Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011/09/06 - Agenda Packet ACTION AGENDA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 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 (Consent items will be heard at 7 p.m.) 7:00 p.m. (Donald/Tasha) MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2011-00689 - PARLOUR ENTERPRISES - A request to modify the exterior paint colors, materials, and architectural design theme for the proposed Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour & Restaurant in the Community Commercial District within the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at 10742 Foothill Boulevard (formerly Macaroni Bar & Grill) - APN: 1077-422-85. Related file: Sign Permit DRC2011-00689. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines since it includes the installation of new interior equipment and the minor alternation of the exterior elevations for an existing building. The project is categorically exempt under Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act. 7:15 p.m. (Mike/Carlo) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2011-00456 - RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFE - A proposal to construct a restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet, including an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet, on an undeveloped parcel within a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12) located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229-411-04. Related file: Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457, Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2011-00768, and Development Review DRC2004-01013. On September 28, 2005, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Development Review DRC2004-01013. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457 - RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFE: A request to provide alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption at a proposed restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet, including an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet, within a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12) located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229-411-04. Related file: Development Review DRC2011-00456, Uniform DRC ACTION AGENDA September 6, 2011 Page 2 Sign Program Amendment DRC2011-00768, and Development Review DRC2004-01013. On September 28, 2005, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Development Review DRC2004-01013. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. 7:30 p.m. (Mike) UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 188 AMENDMENT DRC2011-00768 - SIGNAGE SOLUTIONS - A request to amend Uniform Sign Program No. 188 for Signature Center, an existing shopping center in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12), located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229-411-04. Related files: Development Review DRC2011-00456 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457. 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. 7:50 p.m. (Candyce/Willie) DESIGN REVIEW DRC2011-00070 - MERITAGE HOMES - The design review of building elevations and detailed Site Plan for the build out of 81 single-family lots on approximately 43.3 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the northerly end of Wardman-Bullock Road - APN: 1087-201-01 thru 07, 1087-201-13 thru 40, 1087-191-01 thru 15, 0226-792-15, 0226-792-20 thru 24, 0226-792-29 thru 38, 0226-782-01 thru 11, and 0226-782-12 thru 15. Related file: Tract 16324. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report certified by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004 (State Clearinghouse No. 2003111057) and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report. 8:10 p.m. (Mike/Betty) MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2011-00297 - HUGO LEPE - A request to construct two single-family residences of 8,558 and 8,472 square feet on two parcels of 49,200 and 46,800 square feet, respectively, in the Estate Residential (ER) District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the north side of Amber Lane approximately 350 feet west of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0225-111-37 (Lots 1 and 2). Related file: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19043. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Donald Granger September 6, 2011 MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2011-00689 - PARLOUR ENTERPRISES - A request to modify the exterior paint colors, materials, and architectural design theme for the proposed Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour & Restaurant in the Community Commercial District within the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at 10742 Foothill Boulevard (formerly Macaroni Bar & Grill) - APN: 1077-422-85. Related file: Sign Permit DRC2011-00689. