The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDRC AgendasTHE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA NCHO CUCAMONGA December 15, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER �I Roll Call 7:00 p.m. Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias Additional Staff Present: Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015- A. DRC2015-00650 00650 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING FOR RICHARD DICK & Committee ASSOCIATES - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 44,336 recommended the square foot warehouse building on a 2.2 acre lot located on the west side project be forwarded of Pittsburgh Avenue and approximately 275 feet south of 6tn street in the to the Planning Commission with the Industrial Park (IP) District - APN: 0229-341-03. Related files: CEQA2015- changes discussed 00240, Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00659, and Sign Permit and with staffs DRC2015-1009. review and approval. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RANCHO G'UCAMONGA December 15, 2015 II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December 31 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 7:39 p.m. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA _ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA December 15, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias II. 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015- 00650 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING FOR RICHARD DICK & ASSOCIATES - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 44,336 square foot warehouse building on a 2.2 acre lot located on the west side of Pittsburgh Avenue and approximately 275 feet south of 6th street in the Industrial Park (IP) District - APN: 0229-341-03. Related files: CEQA2015- 00240, Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00659, and Sign Permit DRC2015-1009. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA j THO Cuc ONGA December 15, 2015 II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. II IV. ADJOURNMENT ill 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. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December 3, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Nikki Cavazos December 15, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00650 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING FOR RICHARD DICK & ASSOCIATES - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 44,336 square foot warehouse building on a 2.2 acre lot located on the west side of Pittsburgh Avenue and approximately 275 feet south of 6th street in the Industrial Park (IP) District — APN: 0229-341-03. Related files: CEQA2015-00240, Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00659, and Sign Permit DRC2015-01009. Design Parameters: The project site is located on the west side of Pittsburgh Avenue about 275 feet south of 6th Street. It is rectangular in shape and is approximately 338 feet (east to west) and approximately 283 feet (north to south) with an area of about 94,000 square feet (2.15 acres). The frontage of Pittsburgh Avenue has full street improvements and mature street trees. The site is currently improved with a parking lot that is used for overflow parking for the office building located on the adjacent parcel to the north. The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of about 1,077 and 1,064 feet, respectively. The property is bound on the west by an office building and its associated parking lot. The project site is approximately 345 feet east of Milliken Avenue. To the east are industrial office/warehouse buildings and a vacant lot. To the north, is a parking lot and an office building. The parcel to the south is vacant — a Design Review application is currently under review (related file: Design Review DRC2015-00402) for development of that parcel. The zoning of the property and the properties surrounding the subject property is Industrial Park (IP). The proposed project is a one story warehouse building of 44,336 square feet that will include 1,500 square feet of office space on the main floor and an additional 1,500 square feet of office space within the mezzanine. The front, or primary, elevation of the building will be oriented towards Pittsburgh Avenue. The office area will be at the southeast corner of the building. The loading area, dock doors, trailer parking stalls will be located in the southwest area of the project site. The dock doors will be on the south side of the building near the rear (west side) of the property. This area will be screened from public view on Pittsburgh Avenue by a portion of the building and screen walls. Two access points are proposed for the property along Pittsburgh Avenue. An existing 40 foot wide driveway at the northeast corner of the project site (shared with the adjacent property to the north) will remain in place and will continue to be used. A 35-foot wide driveway is proposed at the southeast corner of the project site. This driveway will be entirely on the subject property and leads to employee parking spaces, the trailer parking, dock doors and the truck loading area. This driveway leads to an 8-foot tall gate approximately 120 feet from Pittsburgh Avenue. There are two parking areas on the subject property. The first parking lot area includes 15 parking spaces along the south side of the subject property. These parking spaces can only be accessed by passing through the entrance gate. The second parking area includes 28 parking spaces and can be accessed by employees or visitors. The combined required amount of parking stalls is 43, and 43 parking stalls are provided. A trailer parking stall is required for every dock door. There are five dock doors proposed and five trailer parking stalls provided. Landscape coverage is 15.09%. The minimum requirement of landscaping for this Development District is 15%. No tenants have been specified at this time; the building is speculative. DRC COMMENTS DRC2015-00650— CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING December 15, 2015 Page 2 The proposed buildings will be of concrete tilt -up construction. Each facade will be painted with a palette of five colors. An additional primary material will be honey ledge coronado stone at various locations on the east, south and north elevation. A secondary material will be glazing. Glazing has been proposed mostly at the office area and each fagade has some glazing material. A metal canopy is proposed above each of the two lower windows on the east elevation only. An employee outdoor eating area will be located at the northeast corner of the building. As permitted by the Development Code, in lieu of a shade structure there will be a large shade tree at the outdoor eating area. 