID E CO N V C Y rn o a) v/ Y C LL c —°o m 5 z 0 O. O .°_' u C C al O 4 0- o E m — v, _ N °` 3 ED F — Z O +• O - in (// 0 ,O ,- N vl IJJ C a, ° N O: a J W U � s w 1- I- ° O• O O 0, U I— ud O d N " Q M Z 0 0 Y CO ° > °i c a u g — a, E c E = 0 vi t c c ; ix " ° 'a et O Y t o O o p Q 0 • c d 0 a, . u) Z U 13 O o Z 0 y vi E o 2 V i ) 0 a, >, O C V IX c C O — I- 'O O ` L Q: ,a a LLI 7 O` > N LL cr N T y 1JJ O N (0 w IX c .. E 'Li- 3 `'a c a) o 0 0 — a. O `• o o v ar u c o .c c E v I- > D C N - c E J o a, N o r c ul H o' o '^ O U Cn v Z Q — O _L° � 3 v~io � cco ° cy � coc � oo `o a ° a a 3- ' D o a .N ' " Y13 E .-; r0 c " CO '" ° as .0 C N a = u a V In A 0 ° y O u t o 3CV av a, _. ma va'ZffaaYC Z O Y E c C o u N 0 o, ,, Y V .o c o o .0 a u 0 0 u C o .- min = o c Q vo4 ° °' - ^/ °' ci^ � v ; cam Naa ° � LAY U = o ~in cu to LL O Y l O Y L ° Q //�� O E o Z a C ° .c C J a J u c r.a, p J Nuc cY ° •' cm Q > Ya ccE F `, a > c J _o ' Li' Emc H Oo, m cc .c vt r W v W as ` ) coo aE Z C .c ut °` a W C C a s r0 7 .° v J a, - '� L a ' 4 r' p •Nc Yaa mom Z = Eo T ; a vi em u, •° 0o ava co .c Vic '" _ ac0 •' a, o a Y O ° c4-1 ° C C Y 1H i.7‘ .c 0 - 0 Y t U ov a' I" u VIM0 in E • a, ,a, .°_ v a 0 .a °• '� a O. 7 C .•; Y •. a 0 d, C - = c L C ccot = > W oN a ' a m7 `-' " `Lag ° N 0. ro •' •- 0 1- c E '" � E in C 0. L, 0 a E � > cua C a °. ,a m c O C Q 0 o CO. 0 a o o N o F .0 W c - 0 w • in N ZYc u ' 0 . ua a-we u, 3 � p vI �, m L L L C c v, ° ° . 'La ° uE o 3ca ._ vv 0 CY VIa Y E ° 3 Q C V Y Y C C n N a' 3 a, ; N a w O C co J N C v cp •4 ~ °� fa 0 v, a, V V a, a, a, VI, _ C a E r 0 Ov o � 0 ° aC Y a = , v Y L a ruEo E o aVY a, Y in U C C a t O a+ O }' C t E N u C a 7 a` C Z a c w a - 0 - N F- Y -' O O ra a, O . v u > C Ca - CI Ill w ° ZCC a0E 0 .7, a > _ au Lo Y +, o v v E 0 0 13 a v ir- C 0 • 0 a a t U C c'a 7 c a N a a>° O a - N J 0 ; Y v C C - a 0- ..-•a o Lc o '' o v - 0a v,oa a Y y n a, c C r r J Y > en; o c '- a N ° O u a a O = ' O `v Y C C V C T• L N'a a •, aL VI a v d w t a- 0 � aC ,a w CO C D a Y F m ° a o ° a ° o ° •, W C - N C Y VI .c a, vi > VI via 3 a o. a °' 4-• D a V a m ►- � .- C a ut C CI 0,1 a, FW vNa U V •- a W a > _ Y -I .0 Y 0 ° 7 v a C a Y Q a D v E c c v ° c C L C J C O O a o F . _ u J C n aD t ra O s tn -C a a o ta F F- O a Ln a) II R � = ro 4 — c o ro 11111611,7 0 F. I — f e� z h , R il li, i II I aoa H ' g 41.D11,1404 ' 0 I. g i am" IR I W t E ' _.- ( cr, � CO L a W Z m O - a Z a W __ r Ci e.2.0 = W 2 I -i = L a — — -2 N a , Z . g 2 0 c r U) Q A I v W J cc ` G i d V) W J I ~ _ i , O � Z -- — Ai u I ; Z O W � cn I :. gl )1011/3• 4 i , El I V) > I is o Z ZZc • i i1 0 z 4. o CL Ili ! ■ O vi Z , I F— = Z0 i .=n ' u I a `n O c�SP a � iJ V e V z2 i Z t } !" H O O a a LL u YYJ =g U Q Z In n Orz 1 , -1 „> Q. _ Z � = f }`; t!) N a. O VI I.OE nrowsrN 1 - �'`; Iii calm+—M. o• co V !i i_ � I i lIa�d ` • Ni. 111 X bOF�t OF a�' 4 tho V.OBitq S Al .b f 16b ilb .N J( l X1.•,77=Y4YIPN.WOIMINt a ��i� 1 1b cc I{� _ h� 1 Z IN rill ,. . ,,. - , ii 11 ? _ a1'a//� O • 1����� a. W�:;• r 1 I W C7 c ¢F-ii Ue ¢w °5 I?O S Q' b pQ \. ^• LLI • JN a�a�•— • ¢25 z 2 - W 0 1 _ Uw OOwW ¢'t 62 MCC WO ca _ _ 1-Z U�jZr ¢LL ¢ '�2 1-CO 1II1iIi 2 haaS�mt4a0a51Ma PN W 5 { 3 it �i�.®o a _,�I ���` LL ���w°_ O W (7w Li z ° 20 O a i "l"c 2 w u 0 IX o Cl) z m LLI O Ci W .mod 0 0 =Z co F t r r •r, •r, r.! W / � b hMb ^b b .1.- b b Z 5 O. O W Q rr{ rrY r iiaof° - of�� ;° a LLm o g re U 'k 1.-,. lb V" Vb -Ibjb /hfl G W �o C LLI CO> 3 !- J o z iii i� °-a i_,, )-a Y A oi�' m o Co Z �� 1� II l i m` 0 ca 3 O W W _ _ _ `���`: . Z N yMZ o � { J `o CP o Qii� rn �� Z o C o a, Q Z W Q '-� i ��C x . N H U \{ � �' Q a.Z y I \ ___ 101 �`�� W ' { ' Fe co yW 1. II T• d m ~ U ' iF�P•w.an.. y^ys i• iltwirlIS1 ¢ I- -1 oz 11E11 � w ea W W Mil a ,tea U 0 1tI' o._ , (Docc J I Q Z ra J C I 2 Q L Q el_o al ,h >-: o _ 1 = a o �? Zm � �� I W o0 IBM J Z ' W J 9;`_- - -' ,wow - • N2 IuuI.. :� iy (,� y� c25 L. 1• Ai o 1a iri w re �_ i .� 1 i 1 0 ii J s m Z rr o o>! � ;Mril�� UO i Z I,I W i {1 - , L 2 ._ . f �I z f o ib Z h �v.. LL Z Z s•1r�' w n ��p r J LU Z ' Ali 1'/ '11 NM 0 0 co CqZ m II z w JZ Z ru z 1 �I• II I. Z 1- ( zz g Z Z 2 1- _ N N co cc N p = o O• C O a OZ a. 3 Q e xr axx rr LL Mw c ~ W0 Tripp 0 T:tI a a J O W N ` `I u Z (' pi Er Er �' V I I I 1 I F 11-; 1 d 0 S Y o I"'I'' O III I I1II11 I I L a 1 ry - " II d L ea � Z ' II;L/ Cl)cA I o..11l::�- iit4. c. m__ Vii`: - o e C' ° ^! mil N p•9_14 r" -i° 011 I I � ,>_. � E 03 ea Gel I- 0 =� — cal i . i=' i . W LU o- o = . L_ millaa1: ® u �� Q cc Le LL a ▪ Cn W .. o CO 0 CC ID Z c75 a o I� .om e. 7 l . a 11 J Q Z __ _r a t,Ii i0 ru•It 0 air NM I CD 0 Jtà W LL Z m 11■I i \ 1 111. 'i z = W O I O J Z y m _ 7/1��1_ — a�e Ill 71 00 I'.. L' O °°.-1. 1 I o 0‘._4 Y� �. F % 1 �� *al'w=1r 11 �� I°I? l I �G I6 Q, . o' o,,—II III�I O I ° mil I 1�f 11J1 1 1. .1 ° W.11 I al -- m 1I_` -n„ o- X101^: , � 1 �.a l ooa in..ah I w o re �J�Ir�'° O 1 .,I =a1 O. ad m Z f Al 'lli ,� 0 ,g IIIAAaI o I: 9 ✓ m °d �� I o 0 I" i rig 4a II.. 1 �I — �r o>MI o ," 0 q ill' la \ a- II /� a 0. Z 11 1i}II�^il 1 1 II :II a i ll,� I� .