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines since it includes the installation of new interior equipment and the minor alternation of the exterior elevations for an existing building. The project is categorically exempt under Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act. Background: On June 14, 2011, Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour submitted a Preliminary Review Application (DRC2011-00617) for a workshop with the Design Review Committee. The applicant presented several color schemes and options to repaint the exterior elevations of the former Macaroni Bar & Grill. The Committee reviewed the applicant's proposals, colors, materials, and design theme and provided a significant amount of direction regarding acceptable color layouts, accent colors, and design elements. The applicant received the Committee's input and concurred with the direction given. On August 2, 2011, the Design Review Committee reviewed the revised building elevations and found the exterior changes to be in substantial compliance with the direction given by the Design Review Committee on June 14, 2011. The Committee complimented the applicant's design team on the architectural color scheme and cooperation with staff. The Committee conceptually approved the exterior design scheme, colors, and proposed signs of the building, subject to the three murals being brought back for final review by the Committee as a Consent Calendar item. The three murals (one on the north elevation and two on the east elevation) have been designed as follows: • North elevation: Route 66 inspired mural • East elevation: Two murals, one mural is a Gibson-inspired design, and the remaining mural will be designed by the applicant and presented to the Committee at the meeting. Major Issues: 1. None. Secondary Issues: 1. Staff finds the size and location of the Route 66 mural (north elevation) and the Gibson mural (east elevation) to be complimentary to the Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour design. Staff requests that the Committee review the design, material, and size of all three murals and provide input and direction as appropriate. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All signs must conform to Uniform Sign Program No. 134 (three maximum signs). DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00689 — PARLOUR ENTERPRISES September 6, 2011 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the three proposed exterior murals and provide input and direction. With the murals designed to the satisfaction of the Committee, staff recommends approval of the project. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the three murals proposed by Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour & Restaurant and approved the design with the following modification: On the east elevation, the Sunset/Route 66 mural shall be modified to eliminate the white building, the Virginia Dare Winery shall be centered in the road, and the palm trees shall be added on each side of the road. Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Donald Granger CONSENT CALENDAR DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:15 p.m. Mike Smith September 6, 2011 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2011-00456 - RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFE - A proposal to construct a restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet, including an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet, on an undeveloped parcel within a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12) located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229-411-04. Related file: Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457, Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2011-00768, and Development Review DRC2004-01013. On September 28, 2005, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Development Review DRC2004-01013. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457 - RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFE: A request to provide alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption at a proposed restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet, including an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet, within a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12) located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229-411-04. Related file: Development Review DRC2011-00456, Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2011-00768, and Development Review DRC2004-01013. On September 28, 2005, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Development Review DRC2004-01013. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. Desiqn Parameters: The project site is located within a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet (11.6 acres) that is approximately 760 feet (east to west) by approximately 760 feet (north to south). The center was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on September 28, 2005 (Related file: Development Review DRC2004-01013). The approval was for the development of a center comprised of five (5) buildings. However, only four (4) of the buildings – three (3) retail buildings (105,050 square feet combined) and a bank (5,600 square feet) were constructed. An undeveloped pad at the south side of, and west of the principal vehicle entrance into, the center was to be the location of the proposed fifth building (7,647 square feet at the time of approval). With the exception of vacant properties to the north, the commercial center is bound on all sides by commercial development. The zoning of the center and all properties to the west, north, and east is Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12). The properties to the south are part of the Ontario Mills shopping center in the City of Ontario. The applicant, on behalf of The Lazy Dog Cafe, proposes to construct a restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet, including an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet on the aforementioned undeveloped pad. The restaurant generally will be conventional in design/layout with the public/customer areas and the service/kitchen areas located at the east and west sides of the building, respectively. The outdoor dining area and main entry will be at the east side of the building near the principal vehicle entrance of the commercial center and will be framed by enhanced landscaping. The