Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/05/16 - Agenda Packet - (2)DATE: TO: FROM: May 21, 1991 Residential/Instituticm%al Design Review Committee CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA _~~_~ MEMORANDUM Larry McNiel Peter Tolstoy |977 Dan Coleman ~ John Melcher (Alternate Steve Hayes, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 16, 1991 The following is a description of projects which require review and rating by the Design Review Committee. Please review the attached plans, visit the project sites, and write down your comments using the blank space provided under each project on the attached sheets. After the meeting, the consensus of the Committee's concerns will be typed up as the formal action/recommendation of the Committee and distributed to the Commission and Council. As always, feel free to contact the appropriate project manager (noted in parentheses along the left margin), prior to the meeting date, if you have specific questions related to the scheduled projects. Dinner will be provided between 5:00 5:45 p.m., Consent Calendar items will be reviewed between 5:45 p.m. - 6:30 p.m., with the first design review item being heard at 6:30 p.m. Please notify our department if you will be unable to attend the meeting, or if you will be late, so that the dinner can be properly ordered and the necessary arrangements made. 6:30 - 7:00 (Steve H.) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14679 - HANDAH INTERNATIONAL - A residential subdivision and design review of a one lot subdivision for condominium purposes for the development of 8 condominium units on 0.8 acres of land in the Medium Residential Development District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located west of Amethyst Avenue, on the north side of 19th Street - APN: 201-474-04. Associated with this application is Tree Removal Permit 90-17. 7:00 - 7:30 (Jerry) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14795 - RANDAH INTERNATIONAL - A residential subdivision and design review of 13 condominium units on 1.23 acres Of land in the Medium Residential Development District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of Arrow Route, east of the extension of Madtone Avenue - APN: 207-201-10, 11 and 24. SH:mlg Attachments CC: Planning Commission/City Council DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:30 - 7:00 Steve H. May 16, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14679 RANDAH INTERNATIONAL - A residential subdivision and design review of a one lot subdivision for condominium purposes for the development of 8 condominium units on 0.8 acres of land in the Medium Residential Development District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located west of Amethyst Avenue, on the north side of 19th Street - APN: 201-474-04. Associated with this application is Tree Removal Permit 90-17. Background: The Design Review Committee has reviewed the project on three separate occasions, with the most recent review occurring on April 4, 1991. At that time, the Committee (McNiel, Tolstoy, Coleman) recommended that the project return to the Committee once the following revisions are incorporated into the project design: Site Plan: The common space recreation area should be relocated to an area between Buildings "A" and "B" (Units 3 and 4). Consequently, Building "A" (Units 1 through 3) should be plotted south of the recreation area, while maintaining the required 19th Street setback of 45 feet. In order to address the previous Committee concern of visibility of garage doors from 19th Street, the Committee recommended that a substantial entry monument/landscape statement be designed for the main project entry off the church parking lot, with design details available at the next formal review of the project. The mailboxes for the site should be located within the centralized common open space area, with an overhead shade trellis provided. In addition, it was suggested that a cantilevered trellis shade structure be provided over some of the visitor parking spaces. Design details of both trellises should be provided for further Committee review. A fourth visitor parking space should be provided along the east property line of the project. The developer should continue to make the effort to preserve (or relocate, if feasible) all healthy mature trees on the property when redesigning the site plan. 6. The vehicular maneuvering area in front of Unit 6 should be increased. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS TT 14679 - HANDAH INTERNATIONAL MAY 16, 1991 Page 2 A design for the 19th Street streetscape wall should be provided, per the design recommendations of the October 18, 1990 meeting. Architecture: Horizontal wood siding should be used exclusively in combination with the proposed fieldstone on all sides of all buildings; no areas of exposed stucco should remain on the elevations. Fireplaces should be treated with either a stone base and sided stack or an all stone base end stack. Some garage doors should be varied in their patterns to achieve a more independent feel for each unit. All eaves on side elevations (ex: Type "B") should be finished to appear as a more substantial architectural element. All inconsistencies between architectural elevations and proposed floor plans should be worked out with the Planning Division prior to scheduling the project for further review of the Committee. Staff Co~ents: The Committee should discuss the following minor issues in relation to the previous meetings design issues: Site Plan: The applicant has provided conceptual designs for the drive entrance, mail box structure and streetscape wall. Staff suggests a revised streetscape wall design will be required due to the solid wall height needed for noise attenuation. In general, the design of the entrance should be more substantial to include curved or angles walls, material variations, etc. e Details for a cantilevered wood trellis adjacent to visitor parking areas has been provided and should be reviewed by the Committee. Architecture: The applicant has provided building elevations using horizontal wood siding with an accent of field stone, as requested by the Design Review Committee. Stucco/stone elevations have also been provided for the purpose of reviewing a possible architectural alternative. The Committee should review the material schemes to determine the appropriate material use for the project. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS TT 14679 - HANDAH INTERNATIONAL MAy 16, 1991 Page 3 All garage doors are still identical in design and color. The Committee should either reinforce their initial recommendation for variation or discuss this issue with the applicant in more detail. All other issues from the April 4, 1991 meeting have been addressed. Desi~ Review Comm{ttee Action: Members Present: Peter Tolstoy, John Melcher, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Steve Hayes The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project with the following conditions: The stone columns adjacent to the main driveway entrance should be increased in size to a minimum of 2 feet square. A pedestrian connection to the 19th Street sidewalk should be provided exclusive of the vehicular driveway. The wood trellises adjacent to the visitor parking areas should be deleted. In exchange, the landscaping along the east property line should be upgraded to include trees that will shade the cars and form a nice property line buffer. The cabana within the common open space area should be replaced with a wood trellis structure and outdoor shower. Also, a shade trellis with structurally substantial tables and benches should be provided in the common open space area. The proposed wood fencing between private yards should be replaced with stucco walls. The private yard space for Units 6 and 8 should be increased by placing the stucco return walls on the side of those units behind the side projection of the front doors. A wood trellis structure should be provided over the throat of elongated entrances for Units 2 and 7. Also, the applicant may wish to provide a gate leading to the front door of these units. The Committee recommended a preference for the stucco/stone elevations subject to the following: DESIGN REVIEW CO~4ENTS TT 14679 - HANDAH INTERNATIONAL MAY 16, 1991 Page 4 a) The stone wainscot should be upgraded in thickness. Also, stone wrapped corners and a stone belt course or concrete cap should be used instead of the wood siding as a transition between the stucco and stone. b) Additional details consistent with detailing used on the stucco elevations should be provided on all balconies for staff review and approval. c) The wood trim on all corners and the belly band should be eliminated. d) A pop out element should be provided on the Plan A side elevation adjacent to and under the garage "eyebrow" gable. Eight foot high sliding glass doors should be utilized and the semicircular window above the doors raised on the rear elevations so that the wood trellis patio covers will not conflict in height with the semicircular windows. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 - 7:30 Jerry May 16, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14795 - HANDAH INTERNATIONAL - A residential subdivision and design review of 13 condominium units on 1.23 acres of land in the Medium Residential Development District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of Arrow Route, east of the extension of Madrone Avenue - APN: 207-201-10, 11 and 24. Background: The Design Review Committee (Tolstoy, Coleman) reviewed the project on March 21, 1991, and recommended that the applicant review the project as noted in the attached action comments and resubmit the project as a full item. The revised submittal addresses most of the previous Committee concerns; however, the following issues should be considered by the Committee: The applicant has provided the attached detail of the mail box/trash enclosure entry statement suggested by the Committee. The detail appears both functional and aesthetically consistent with the project architecture. A retaining wall was not provided behind Units 8-10 as suggested. However, the grading plan was changed slightly to provide an approximate 20 feet flat usable rear yard at the shortest distance behind these units. The block wall at the south end of the yard for Units 1 and 13, which face Arrow Route, should be 6 feet high. 4. Revise detail A-2/1 to show a stucco wrapped wood trim. Should the plant-on trim at the base of the second story pop outs be used in all similar locations or eliminated entirely? (See east and north elevations of Building "B".) Design Review Comm{ttee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Jerry Guarracino The Committee recommended approval of the proposal subject to the following conditions: A streetscape elevation should be provided for the full Commission to review the proportions of the entry monumentation. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: May 7, 1991 TO: FROM: Commercial/Industrial Design Review Committee Members SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-20 (Sycamore Village) Attached please find a set of the revised plans for the Sycamore Village project, per the recommendations of the Planning Commission workshop on May 2, 1991. We apologize for any inconvenience the late delivery date may cause. If you have any questions or comments regarding the submittal package, please feel free to contact me at (714) 989-1861 ext. 2265. Thank you. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS TT 14795 - HANDAH INTERNATIONAL MAy 16, 1991 Page 2 4. 5. 6. A retaining wall should be provided, as originally suggested, to eliminate the slope behind Units 8-10. Provide a minimum of 3-foot clear planter area between the perimeter wall and the retaining wall. The block wall at the south end of the private yard for Units 1 and 13 should be 6 feet high. Detail A-2/1 should be revised to eliminate the exposed wood pop Out trim; reflect this change consistency on all elevations. The private open space for Units 7 and 8 should be increased by moving the fencing out to the front entry. A connection to the public sidewalk should be provided, via a 4-foot wall east of the driveway. A revised cabana plan should be provided to include the following changes: a) Place the spa equipment within the storage room. b) Provide a sink and lavatory in place of one shower. c) The shower need not be enclosed.