�I ?ll �9_:I11�1 Z __Q trial. I 1L)P III']iilil ' ! C7 N am:00 Ilrfui ?cr.CI fi� , III' 1l ■I LLa �I: il'= I I I VIII i• cc < t .t A ...m =-I� ! o- i4 II_�, I� _ W WIlll ; ' I lr:a ,- 0 1.1.11: ! I`" al O. ° O O z W Z ' w I-CL N F- 2 a a C a U) W J >- I- U) Z N - N 0 WV N Cn W J '' RR N .0 V Z 0 RI _ W H : a 'ai o Q o k :at ��:al I p I.E. W 3 ^" �1 `it CC e 01 Q V ' Wu w �! O Z W li , ij = "ss= 2 = < s„ 3 Sc QroUOum_ ° J J Z pZ zz 1.1.1 immi rg co CO J ■� U stn g Cn Z Lw 8 s z H is € [1 N C I © O - a5 § R a p■ N 2 r Q � E¢ F O t c 0 w oE o � ? Q o Ed w r ZQ a - U Q 6 S. 2 F o F Q N W¢ 2 O O o VI ii m yGj 63' /�1y W Z O C O p © < UCw wO 2 - , J rTl O a N J xx 1 0 - U DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Donald Granger December 6, 2011 PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT DRC2011-00824 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A report on the use of metal roof material to simulate composition, tile and barrel tile roofs for dwelling units within Residential Development Districts. The report qualifies under State CEQA Guideline Section 15061(b)(3) because the report is for informational purposes and will not result in an intensification of environmental impacts. Background Historically, the Planning Department's re-roof operating policy for existing single-family homes is like material to like material (e.g., composition to composition) or a material upgrade (e.g., composition to tile). In August of 2011, the Planning Department received a request from a homeowner who had removed his existing composition roof to install a metal roof that simulates composition. Based upon the existing policy, the Planning staff denied the permit at the counter; the resident subsequently appealed the Planning Director's decision to the Design Review Committee for consideration. At the August 2, 2011, Design Review Committee meeting, the Design Review Committee received testimony from the appellant (homeowner), a metal roofing contractor and a metal roofing manufacturer regarding the aesthetic, environmental, wind, solar and energy benefits of metal roofs. Following the testimony and discussion, Chairman Munoz directed staff to prepare a report analyzing the benefits and negative aspects of metal roofs that imitate tile for use on residential dwelling units. Chairman Munoz requested that staff provide a comprehensive analysis of metal roofs that includes the following: • Aesthetics • Noise • Structural and wind load requirements • Life span and walkability factors • Energy efficiency and green building compatibility • Survey of surrounding cities regarding polices on the use metal roofs for residential structures On September 20, 2011, Planning staff presented a comprehensive report to the Design Review Committee (Exhibit A) outlining the manufacturing, installation, structural, energy, aesthetic, and lifespan characteristics of metal roofs. The report also includes information on the permit requirements of surrounding cities for metal roofs on residential dwelling units. Following the oral Staff Report and discussion, the Committee tentatively concurred with staffs recommendation affirming the use of metal roofs that mimic tile, barrel tile, and shake to be acceptable, but requested that staff arrange for a field tour prior to making a final decision. On November 3, 2011, Planning staff conducted a field tour of 5 homes in the cities of Chino Hills and Upland to permit the full Planning Commission the opportunity to review metal barrel tile and shake roof roofs on single-family dwelling units. The Commission reviewed the metal roofs in the field, and then requested that the issue of metal roofs return to the Design Review Committee for a final Staff Report, consideration, and discussion by the Design Review Committee. DRC AGENDA DRC2011-00824— CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA December 6, 2011 Page 2 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. Based upon the information contained in the September 20, 2011, Design Review Committee Staff Report, photos and field tour conducted on November 3, 2011, the Committee should provide direction to staff regarding the use of metal roofs for the following: • Residential re-roofs • New residential construction 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. There are no Policy Issues. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee receive the report and provide input and direction as the Committee deems appropriate. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Donald Granger Members Present: Attachments: Exhibit A - Design Review Committee Staff Report, dated September 20, 2011 Exhibit B - Draft Planning Commission Special Meeting Metal Roof Tour Minutes, dated November 2, 2011 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Donald Granger September 20, 2011 PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT DRC2011-00824 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A report on the use of metal roof material to simulate composition, tile and barrel tile roofs for dwelling units within Residential Development Districts. The report qualifies under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because the report is for informational purposes and will not result in an intensification of environmental impacts. Background The current policy of the Planning Department, based on the past direction of the Planning Commission, is not to permit the installation of metal roofs on residential structures. This policy is based on the following two sections of the Development Code: Section 17.08.040-S: Roofing Materials. All new development within residential districts shall have roofing material made of tile, or the imitation thereof, but not including composition shingles. Other roofing materials such as metal, slate, or the imitation thereof, but not including composition shingles, may be approved by the Design Review Committee, if it is determined by the Design Review Committee that the roof material enhances the building design. Roofing materials for