service areas, including the trash bin storage areas, will be integrated into the building, i.e. not stand DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00456 AND DRC2011-00547 — RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFE September 6, 2011 Page 2 alone enclosures. All existing parking areas, circulation, and access drive aisles, and lighting in the general vicinity of the proposed building will remain as-is unless modifications are needed to comply with ADA access. The most significant structure that will be removed is a shade feature on the west side of the vehicle entrance that is not physically compatible with the outdoor dining area. Where it is not possible to preserve the existing landscaping, new landscaping, including trees, will be installed following the completion of the project. Existing landscaping comprised of trees, shrubs, and ground cover located in the public parkway and at the south side of the site will remain in place. The proposed building includes a 40-foot high tower element at the main entrance at the southeast corner of the building, a set of decorative trellises at the north and south elevations, and an overhead trellis at the outdoor dining area. There will be a variety of materials including decorative stone veneer, stucco, metal, and wood. Stone veneer will be the primary material on the tower, on the vertical element at the southwest corner of the building, and at the base of support columns for trellis at the outdoor dining area. The exterior walls of the building will have a combination of wood siding, smooth stucco finish, and weathered steel paneling. Storefront glass will be provided on the east, north, and south elevations coinciding with the location of the public/customer areas of the building. The tower element will have a standing seam metal roof; the remainder of the roof will be screened by the parapets and will not be visible. The architecture of the building will have limited similarities with the architecture of the other buildings within the commercial center. For example, the proposed tower element at the southeast corner of the building incorporates a lighthouse design and hip roof that is similar to the other tower elements in the center. Furthermore, the use of decorative stone veneer and the presence of trellises are common throughout the center. The proposal departs from the architecture of the existing center with the use of wood and metal siding and the use of a relatively darker palette of colors. However, staff believes that these differences are acceptable as the other buildings were reviewed and approved without specific tenants being known and, therefore, the architecture was tailored to appeal and fit a broader range of potential tenants. As the tenant of this particular building is known, the architecture reflects the signature and characteristics of the tenant more precisely, e.g. the dog bone door handles at the main entrance and the generally rustic appearance of the building. The architecture is consistent with the design goals and policies of the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission. 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. None. • Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. None. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00456 AND DRC2011-00547 — RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFE September 6, 2011 Page 3 1. Any new groundmounted equipment and utility boxes, including transformers, back-flow devices, etc., shall be screened by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced a minimum of 18 inches on center. This equipment shall be painted forest green. 2. All signs shall comply with the applicable provisions of the City's Sign Ordinance and Uniform Sign Program No. 188. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith CONSENT CALENDAR DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:30 p.m. Mike Smith September 6, 2011 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 188 AMENDMENT DRC2011-00768 - SIGNAGE SOLUTIONS - A request to amend Uniform Sign Program No. 188 for Signature Center, an existing shopping center in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12), located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229-411-04. Related files: Development Review DRC2011-00456 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457. Background: The proposed Sign Program Amendment is requested to incorporate the proposed restaurant that will be constructed on an undeveloped pad at the south side, and west of the principal vehicle entrance into the commercial center. The restaurant will be operated by The Lazy Dog Café. The overall Sign Program, including the construction and design requirements for wall signs; category definitions, i.e. "Major Tenant," "Minor Tenant," etc.; sign restrictions and tenant responsibilities will remain unchanged. Note: as the proposed building is a pad building, the restaurant is classified as a "Pad Tenant." Design Parameters: The restaurant building will have three (3) wall signs that will be located on the east, south, and north elevations. The wall sign proposed at the north elevation (identified as Sign 5.0 and 6.0 on the attached plans) will be comprised of text to read "The Lazy Dog Café" and a stylized dog's paw located beneath it. The maximum height dimensions for the text and logo will be 18 inches and 36.8 inches, respectively. As the text is above the logo, the combined overall height will be about 5.33 feet (or 7.33 feet when including the approximately 24-inch gap between the text and logo). The overall length of the combined sign will be approximately 23 feet. The text and logo