HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-02-18 DRC Agenda Packet
FEBRUARY 18, 2020 - 7:00 P.M.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA
RAINS ROOM
CITY HALL
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
Page 1 of 2
A. CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call: Diane Williams __
Tony M. Guglielmo __
Mike Smith __
Alternates: Bryan Dopp __
Francisco Oaxaca __
B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee on any item listed
on the agenda. 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 to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by
the Staff Coordinator, depending upon the number of individuals members of the audience.
This is a professional businessmeeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please
refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises or engaging in
any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. Please sign in after
speaking.
C. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They
will be acted upon by the Committee at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed
for discussion.
C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes February 4, 2020.
D. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS
The following items will be presented by the applicant and/or their representatives. Each
presentation and resulting period of Committee comment is limited to 20 minutes. Following
each presentation, the Committee will address major issues and make recommendations with
respect to the project proposal. The Design Review Committee acts as an advisory Committee
FEBRUARY 18, 2020 - 7:00 P.M.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA
RAINS ROOM
CITY HALL
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
Page 2 of 2
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting,
please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours
prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure
accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
to the Planning Commission. Their recommendations will be forwarded to the Planning
Commission as applicable. The following items do not legally require any public testimony,
although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. Please sign in after speaking.
D1. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00069– CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to construct
a 24,512 square-foot concrete tilt-up warehouse building at the Rancho Cucamonga public works
yard, within the General Industrial (GI) district, located at 8794 Lion Street – APN: 0209-013-85.
This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and the City’s CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects.
D2. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 – Megan Whieldon, Phil Burum, for D.R. Horton – A
request to modify the architectural style of a previously approved attached rowhomes within the
MU (Mixed Use) District, in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) located at 12255 Baseline Road,
commonly referred to as Day Creek Villages; APN: 1090-331-20. Related Files: Community Plan
Amendment DRC2016-00452, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map
SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Minor Exception DRC2016-00508, and
Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451.
E. ADJOURNMENT
The Design Review Committee has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m.
adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Committee.
I, Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant, of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee,
hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on February
13, 2020 at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at
10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
FEBRUARY 4, 2020
DESIGN REVEIW COMMITTEE
MINUTES
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Page 1 of 4
A. 7:00 P.M. – CALL TO ORDER
7:00 pm
Roll Call: Diane Williams __x___
Tony M. Guglielmo __x___
Mike Smith __x___
Additional Staff Present: Sean McPherson, Sr. Planner; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner.
B. ADJOURNMENT
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They
will be acted upon by the Committee at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed
for discussion.
B1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes February 4, 2020.
C. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law.
The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be
limited to 5 minutes per individual or less as determined by the Chairman. Please sign in after
speaking.
C1. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00770 – SC WESTBURY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP - A
request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed mixed-use development that
includes 131 residential units (with 4 commercial ready units) and 1,500 square feet of
commercial space on 11.44 acres of land in the Community Commercial (CC) District,
located on the west side of East Avenue and north of Foothill Boulevard – APN: 1100-191-
04. Related records: Development Code Amendment DRC2018-00992, Zoning Map
Amendment DRC2018-00994, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20148, Uniform Sign Program
DRC2019-00959 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2019-00867. A Mitigated Negative
Declaration of environmental impacts has been prepared for consideration.
Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, gave a PowerPoint presentation. (Copy of file)
FEBRUARY 4, 2020
DESIGN REVEIW COMMITTEE
MINUTES
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Page 2 of 4
Questions by the committee included the following:
If there would be a vehicle left turn lane into the project.
If on-street parking was parallel or perpendicular.
If there was a bike lane planned along the west side of East Avenue.
If the project provided a tot lot.
If there was trail access to Garcia Park, which is adjacent to the project site.
Staff informed the Committee that the parking spaces were parallel to the sidewalk, that they
would need to investigate the bicycle lane and left-turn lane, that the project did not include a
tot lot, but that it was within ½ mile of two parks, and that there was a planned community
trail adjacent to the project site, but that the project would not be required to install these
improvements.
The applicant gave a brief presentation.
Committee asked the following questions to the application:
Asked where the front entrances to the units and live-work units were located, where the
residents could ride their bikes and what energy-saving methods were planned.
Applicant answered that the front entrances to the units were located down common outdoor
entranceways from the front of the buildings.
The live-work units faced directly East Avenue and that there were bike storage racks in the
garages but that they did not control the bike paths of the project’s residents.
They have not yet determined whether solar panels would be used on the project, but that
the project would be required to follow the California Green Building Code and that Energy
Star appliance would be used.