additions and accessory structures shall be governed by Section 17.08.0601f, Special Development Criteria. Section 17.08.090-D-2-x (General Design Guidelines): Use roofing material made of tile, slate, copper, or the imitation thereof, but not including composition shingles, that will upgrade the character and the visual quality of the structure. Historically, based on the these two sections of the Development Code, the Planning Department's re-roof operating policy for existing single-family homes is like material to like material (e.g., composition to composition) or a material upgrade (e.g., composition to tile). In August of 2011, the Planning Department received a request from a resident who had removed his existing composition roof to install a metal roof that simulates composition. Based upon the existing policy, the Planning staff denied the permit at the counter; the resident subsequently appealed the Planning Director's decision to the Design Review Committee for consideration. At the August 2, 2011, Design Review Committee meeting, the Design Review Committee received testimony from a resident, a metal roofing contractor, and a metal roofing manufacturer regarding the aesthetic, environmental, wind, solar, and energy benefits of metal roofs. Following the testimony and discussion, Chairman Munoz directed staff to prepare a report analyzing the benefits and negative aspects of metal roofs that imitate tile for use on residential dwelling units. Chairman Munoz requested that staff provide a comprehensive analysis of metal roofs that includes the following: • Aesthetics • Noise • Structural and wind load requirements EXHIBIT A DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00824 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 20, 2011 Page 2 • Life span and walkability factors • Energy efficiency and green building compatibility • Survey of the surrounding cities regarding polices on the use metal roofs for residential structures The Planning staff surveyed a total of 14 cities, and the information is presented in the tables that follow, along with discussion and analysis. Analysis Table 1 Metal Roof Material Permitted on Residential Structures by Development City Code Notes/Comments Rancho Code permits"imitation tile" Metal roofs currently not permitted by policy on new construction or re-roofs Cucamonga Ontario Code is silent Policy: Review on a case-by-case basis for neighborhood compatibility Irvine Yes Permits the following metal roofs: tile, barrel tile,and composition San Marino Code is silent Policy: San Marino refers requests for metal roofs to the Design Review Committee La Verne Code is silent Policy: Permit the following metal roofs: tile,barrel tile,composition Chino No New roofs: concrete or clay tile; re-roofs must be of like material or better Upland Code is silent Policy: Metal roofs are permitted on new construction and re-roofs Fontana Code is silent Policy: Metal roofs require submittal and review. Claremont Yes Roofs are reviewed with architecture and must be appropriate to architectural style San Dimas Yes Permits all types metal roofs(standing seam,tile, barrel tile,composition) Monterey Park Code permits variety of Metals roofs are permitted on new construction and re-roofs residential roof material Yorba Linda Code is silent Metals roofs are permitted on re-roofs Pico Rivera Code permits metal roofs that Metal roofs must be "formed and finished" to accurately simulate. Metals roofs simulate tile,shake or shingle permitted on re-roofs Montclair Code is silent Policy: Review on a case-by-case basis for neighborhood compatibility Arcadia Yes Permits the following metal roofs: tile,barrel tile,composition with conditions Staff selected the above cities based upon the following criteria: adjacency to Rancho Cucamonga (Upland, Fontana, and Ontario); comparable size (Fontana, Ontario and Irvine); reputation for quality and comprehensive architectural review (San Marino, Claremont, San Dimas, and Arcadia); sampling of Southern California (balance of cities). Of the 14 cities surveyed (Table 1), 6 of the cities permit the use of metal roofs by their respective zoning codes (Arcadia, Claremont, Irvine, Monterey Park, Pico Rivera, and San Dimas); 7 have zoning codes that are currently "silent" on the use of metal roofs on residential structures (Fontana, Montclair. La Verne, Ontario, San Marino, Upland, and Yorba Linda); and the City of Chino is the only city whose Code does not permit metal roofs (new structures and re-roofs). Of the 7 cities that have zoning codes that are silent on the use of metal roofs for residential structures, all of the cities either have operating polices that either permit metal roofs or review them on a case-by-case basis for neighborhood compatibility. Supplemental Requirements by City City of Upland: Upland permits the removal of a concrete tile roof and the installation of tile, traditional composition or a metal roof that simulates tile or composition. City of San Marino: San Marino's standing protocol for a metal roof request is to refer it to the Design Review Committee for consideration; if approved, it would be added to the list of pre-approved roofing materials. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00824 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 20, 2011 Page 3 City of Claremont: Claremont utilizes a holistic approach and reviews roof material concurrent with the architecture and must make series of findings that the overall design meets standards. City of Arcadia: Arcadia includes a series of conditions of approval to ensure aesthetic quality and architectural authenticity. Building Code Requirements Structural Requirements and Integrity: The Planning staff researched the use of metal roofs with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Building and Safety Department and asked a series of questions regarding the installation of structural requirements of metal roofs. Following is summary of the discussion: • Metal roofs are walkable, but additional care must be taken to avoid damaging the roof • Wind clips and the use of battens beneath the metal are required when the manufacturer's specifications require it. • Installations should be done by a contractor familiar with bending metal and the aspects of installing a metal roof that is aesthetically pleasing (i.e., valleys, rake, start of ridge). Quality craftsmanship is critical for the successful installation of a metal roof. • The Uniform Building Code permits up to two layers of roof material to be installed before a complete tear off is required. Since metal is one of the lightest products, it is an ideal choice for re-roofs. • Metal roofs have the potential to mitigate impacts from earthquakes since the lateral loads are substantial, less than other materials, especially concrete tile. The weight per square of the most common residential roof materials is shown in Table 2. Table 2 PRODUCT ' WGT. PER SQ. (1-SQ. = 100 SQ. FT.) Steel Roofing 125 lbs. Standard (3-Tab) Asphalt Shingles 190 — 215 lbs. Wood Shake/Shingle* 250 — 300 lbs.} Heavy Weight Laminated Asphalt Shingles] 290 — 430 lbs. Clay/Concrete Tiles' 1 900 — 1200 lbs." Souce:www.m eta I roofm a rt.com Fire, Hail, Wind, and Rain: Metal roofs receive very high scorecard marks for fire, wind and hail resistance. Metal roofs have the highest fire rating (Class A), a non-combustible rating under the Building Code, a 120 mph-plus wind resistance rating (F2 Tornado equivalent), and are impact hail resistant (class IV). One manufacturer, Metro panels, received the highest impact resistance rating from Underwriters Laboratories. According to Metro, except under the most extreme storms, Metro panels show no visible effects from impacting hail stones. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00824 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 20, 2011 Page 4 Acoustic Analysis Rain noise: Research indicates that stone-coated metal roofs provide substantial sound attenuation because the stone coating provides energy absorption and the dead air space between the metal roof and decking provide sound attenuation. Non-stone coated metal roofs, however, are known to generation moderate to substantial amounts of noise when measured from close distances (less than 50 feet). Interviews with industry professionals indicate that residential occupants with stone coated metal roofs do not complain about rain generated noise, and that the only likely scenario that would generate a compliant be from an adjacent owner concerned about the noise level emanating from or generated by a non-coated metal roof(e.g., an adjacent barn with corrugated metal roof). Manufacturing Product Types: Metal roofs can virtually emulate all types of traditional residential roofing materials. Metal roofs are available in barrel tile, shake, shingle, and composition. Environmental Impacts and Green Building Manufacturing: Today, many construction materials are recycled for various purposes, including landfill waste reduction and material re-purposing. Metal roofs are made of steel and often use recycled steel in the manufacturing process (up to 30 percent recycled content), which is environmentally sensitive. Solar Absorption/Reflection:. Metal roofs receive excellent marks for energy efficiency. A steel roof system moves air both between the shingles and the underlying deck, as well as moving air from vents under the decking. Heated air is allowed to dissipate through the ridgeline as cooler air is drawn through eave vents. Reduced energy bills can result from airflow both under and over the decking. Green Building Score Card: If recycled steel is utilized during the manufacturing process, then metal roofs qualify as green construction building material and score 1-2 points for a LEED® certification. Once installed, metal roofs dissipate heat quickly because of air gaps between the metal and roof deck and the heat loss properties of metal. As such, metal roofs score well for energy efficiency and contribute to lower energy consumption. Once the lifespan of the metal roof has been exhausted, up to 100 percent of the material can be recycled. Construction Field Survey The Planning staff arranged for a field tour of residential structures with metal roofs and conducted a site visit with a residential roofing contractor. The Planning staff surveyed the metal roofs for aesthetics, architectural simulation, color, and weathering. Below is a summary of the type of roofs surveyed and field review comments. Staff used the following rating system in the three evaluation categories: poor, fair, good, very good, and excellent. Barrel Tile: Color and material quality: Very Good Architectural authenticity: Very Good Installation quality: Very Good to Excellent Photo: Exhibit A • DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00824 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 20, 2011 Page 5 Half Barrel Tile: Color and material quality: Excellent Architectural authenticity: Excellent Installation quality: Excellent Photos: Exhibits B, C, and D Shake: Color and material