will have a depth of 3.5 inches and 1.5 inches, respectively. The overall area of this sign will be approximately 54.6 square feet. Note: the applicant erroneously did not include the gaps between the words of the text, and the text and the logo in the area calculations; Staff has recalculated the area of the sign accordingly. The wall signs proposed at the east and south elevations will be comprised of three (3) lines of text to read "The Lazy Dog Café" (identified as Signs 1.0 and 2.0). These signs will be mounted on an oval 'back plate' located on the tower at the southeast corner of the building. The maximum height dimension for these signs will be 64 inches. The height of each line of text will be from top to bottom, about 10 inches, 24.25 inches, and 10.5 inches, respectively. The overall length of the sign will be approximately 11 feet. The text will have a depth of 5 inches. The overall area of this sign will be approximately 46 square feet. A stylized dog's paw (identified as Sign 4.0) is proposed on the south elevation on the vertical element at the southwest corner. However, because of its relative isolation from other signs, Staff has concluded that this can be considered a decorative feature and, therefore, not a sign. The applicant also proposes an `eye brow' sign (identified as Sign 3.0) consisting of one line of text to read "Take Out— Pick Up" to be located at the lower portion of the south elevation of the tower. Signs with this type of generic text are commonplace for restaurants. Consistent with the other signs within the shopping center, the signs will be fabricated channel letters. Illumination will be internal or halo with the exception of the "Take Out — Pick Up" sign which will be constructed of non-illuminated aluminum letters. The colors and fonts will be the trademark colors of the restaurant. No monument sign or additional signs on existing monument signs are proposed. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00768 — SIGNAGE SOLUTIONS September 6, 2011 Page 2 In the current sign program, the maximum overall height for 'pad tenant' signs is 5 feet with a limit of two lines of text of 36 inches and 24 inches each — these are the only restrictions on dimensions provided. This amendment request provides for an increase in overall height from 5 feet to 7.33 feet (maximum) and provides for a third line of text. The design and dimension of the signs is primarily the result of the architecture and specific trademarks (particularly the logos) of the tenant. Therefore, Staff believes the proposal to increase the overall height is justified provided that the amendment applies only to the subject building. All signs comply with the restrictions applicable to maximum sign areas as specified in the existing sign program. The limits are 10 percent of the front elevation, 10 percent per side building elevations, and 5 percent of the rear building elevation. The largest sign will have an overall area of 54.6 square feet; the maximum area permitted on the elevation on which it will be placed is about 252 square feet. The majority of the Sign Program will be unchanged; therefore, staff has no concerns that the changes will not unduly affect the existing tenants or render their corresponding signs non-compliant with the Sign Program, nor will the changes to the Sign Program alter what will be required for signs for future tenants of the other buildings. Generally, the Sign Program will continue to comply with the standards and guidelines set forth in the 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. None. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: None. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. 1. The applicant is advised that any future changes to this Sign Program will require an application and fee to amend this Uniform Sign Program for review and approval by the Planning Director and/or the Design Review Committee. 2. The City's Sign Ordinance permits a maximum of three (3) signs per tenant. As there are three (3) building signs proposed, an additional sign on any of the monument sign locations will not be permitted. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00768 — SIGNAGE SOLUTIONS September 6, 2011 Page 3 Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:50 p.m. Candyce Burnett September 6, 2011 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2011-00070 - MERITAGE HOMES - The design review of building elevations and detailed Site Plan for the build out of 81 single-family lots on approximately 43.3 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the northerly end of Wardman-Bullock Road - APN: 1087-201-01 thru 07, 1087-201-13 thru 40, 1087-191-01 thru15, 0226-792-15, 0226-792-20 thru 24, 0226-792-29 thru 38, 0226-782-01 thru 11, and 0226-782-12 thru 15. Related file: Tract 16324. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report certified by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004 (State Clearinghouse No. 2003111057) and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report. Background: On August 2, 2011, the Design Review Committee reviewed the project and noted several deficiencies in the design of the project. The applicant was asked to make revisions and bring the project back to the Design Review Committee for review. During the meeting, the applicant was advised that the Committee's concerns were regarding the Santa Barbara Revival and San Juan architectural styles, as well as the Plan 2C, Country. The Committee directed them to make appropriate changes to make them more consistent with the true architectural styles. The applicant agreed to revise the plans and to bring the item back to the Design Review