Commissioner Williams expressed concern over on-street parking and expressed that units
should be set back further from the street, that dedicated left lanes should be provided to
prevent traffic backups, that bike lanes should be provided and that tot lots should be
provided on all multi-family projects. Both Commissioners felt that the applicants should
provide an illustrated street scene that includes the adjacent projects to better understand
the neighborhood context, including the architectural themes of surrounding buildings.
D. ADJOURNMENT
FEBRUARY 4, 2020
DESIGN REVEIW COMMITTEE
MINUTES
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Page 3 of 4
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please
contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the
meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility.
Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
Motion by Mike Smith, second by Diane Williams to adjourn the meeting; carried 3-0-0.
7:30pm
I, Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee,
hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on Thursday,
January 2, 2020, seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code
54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive.
INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC
TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak,
given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your
position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson
may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the
audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience.
The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning
Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name
for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next
to the speaker’s podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments
refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual.
If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under “Public Comments.” There
is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda.
Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for
distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to
be used for the official public record.
FEBRUARY 4, 2020
DESIGN REVEIW COMMITTEE
MINUTES
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Page 4 of 4
All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for
scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director.
AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the
Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730.
These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through
Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays.
APPEALS
Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the
Commission’s decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the
City Clerk’s Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $3,114 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees
are established and governed by the City Council).
Please turn off all cell phones while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission
agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Vince Acuna February 18, 2020
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00069– CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to construct
a 24,512 square-foot concrete tilt-up warehouse building at the Rancho Cucamonga public works
yard, within the General Industrial (GI) district, located at 8794 Lion Street – APN: 0209-013-85.
This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and the City’s CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects.
Site Characteristics and Background: The Rancho Cucamonga public works yard is comprised of
an approximately 22-acre, L-shaped site developed with an open-air service yard, vehicle parking,
and several structures including a vehicle service building, an administration building, and a
warehouse. The portions of the yard abutting a public right of way (along 9th Street and Hellman
Avenue) are screened by 6-foot high concrete block wall, limiting public visibility into the property.
The yard is accessed via the terminus of Lion Street from the north, and a private driveway off
Hellman Avenue from the west.
The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent
properties are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Public Works Yard General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District
North Industrial/Manufacturing
Building General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District
South Outdoor Storage General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District
East Industrial/Manufacturing
Buildings General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District
West Industrial/Manufacturing
Buildings General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District
Project Overview: The proposed 24,512 square-foot concrete tilt-up warehouse building will be
constructed toward the southeasterly corner of the public works yard, adjacent to an existing
warehouse. The project site, which is the total area of ground disturbed within the public works
yard as a result of construction totals .92 acres, or 40,118 square feet. The proposed building will
house an interior storage area, an interior drive aisle for the maintenance and repair of vehicles,
and a restroom. A storage mezzanine directly above the first-floor storage area is also proposed.
The building will require a 23 parking spaces based on the proposed warehouse use. With the
proposed warehouse building, all uses within the public works yard will require a total of 229
parking spaces. The yard currently provides 386 parking spaces, resulting in a surplus of 157
parking spaces on site.
The building will be painted a tan color with white and brown accents. A total of three roll-up doors
are proposed – one along the south elevation and two along the east elevation. Steel shade
DRC COMMENTS
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00069 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
February 18, 2020
Page 2OMMENTS
canopies will be installed along the east elevation above the roll-up doors. Per the City’s design
policy, the building will feature internally routed downspouts, resulting in a clean, modern building
appearance. The building meets all applicable development standards for the General Industrial
(GI) District, including building height, setbacks, and lot coverage. The building will not be visible
from the public right-of-way, or any publicly accessible area.
No landscape is proposed with the project. The 144,137 square-feet of landscape area (15% of
the public works yard) provided will remain unchanged and will continue to exceed the minimum
10% landscape required for the General Industrial (GI) District. No changes to the existing gates
and fencing around or within the public works yard are proposed.
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 the project:
1. None
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
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. All ground-mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back-flow devices,
visible from the public right-of-way shall be surrounded by a minimum of two rows of shrubs
spaced a minimum of 18 inches on center. All ground-mounted equipment shall be painted
dark green except as directed otherwise by the Fire Department.
2. Downspouts shall not be visible from the exterior on any elevations of the building. All
downspouts shall be routed through the interior of the building walls.
3. All doors (roll-up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the
adjacent wall or glass panel.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the proposed project as submitted
to the Planning Commission.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. David F. Eoff IV February 18, 2020
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 – Megan Whieldon, Phil Burum, for D.R. Horton – A request
to modify the architectural style of a previously approved attached rowhomes within the MU
(Mixed Use) District, in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) located at 12255 Baseline Road,
commonly referred to as Day Creek Villages; APN: 1090-331-20. Related Files: Community Plan
Amendment DRC2016-00452, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map
SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Minor Exception DRC2016-00508, and
Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451.