quality: Very Good Architectural authenticity: Very Good Installation quality: Very Good to Excellent Photo: Exhibit E Flat Tile: Color and material quality: Excellent Architectural authenticity: Very Good Installation quality: Excellent Photos: Exhibits F and G Table 3 below indicates the roof type from the field survey and any applicable notes. Table 3 City Roof Type Notes/Comments Pomona,Philips Barrel Tile Ranch Pomona, Phillips Half Barrel Tile Ranch Pomona,Phillips Shake Ridge pieces must lie flat/match slope of roof;do not Ranch overlap fascia Pomona,Phillips Flat Tile Must have open cut valleys Ranch Summary Findings and Conclusion: From staff's research, nearly all municipalities either permit the use of metal' roofs by Code, policy or on a case-by-case basis if the material is compatible with the surrounding, neighborhood and compliments the architectural style of the dwelling unit. The City of Arcadia provided useful information to staff in the preparation of this report, including the following 5 conditions of approval that are attached to every roof permit: 1. The roof shall have open cut valleys. 2. A drip-edge overhang shall be provided at the eaves. 3. The edges shall not be exposed more than two inches. 4 The starter of the ridge shall be cut and bent neatly. 5. No trim tiles shall be used on the rake of the gable roof. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00824— CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 20, 2011 Page 6 Metal Roof Advantaqes/Disadvantaqes: Staff research concludes that metal roofs, like other roof materials, possess advantages and disadvantages. Below is a summary of the pros and cons: Pros: Durable (25 year plus color/aesthetic lifespan; 50 to 100 year plus functional lifespan); fire-retardant; maintenance free; good scorecard for energy efficiency (34 percent less heat absorption than asphalt shingles; green product (high utilization of recycled metal in manufacturing process-can be 50 percent or more; can be installed over other systems, thus reducing landfill waste); lower energy bills; lighter structural loads, which is advantageous in areas known to experience earthquakes. Cons: Price premium relative to other some materials (i.e., asphalt shingles); some loss of architectural integrity on some types (i.e., barrel tile); installation is more intricate; more care must taken when walking for maintenance purposes or when roof accessibility is required. Staff Recommendation: Re-roofs: Staff finds the use of metal roofs that mimic tile, barrel tile, and shake to be an acceptable material choice for all types residential re-roofs, even if the tear-off material is concrete tile. Should the City of Rancho Cucamonga opt to change its currently policy and permit metal re-roofs, in order to • ensure that roof installations meet the desired aesthetic levels the City expects, staff recommends that the five conditions of approval that the City of Arcadia utilizes be attached to roof permits. For re-roofs that propose the use of metal, the Planning Director has the authority to draft a policy based on the input of the Design Review Committee and the current Development Code (Section 17.02.050). New Construction: Should the Committee also conclude that metal roofs are an acceptable material choice for new residential roofs, no Development Code Amendment is required, as the Code currently requires that "tile, or imitation thereof" be used and also states the following: "Other roofing materials such as metal, slate, or the imitation thereof, but not including composition shingles, may be approved by the Design Review Committee, if it is determined by the Design Review Committee that the roof material enhances the building design." For re-roofs that propose the use of metal, the Planning Director has the authority to draft a policy based on the input of the Design Review Committee and the current Development Code (Section 17.02.050). Staff also recommends that the Committee receive the report and provide input and direction as the Committee deems appropriate. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed and received the Staff Report on the use of metal roof material. The Committee tentatively concurred with staff's recommendation affirming the use of metal roofs that mimic tile, barrel tile, and shake to be acceptable, but requested that staff arrange for a field tour prior to making a final decision. Staff will arrange a field tour for the Design Review Committee. Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Donald Granger '.;•• , 1 if 1 1 • . ••.• 1 .. . .. . 1,t,....-. '!'• •1:••- .. .*. - - - . :... ..• . .-,..- -"4±0,4 , • .-- -'- - ..-.-. • -,., .,.... , . . ‘ , - --a- -.---• li 7,,,, - - -4.■ ,... , \ . . . .4,-. ....,, I i . .■:, •'-:■'.' '''. * ' • -'.; • 1 . .. , . .. i - . .,..7:• I ... . l':•••" --C..-:. . ...- ... . . ..... ... .,.. • -. - . . j• it 1 ji--.. • . • ._ il .'llt Ill Attachment . . _ • . . . . . Si l' '■''''' l';... . ' : . , .L. • • . , ,, • i• -4./--,., 1r‘ . .,.,, -1.1-1...... 1 . -, ... 1 , .. -. ...'ri...... -IX ' t ., .: , .11111111 .. . , -•,.,. . -,, . ::4%. *.. ..... 4 Ad. . .. ..le•-‘-. ,.,-• . - 4:",.•7--.. ore „ . :,4.41 • - - =. • •,•• .:•- I v , i . 1 _ ... . „ . . 1 • '.i.'C li .. ......- - i I .. 1 • ... i . ' 'I •I V 4 5., ... , i 11 ••• i I •111 : t . , i . 1 . . -- ..1.,. ,. 11' - •-•.-.•I. ... •-- , -,.. - 1-' ,, ,-741•1t ., --,. ,.1 . • . ft . . Pi ,•--'. • . . !! -: . , .., . . - • 1 ,... , 3 - I .; „,;,.,.."...r.i!:.:„..• 1 111f ,lit i 1 } ..''',;...$4,..%',..,1+1;1)11i ..