Committee. Design Parameters: The applicant is required to develop in substantial compliance with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan which has extensive design guidelines and development standards to promote a high-quality development. The Specific Plan area is divided into distinct neighborhoods, each with their own standards and guidelines to create a unique character. The project site is located within the Etiwanda Highlands (Subarea 6) neighborhood. Design requirements of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan demand a varied arrangement in site layouts by the use of different garage locations and the skewing of houses relative to the street. The Etiwanda Specific Plan also requires eight foot prints with 4 elevations per footprint/floor plan, which the applicant has provided. Plan 1 is designed as a single-story house and is plotted on 20 lots (25 percent). The "Etiwanda Highlands" neighborhood has its own unique architectural design guidelines per the ENSP and requires a mix of the following primary architectural styles be used for at least two-thirds of the units: Ranch, Monterey, San Juan, and Santa Barbara Revival. Up to one-third of the units may use Secondary styles: Victorian, Country, and Bungalow. Design Changes: The Design Review Committee requested that the applicant enhance the elevations of Plans 1 through 3 of the Santa Barbara Revival style floor plans and revisit the window box detail as well as to add additional detail to the San Juan Style plans. Additionally, they felt that the front elevation on the Country Style plan could have additional stone veneer added to enhance this elevation. Santa Barbara Revival The Committee felt that the elevations as proposed did not truly represent the Santa Barbara Revival style. The applicant revised the three plans and added additional details. Specifically, they amended the following: DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00070— MERITAGE HOMES September 6, 2011 Page 2 • The front and side elevations of Plan 1, by adding additional Santa Barbara Revival style details. • The front elevation of Plan 2 was not altered, but enhancements were made to the left and rear elevations. • The right elevation of the Plan 3 was enhanced with additional details. • No changes were made on Plan 4. San Juan The Committee suggested that the applicant add additional appropriate details to the side and rear elevations of the San Juan style plans. Additionally, they asked the applicant to revise Plan 3B San Juan, and Plan 4B San Juan to make them more appropriate to the true architectural style. Specifically, they amended the following: • Added a decorative arch detail to the rear elevation of Plan 1. • Revised the coved porch detail on the Plan 2 to better reflect the San Juan style and added decorative details to the front, right, and rear elevations. • Revised the coved porch detail on the Plan 3. • Added a decorative arch detail to the front elevation windows and rear elevation window of Plan 4 and revised the coved porch detail to better reflect the San Juan style. Country The Committee suggested that the applicant look at using more of the stone veneer (repurpose) on the front elevation that is most visible to the street. The Committee suggested that the applicant revise Plan 2C, Country to make it more appropriate to the true architectural style. Specifically, they amended the following: • The location of the stone veneer on the front elevation of Plan 1 was revised as well as the window placement and stone veneer on the sides and rear elevation. • Revised the roof on the Plan 2 and added additional stone veneer on the sides and rear elevations. • No changes were made to Plan 3. • Minor window changes were made to Plan 4 right elevation. Ranch Although the Committee did not recommend changes to the Ranch style plans, the applicant made minor changes to the plans. Specifically, they amended the following: • Amended the roof line and rear elevation of Plan 1. • Revised the window placement on the garage of the front elevation on Plan 4 and added windows to the right elevation on the garage. The floor plans did not change; the project still meets the 30 percent side-on garages and the 25 percent single-story requirement. There are 3 two-story floor plans and all plans have four architectural styles consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00070 — MERITAGE HOMES September 6, 2011 Page 3 Staff requested that the proposed architectural design and scale match the existing development so that there is a seamless transition from the existing project to the proposed project. 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. None at this time. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. None at this time. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. Provide a minimum 5-foot landscape planter between the fence/wall and sidewalk on the corner side yards. • 2. Provide a minimum 10-foot wide access gates from the private equestrian trail to the horse corral to accommodate vehicles and horse trailers. Code Standards: The following items are standards of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan 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 feature a variety of decorative treatments with brick or other masonry bands and varying concrete colors and textures per Specific Plan Exhibit 33. 3. View fencing shall be used along the Etiwanda Creek Wash (west tract boundary). Design shall include beige tubular steel with brick pilasters at property lines per Specific Plan Exhibit 27(C); minimum height shall be 5 feet 6 inches. 