Entitlements Background: The Planning Commission approved Design Review DRC2016-00450
on June 14, 2017, for the development of a mixed-use project consisting of 380 residential units,
a 71-room hotel, and two restaurant buildings. The Planning Commission approval also included
approval of Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452, Tentative Parcel Map
SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449,
Minor Exception DRC2016-00508, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 on July 20, 2016.
Original Project and Applicant Request: Day Creek Square is comprised of a variety of uses. The
residential component, referred to as the Day Creek Villages consists of four residential villages
– Solistice (Village A), Veranda (Village B), Palozzo (Village C), and Madera Estates (Village D).
Each village includes a different residential style and building types. The proposed modifications
will occur on the Veranda models. The Veranda village includes 3-plex, 4-plex, 5-plex, and 6-plex
structures. A total of 31 structures were approved and designed as an Alternative A and
Alternative B for Veranda. Both alternatives include a consistent architectural style, using similar
color palettes, materials, and other architectural elements to accentuate the overall design. The
distinction between the alternatives was achieved by incorporating variations in the color palette,
placement of finish materials, and placement of architectural features. The applicant is requesting
to modify the façade and architectural style of Alternative A and B. The modifications are
proposed on 12 structures only: six 4-plex structures and six 6-plex structures. For both
Alternatives, the following modifications are proposed:
• Removal of the brick veneer along the ground floor of the structure
• Reduction and removal of the hardboard lap siding
• Removal of the standing seam metal roof canopies over the windows
• Removal of the steel canopy over the entry doors
• Structural redesign of the roof
With approval of these modifications, the applicant is proposing two new alternative designs –
Alternative C and Alternative D. Alternative C will maintain the current craftsman-like architectural
style. The finish materials will include a combination of lap siding and stucco. The lap siding will
be incorporated primarily on portions of the third floor and some areas of the second floor, while
a stucco finish will complete the balance of the exterior. A new color scheme will also be applied
to Alternative C, using a palette of light tan and beige earth tone colors. The roof will be
structurally redesigned with a greater hip-style and less gable features. Alternative C will also
include additional architectural elements, such as wood trellis features and steel awnings over
the windows, and new trim treatments around the windows.
DRC COMMENTS
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00450 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
February 18, 2020
Page 2
Alternative D will introduce a new architectural style to the Veranda model by shifting from
craftsman to a traditional Spanish architectural style. The finish materials will include a smooth
plaster with an integral white color, as well as brown accents applied throughout the exterior. A
variety of arch features will be incorporated at the entries and balconies. The windows and doors
will be recessed at different depths. Architectural elements such as window awnings, decorative
pipes, and decorative metal grills will applied throughout the exterior, and concrete “S” tile will be
applied to the roof to further accentuate the Spanish style.
Staff Comments: Alternative C retains a very similar architectural style as the previous design.
The approach of reducing the lap siding and revising the window treatments maintain a level of
consistency with the other Veranda models and the overall project. However, the complete
removal of the brick veneer appears to reduce the structure’s architectural quality. Staff believes
incorporating brick veneer as a base material will be beneficial to maintaining the same level of
architectural quality as the previous design, Ns it will give the structure a more “architecturally
ground” appearance. Alternative C also proposes to structurally redesign the roof. The modified
roof design is consistent with the architectural style, however the use of flat tile or shingle material
for the roof will be better suited than the proposed concrete “S” tile. Staff recommends enhancing
the revisions to Alternative C by incorporating a brick material moderately along portions of the
structure’s base and revising the roof material to flat tile or shingles.
The proposed Spanish design of Alternative D provides a new architectural style to the Veranda
model. Alternative D incorporates many architectural features and elements that are true to
Spanish architecture. Staff believes incorporating this new style throughout the project will provide
variation and distinction within the Day Creek Villages and will provide a strong complement to
the proposed hotel, which also has a true Spanish architectural style. Staff is supportive of the
changes for Alternative D.
Overall, the proposed changes are consistent with the expectations set by the City at the time of
the project’s initial approval. The changes are primarily architectural. The location,
plotting/orientation, and size of each structure will remain as is. The number of residential units
will also remain as is.
Environmental Determination Update: As the scope of the changes are minimal and no expansion
of use is proposed, the project will remain in compliance with the previously approved
environmental review.
Staff Recommendation: Staff supports the applicant’s request to modify the architectural style
and building façade of two designs within the Veranda Village. No additional entitlement will be
required for these revisions, and upon approval, the revisions will be forwarded to the Building
and Safety Department for building plan check.