---.-•,,... ',........-. .,..okr'..,?.?/;•?.; • , . .:'..1:e 4.,,,,,•,,, ,I ?, .. --•,-, -.. •-• ,..• : :-. ....,--,..,!•-• 0?(;•::.:„i)? ) , .., •.;.: • ,•.;,. ,, , ; , . •••.,,• .,.:.-,,i,„.-„,,,,-s.:,:- f. „, . . • ., ,,. ••-• •,:,,.,'''i 1 i ..1; ;. A..:,-;.:.:'.ig-li,;,,C......-.t4,I1 .,--.' . . i . I- : .: .,..,--...,2,,t;',74,-.1,:7,-.'•,-,..-:-..., , — . -,,,, Iiiiiill ' ... ----....,: . ..-, •: -- .,.... - • . 1 ,,,,,..::...,;:.:•: .,.. e.: • . ti .. 4., t • -4•7,' . ' L--- , . . . s • . , I - - ' ... . r .. ... _,... . . .. . . . iiti -....„ . .. . , . .. :.. 40,..7 .- - 1 ... . .. ,... 1: . i il .. .",t • •-• . ... ...: -. a • • . •_ .. 11 .. . . . . ,.-.., .,.. . .. , . . • ' ; .. , ,-- r . — . -.. ... ...• ir 10 . '1.---:'-.-. ..- •:•".:,..', 1 1 . k ° ti,_ 1 .};'. 4F;+++11i, i 1 ` 0 7 i,► `11►i11i �� '4 ,•i�.1.11 `� 4 ` •s`+i11111�‘4 ! ` $ 1 {.)ciC.Ci c i ( i I*.. -.-- •' . ''''''''' ''''''''. r .. 11• IN: , ; i • .,:.,,,,,,r, ,,,o,g..,,,Y.' 1,V?),If.',1) It‘ ''' -: . T ` -s.`3M1...i2-3kr . N-,. , . r• — .„, , . . . , , . ...e'c'.-.•; f', .7 .: ...":?c,..- •- . ?' ft,..111 - • . -,t,.: . ,— .,..,,-,•••••"•-i. ;-....,.:4,.4LA,L-. -...,-f ,, A . . . . • ,s„-...:.,:::-Art•t,f11.:,,-.-.. -.,.,4.14..- . . . 61 i . it - . ' 'I.~,.'''-`'.7f- '!'1 ir'S.. •4 :..r. . . . . , ,-.. :I ..• it tiro ...,.. _4.,....,... , ;,.,. , ...,.: 0 . ,,-,.'--3::4,;.",.,..1:4 74,!:• - •.-- .\-:in. 4.7: :..::,! ,1-L - FM 7, ifil u .., u• . T.. , i_.,.:T •,-,... - • e .-.:,.. . • ,...... 1,tii 1. 01 . • . . "• ..- . , .p: . ..) • ., • .... . . \ . :. . .. . . . ''-•.i ' ' Ilkiti_.c......... . :. • . . • ... _:... ft .;.. ... .,..., ..,.... i:ett ;: f t,041. --.. . • .i. ..,. ( ( . ..• . --.,. 0. ".;i'' 1.. .', I( .: .'• ' A- -v' r,;•:. . .,, # ,. •;:- . . — -'-' "'..- ... ..: s'• -- . '.— .. ', -.., ', .1: .''. .- . ".. _... ..,•,........• ,r. • ., - --•-• •,-, 'i: ;.;.., -. . ... - . ....•...., ..,,,, . )::01L - •,,' :-...-,',..:::,. 7,-4-t--'.'•--'-.,.--,' -- kfif . 44. ., ... .41 . - . . . , 1: i .:::'..ts.-1........''''''''..,................,. .... .i, _ ,,........ -_ .. . . - •#•• . . . ....,, illifittit • - : •; ,•• .• •• • , •-• '- '0- • ' '1 1• ,'' ' . 1 ((lt ..k . „ . ■ , : ,, , --• . . . _ .:.-,"::::::P-s'ef...,V.. ri.. ..,' ...,,, .....-.4:-...;,, ,:ei...;2:.,r 1 Itif 404'it i(k( . ,-,,.,3tPK4F%.',"'"., ' - AIWA '.1:-.'L,C'''• 4 :' ' ./..,• ''.11..v ‘'• - . ' „ . - •'',•:-.-...f:,,,!=ok'i;', •,-- .. t o( .A - 'fl' 'I(I •- • • :•",..-:•:'',4•7:3''.i''.. - ..., . , ., .. .•••• '''':i 1:t•ii-',''''''' . • 4, ( i '... . • 4 4' .-'• . ....... . ._ . ,., . . .•. , • . 3‘.-.• e •... , . .....•••• I i4, , . . , • .., „ 171. -: •. ., 4 t . -i '. -. . ' r , .T........"'N.,...• .-... .li, ..... ' • .. itNi- . • . ., ,.., 4 1 ,., • II , _ • _. . ole... - - , - - _ - 41,1.trow......,„4'.•,4;11, r"-..iiivirir • . ..„- ..40,.. • ••,.,I: • ' mite- . • . f.) ..-: , Arrill', - .•..A.. 4,4.:‘ t $`1C.ciA0'.., . ,•.. ., . ,••- • . . . • • •••) / .••11r4,1; ;xi.11K r ,1. ),,,,,,. 4,,...e. 4,24•-— i le-. c eiliri-plo - r pir.:: . -,,.. .-- - 4 . - ••• • •• 72i1 '' Ai 'ill°. , -.L.:, 1.‘ . - - . ..:44,101' •-• • •..-.:••• .i...1. . ...... _ .-.. 'I. • • - ', .,.___,. 1.11.1:,AP - -- - .":443,11*. -.-k• 4.1111•71'.'. ••• ' ,_ - ''. • ' .%. '4144Pire"- • - __..._ iy 40:,...,......., ... VI •%.... • ‘414111110;Irr • 4.•-• •400:......, ' *73i •.1- 7' 1 '.*".4' -, g' -_-. I 41. ,..." .4,6. 0. - -- ,,•• . t,. . , • - 1 ' .% • Vbs - 5r.1* vie to,. . , ;,....,...._:;,_ ...iih.„. . -' %....'-.... "" _ . . 4I 4-■ •.,./..•-f"N 141. ‘:'t -- 71- - ..... 1114;' '-/--:".116' . ' . ‘........_, ,,....6 ,-. - ..,__....... .-■,- -- -.....,.... --. _ -, # ..4:- ._„,„ •-,-;:.- .-, ,— . _.„ ,... -et-. ....w.: • ...do. ,•.......f.-:l•.i lli'. "'"1.7.:,-..,-*-,'. P•..'''. -"-i r.-'''.-'i.l.'-t..i.*.,-.•6'''.,.,f..4.....9 ', 4. ki V11t$..• ,:..#.4.- -..-A..•-4..,—.i-1/4.4„....-_ 7..1''4•_1— l . ,,j _ „ 4 i .. •k.,._--tv .....-....., ,•,,4 ,---"”. 4........- ....)• _U r- ''','‘",..._A.0.'.r-.'s......d.-r- .., ...r.,\-- 1 tirit-w: IA " #'.. . ;,•■■'' ' Alt'<ki.7.t.f,- " .; ;al -If:..' J • "...*7....". •••••' ), ' .., ..e.. 44.ir. •.... 44. ••• , ...,24„, :..... : •,•••, , "Ir i - ir , - ,„‘r,, --...1 -- .4.....4,........;, , - ,. • ,t •;;,/jit Vc‘..0r.,r-- ....1•711 .'"- —-.., ''''':#;:.‘1";-.,:s___:" .....,...;7111Tr..'-4'/ .4,:,,,,,.. '''. -....15.--,.., '-.\in, ,....itte0..e.ii•*='''').-4,—..../....:',.,1%.::4•!'' ..-:' ., ''' ...ii• t v ... 4,,,. A"'" odit . ' '48,.... . •.t-''Ts ;.. --Itt..;‘,. ,...,,,..74.. ileir- $..,-...pl- r: joi..,ii .1.4. ..._! ".t.. •-•;,---1.-,• .-;-- lug ... 1107 -- %,,,=‘,.1 -4:i7W .. -:4-A:` , -- . %- A .. . ,t . '-4, 4-4-c' vle,6: :,.rrt• I .., .1 __ •s.- -- ..- .`-", 11Es- I., .":r.‘r- ' t ‘ . :' ..-‘1.".. . . 'A.1 i 74.. •...-...".. .. ...-,..,t • \. .. s_.--;._:., ., - - -. 7` .; '..,..i‘n . . ., .■ ,-* I , 1 ■ , .k.....I'...,4- • - . ,,,,,1,,.. A' . . .., . ' • • - 040 --- V.vik. tkVAA\:\ . , . 'A . ...., • „.....,,,, , ... ,, ....„. _ „... .. „\..., ....„ ...... 4 . . .. ... II . . . , , , ..„. i ......3 ., ... . ,. ,... 4. •y ..- -'71 . ..• 1 . • -ii • - i '• . If ,- - 'i . UPI' ....-• *.: .::- -- I. '1 i . j. i.' 1111 , --, . +.4 Ai, . . .........- • cr _ , -....._. ....._.,_ Ii.. • • _____ i ........... Vi.., 4k.. ••••••••••-•••• #. 1 tr' • , . 4••• if: t. ' . •ki.:' r ..; .. \ • alliodor wp . . , I • . i , .t . . N.,..,. • , — _.,...... .7/ • - • •—. 4s. • i • 7r• .. 1.11!.41 I 16' lk- i PoI71-11.P ' 4 . .. , 1 b—*- ;.. . "..-1415ifet - • -'-': Il .01414,410* 1 . • r,. 4". -,•f-• . 