4. Interior private lot view fencing shall include beige tubular steel with brick pilasters at property corners per Specific Plan Exhibit 27(C); minimum height shall be 5 feet 6 inches. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of the project. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the proposed exterior modifications to the four architectural styles for each of the four plans and found the exterior changes to be in substantial compliance with the direction given by the Design Review Committee on September 6, 2011. The Design Review Committee approved the proposed changes with minor modifications to Plan 2C Country and Plan 3C Country to repurpose some DRC ACTION AGENDA • DRC2011-00070 — MERITAGE HOMES September 6, 2011 Page 4 of the stone veneer on the front elevations. The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff on the revisions prior to scheduling for Planning Commission. Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Candyce Burnett • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:10 p.m. Mike Smith September 6, 2011 • MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2011-00297 - HUGO LEPE - A request to construct two single-family residences of 8,558 and 8,472 square feet on two parcels of 49,200 and 46,800 square feet, respectively, in the Estate Residential (ER) District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the north side of Amber Lane approximately 350 feet west of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0225-111-37 (Lots 1 and 2). Related file: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19043. Design Parameters: The project site consists of two (2) vacant parcels located on the north side of Amber Lane approximately 350 feet west of Etiwanda Avenue. The two parcels, Parcel 1 and Parcel 2, are 49,200 and 46,800 square feet, respectively. The parcels are conventional in shape; the dimensions of Parcel 1 are 300 feet (north to south) and 164 feet (east to west), while the dimensions of Parcel 2 are 300 feet (north to south) and 156 feet (east to west). The properties to the north and west are developed with single-family residences. The properties to the east and south are vacant. The topography slopes in a generally north to south direction. The change in elevation between the north and south sides of the project site is approximately 16 feet. The applicant is proposing to construct 1 one-story, single-family residence of 8,558 and 8,472 square feet on Parcels 1 and 2, respectively. Each residence will have an attached 4-car garage. A 400 square foot gazebo is also proposed to be constructed with the residence on Parcel 1. The existing homes in the area and the proposed homes will be architecturally compatible. The existing homes were built recently. The proposed homes incorporate architectural materials, details, colors, and trim consistent with the design goals and policies of the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission. The exterior walls of the homes will have smooth finished stucco. The windows and doors will be framed with real stone moldings (as opposed to foam), and there will be details such as wrought iron doors and decorative lighting fixtures. Stone tile will be provided at the entry towers and the roofing will be barrel tile. Parcel 1 will have two drive approaches and a circular driveway, while Parcel 2 will have a single driveway with a large paved area in front of the residence. All vehicle access and parking areas will be constructed of decorative pavers. A decorative fountain centered in the front yard area and decorative combination walls/fences along the street frontage of each lot are also proposed. Although not included with this proposal, a location for the placement of a 24-foot by 24-foot horse corral on each lot has been provided. Furthermore, a 15-foot wide local equestrian trail will be constructed. As the property is generally level, i.e., flat, the maximum depth of excavation and/or fill will be no greater than approximately 2 feet. The rear yard areas of each lot will be graded level; to account for the changes in topography, there will be a series of 4-foot high retaining walls at various locations. At only single-story, the overall height of both residences will not exceed 30 feet as measured from the finished grade. Lot coverage will be 18.8 percent and 19.4 percent for Parcels 1 and 2, respectively; the maximum permissible in the Estate Residential (ER) District is 20 percent. The applicable setbacks (measured from the property lines) are 40 feet (front), 20 feet (interior sides), and 60 feet (rear); the proposed setbacks of both houses exceed the minimum setbacks that are required. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior/Secondary Issues: None. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2011-00297 — HUGO LEPE September 6, 2011 Page 2 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. 1. All walls shall be constructed of decorative concrete masonry units such as slumpstone or split-face block or have a decorative finish, such as stucco. 2. The maximum height of all walls is 6 feet measured from the finished grade, except in the front yard setback where this limit is 3 feet. A combination fence/wall of 6 feet in height is allowed in the front yard setback, provided that the upper 3 feet is 90 percent open, i.e. the components of the vertical surface do not obstruct visibility through the fence. 3. Standard Conditions for trail improvements shall be required. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Director for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS September 6, 2011 ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, `17° j «'4'+3 CgW� James R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director