4 ..--°-• .". ,.. sir,-. .a • i 1 f • n• ill H • ' I i . i !-,,' • I - . . . . .—, 1:::::: frs;-.:41".1_,• :- ...--' ' --' ' • - I. ....i . _ t !t-:-.1,...' .-:• --7 i flJi " 6' P4' , . 1' , ( — , 1 —1 1 ....... ...--■ 1 I 1 .. --1 f .' e ... . • --- N—___.,1... 1.,j •■-- . .•- " '.. 1 i i 4 i • I 0 I Jr- 1/1".4.. ' " I . .-.4 ti:1 I ''7 7- .-., -1;:-.. * • r .--. ..., ...... , -.....,:,, -i' '77.,?Ze/.-...,.: :,, ' - • .". ., . 1 4,1• .7'..., - -"le...;.''..:. ...., .z.. , - 1 ^',,, 7, '.i...,' •' , 7,....• ... ' t i.. "■ .- ' •,' - -4'..0...' : •- . • ttr''..•.7' 7 ••• .,.---.', .. '-• . % • - '''.7 ' 4 f--,-'''.--;•-, ,., • ... .,. .... - , ...4:,. <---. - -,•.--::. _... .. •.. .•• • • , , • . . . . . * •4;'7',-.:---^ '..1-4:-4'.• . . , . • ;..,. 7.t:*'!'' r'4.-'es. ' ', ''''. •-•-'' . . . . -. i 4..„ i' , , -,,,...1, . . .. • . e:,...1, --Ir rc. ---r• ...,•-,., - . . ... . • . ... _. •.:,...r.f. ''',-. . I -A, •• ..- ,..s.-.. i ti • - .- . .‘ .: . .• ,...-,_,..,.- r,•,, -,i .., . . • • ,. • , •:, ; 1 •. .• . .if._ --f• -• . . •• • -. -.;•'„_. ,' ,,,,•-f ,.-. -e:'-q---_-... -4.. -',.•4:...-;:-,4,''.•'5-,'..,-. .:'. . ',,p'. . .•.. ' .'-•,.• -..,...„,„„.....,,...... . ._.. . .. •• ... .......;:-. .:- ' ... -'-. ••,‘-,.......' • :.. r. +...-•1 .• ,1.... ,- .. i ,, .--,. • -...,4',....,1,,-,... •. ••■ ,,..t... ... .1-1••-ss- .. • - •.: ■ .,..• 70-•. •'- .-.. L77,...,-, ".. .7- ' '--7 V. ,-,- 7.7.'..11.. .e7,...P."7"r ..t.5... . • '.. •-..-:-- 1; ..' •.'..!-' t.1k ,;i.T• -, - - - •'' '' . • o.Att ..:4,,....- .ie..., •,:,-.,,.. •j. •...i..I, -_, ..v.-1:',;f.L*:-.' ,'-',■-k... .. :,.-7-'--•••/4/P71.7-t-'7,'-7-'''' .-- ' .. - , . .-....:-• :4 • k- '1,c-' '‘‘'`..-1,V.".:,- '' .'lir •-.. ',..--V,7...-7-4'-'2.- i'„?.;•.■ '.....1-:-."'",--::',...,f?.,.,.. . . .• , ..:‘,"•';....7. . -,o,17...41,..,:..,,.pii,,,....s...,.... . , , AO, ,,■,f:‘'-•".i _ .,w,. %".0r-74: • . ... , j-i...... '''',. 7.. • ::::-.7 ',.;.,',- ' . .. . , •-■••'--• :-.'fir-''''•-....4 :P-.Ai:—A ,._... . .. _ . - -,_ % . .,..--,-___...........;(1„....„,.... .,,,,,..2,...... ..., . 4 ,4- - --...t .,. •• 4:-:-.,..• .i•-.; – . • , -••••••• -,. ••••,,,i1, , .....• •.",: . t, - .r,!..i. • •.- - ,?1:_,,,, .,..: .. • •• • • „. •-• -,...1,..A... 1 - /, ,•• — • . • , . ,. ...;,e,:.., ,, ..:,, ;....,.r.• -...4.. ,,.. • •.,. • . .• .. ,..,,,,•- ,....;,„_•/. ...e• ' - ',:..-'i i €.••--*.t. . 7P,...• • .07r. '. . • ' •. '.. -• "7 '''.4 . ''''' ;','- •.. ' ;,% .e,,. "•.• -11 . .,.,',.``...... '.',',„, .. ..'2 r.f.:-..Art-., . .,-. . ,. ; ,z •"' iiii : .A,,... , ..: .t. .:-,,:- - ''• l'. i'.,r.', . .';:. ' ,' • "4'' ' '• 'rpk-(- -—.. ,-, •.:,•:i•-•?..-, ', ,44.,A.,.•4. . ''.'. ,.• . ''■.-,....6..z...„-ri.,-4.>„:..„:,......,-,-..„.. - ... ,..", _. .. • ••• _A•... ,,:.• •,,..-.•,...,r.._•,r.... . . , . ' . -• ' •'...'•'' .., • • 1, , I tilf iii til it 11130 ... 1 i le 1= fs It 0 I I i issiii; 1 .... 411' ,■-' 1 . iliffi r, !„ r i !, , , 1 ,,,,,r, ,.,:„.: ... .,. .., . 1 4 "..7•:' 17 : .4.'.. ill 11 11411i 1 - ,,. ... . ii- t11 I 1 IIIIII i i ti kl 1 I illi i II, t t Z‘i 111■11 . It '. 1 111 411111!11 I 1 ii 11. II : ,, i ,(01 ‘. 1. 1t., ... 1 , t, ,, , .011tellk,lk- ; it , k % k 111 ...„.....„....) , It , i ,Ichi 1 . ill 1,i1 11 . \.• 1 \ ,. ..-- iiiWt - III . .', .•,4-,:,' .`44tr-,-',..-„i':'•;- !1.- c •-2 -;''' • .i i' • . . , , • • . - C i . \)'.. • 1 • ...._. 0111111111 i .P. ti• ;%' . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Special Meeting Metal Roofing Tour November 2, 2011 DRAFT Chairman Munoz called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 3:00 p.m. The meeting was opened in the Haven Room within the Planning Department at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The group then boarded the vehicle at 3:10 p.m. ROLL CALL • COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Frances Howdyshell, Lou Munoz, Francisco Oaxaca; Ray Wimberly ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Donald Granger, Senior Planner; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; James Troyer, Planning Director • • • w x NEW BUSINESS A. PURSUANT TO SECTION 54954(B)2 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL TOUR SELECTED LOCATIONS IN THE CITIES OF UPLAND AND CHINO HILLS TO VIEW VARIOUS TYPES AND STYLES OF METAL ROOFING MATERIALS Donald Granger, Senior Planner, gave a brief introduction and handed out a prior report previously presented to the Design Review Committee dated September 20, 2011 to all in attendance(copy on file). Commissioner Fletcher suggested the order of the sites be changed to better accommodate the current traffic conditions. He advised that the Chino Hills sites be viewed first followed by the Upland addresses. Commissioner Oaxaca seconded the motion. The Commissioners unanimously agreed 5-0 to change the order of the tour. No members of the public were in attendance of the meeting. The assembled Commissioners proceeded to the waiting vehicle. Transportation was provided for the public however, no members of the public attended the tour. The Commissioners made the following comments during the various stops of the tour: Commissioner Oaxaca asked about the size of the tiles, if they have a backing, and the projected lifespan of this roof material. Mr. Granger said the material comes in sections, and they are backed with foam that forms an air pocket for insulation and sound mitigation. He said the roofing industry projects these roofs to last about 50 years. AFT EXHIBIT B Chairman Munoz pointed out very visible valley flashings and top caps. ®R AFI Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked if there is a variety of material available. Mr. Granger said that it comes in a wide range of colors and styles. Commissioner Wimberly said with some of these roofs it appears there are challenges with making the top peaks look right;they appear large, they project high above the rest of the material, and they extend beyond the end of the hips and do not appear well integrated with the rest of the installation. Vice Chairman Howdyshell noted that the owners'choice of material was generally a good match for the style of the homes. Chairman Munoz noted that some of the roofs appeared to be installed better than others and with some that were seen, it was difficult to determine because of the shape and dimension of the roofs as they are viewed from the street. Vice Chairman Howdyshell said she liked the texture of one of the examples seen. Chairman Munoz said real barrel type roofs have more of a defined undulation than those seen on tour today. Commissioner Fletcher asked about the thickness of the coating on the material. Chairman Munoz said the material comes pre-coated with a sandy/bumpy finish. He noted that some of the roofs looked like a better installation than others. He asked if roofers obtain a specific certification to install these types of roofs. Mr. Granger said he did not believe so,that they are most likely covered under their general license to install these roofs, but that he would check into that for the specifics. Chairman Munoz said he may have a concern with these being installed as roofing for new home product, but less of a concern for re-roof projects which is already covered in our current Development Code. PUBLIC COMMENTS None COMMISSION BUSINESS AND COMMENTS Chairman Munoz directed that the issue be brought back to the DRC for further review and consideration. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 5:40 p.m. DR i\F PC Adjourned Minutes -2- November 2, 2011 Respectfully submitted, in.R 1,F U James R. Troyer, AICP Secretary Approved: DRAFT PC Adjourned Minutes -3- November 2, 2011 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 p.m. Steve Fowler December 6, 2011 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00577 - CALVARY CHAPEL OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - An amendment to the master plan to add additional building space for additional classrooms and add approximately 3,000 square feet of temporary modular trailer space on site until the new classrooms can be built at Calvary Chapel of Rancho Cucamonga located within the Office Park District of the Terra Vista Community Plan at 10700 Town Center Drive - APN: 1077-422-14. Related File: Minor Development Review DRC2011-00578. This action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, existing facilities. • Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to construct a 960 square foot temporary, 1-story modular classroom structure for Sunday school at an existing church and school on approximately 4 acres at 10700 Town Center Drive. This site is located west of Elm Avenue between Town Center Drive and Church Avenue in the Office Park (OP) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan. Background: The church was approved on September 11, 2002, with a phasing plan. The first phase was for a 17,733 square foot multi-purpose building, basketball and volleyball courts, turf children's play area and outdoor courtyard with the associated parking and landscaping. The second phase of the original approval was reviewed by the Planning Director on August 4, 2004 for the 21,500 square foot primary worship center. On July 9, 2008 the Planning Commission approved the site for a private parochial school within the multi-purpose building. Since the previous approvals the school has grown and needs additional classroom space. This proposal is for the placement and construction of a temporary classroom and master plan of the future placement of a permanent classroom. The temporary classroom will be located south of the parking lot and west of the worship center on the volleyball court. This classroom will be a modular trailer that will be stuccoed to match the exterior of the church. This structure will only be allowed to remain on the site for a maximum of 5 years. The permanent classroom location is just south of the temporary classroom also on the existing volleyball court. A Development Review application will be required for the design of this building to provide staff the opportunity to review the elevations for consistency with the existing buildings. The additional classroom requires minimal parking and the existing church has ample parking for this additional use. This classroom will be utilized on Sundays for Sunday school purposes. The landscape around the building will remain the same and the architectural style shall match the existing buildings on site. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for the Committee discussion regarding this project. Major Issues: The applicant worked hard with staff to follow the criteria outlined in the Development Code. There are no major issues regarding this project at this time. Minor Issues: 1. At the meeting, the applicant will present plans that will show how the architectural style, finish and materials will match the exterior of the existing building. Policy Issues: 1. No policy issues at this time. Staff recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00577 to the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Steve Fowler Members Present: • •