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. Provide additional glazing to further emphasize the office area and more visible elevations of the building as follows: a. On the south and east elevations of the building in the vicinity of the office area; b. On the north and east elevations near the northeast corner. c. NOTE: As the proposed building is 345 feet from Milliken Avenue, and the west elevation is partially screened by parking lot trees and a portion of the building on the adjacent property to the west, no additional glazing is necessary on the west elevation. 2. Raise the parapet walls at the northeast and southeast corners of the building by an additional 12 inches to further emphasize the office area and more visible corners of the building. 3. Add eyebrow metal canopies above the glazing on the east elevation, above the glazing on the east corner of the south elevation and above the glazing on the east corner of the north elevation to further define and frame the glazing. 4. Extend the decorative stone veneer to the top of the parapet wall (at all locations where the stone is proposed). NOTE: As the northwest corner of the building will be minimally visible as seen from Pittsburgh Avenue, no increase in the stone veneer is necessary there. 5. Enhance the top edge of the parapet walls on all elevations by adding a prominent reveal, chamfer, or similar embellishment. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Landscaping — a. The paved area along the south property line, in the vicinity of the dock area entrance, is comprised of 15 parking spaces. Provide trees along the south property line at a rate of one tree per every 3 parking stalls in order to comply with Section 17.56.060(N)(1) of the Development Code. DRC COMMENTS DRC2015-00650— CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING December 15, 2015 Page 3 b. Provide a landscape planter that is 5 feet wide with a 6 inch concrete curb along the south property line, in the vicinity of the parking stalls and dock area entrance. NOTE: This perimeter landscaping has been required on prior industrial projects to soften the interface between the walls and paved surfaces. 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 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 dark green. 2. All Double Detector Checks (DDCs) and Fire Department Connections (FDCs) shall be screened on three sides behind the 4-foot high walls. The walls shall incorporate the design and materials used on the buildings. 3. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 4. Decorative paving shall be provided at all vehicular access points onto the site. 5. All doors (roll -up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall or glass panel. 6. Provide durable street furniture in the outdoor employee eating area, such as tables, chairs and waste receptacles. 7. All trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standard. The design of the trash enclosures shall incorporate the materials, finish, color, and trim used on'the buildings. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to revisions per the above recommendations prior to scheduling the application for review and action by the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Nikki Cavazos Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA CUCAA ON GAA November 17, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL To ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias Additional Staff Present. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-01145 —ALDI - A request to modify the exterior of an existing commercial building of approximately 36,000 square feet located within a shopping center at the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Spruce Avenue and Elm Avenue, in the Community Commercial (CC) Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan at 11070 Foothill Boulevard. SIGN PERMIT DRC2015-00847 - ALDI - A request to install one new illuminated wall sign and to replace a panel on an existing monument sign 1 of 2 7.00 p.m. A. DRC2014-01145 & DRC2015-00847 - Committee recommended approval and forwarded project to PC. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA ANCHo CUCAM°NGA November 17, 2015 for a grocery store located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Spruce Avenue and Elm Avenue, within the Community Commercial (CC) Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan at 11070 East Foothill Boulevard. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on November 5, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 7.09 p.m. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ;ANCHO CUCAMONGA November 17, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-01145 — ALDI - A request to modify the exterior of an existing commercial building of approximately 36,000 square feet located within a shopping center at the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Spruce Avenue and Elm Avenue, in the Community Commercial (CC) Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan at 11070 Foothill Boulevard. SIGN PERMIT DRC2015-00847 - ALDI - A request to install one new illuminated wall sign and to replace a panel on an existing monument sign for a grocery store located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between 1 of 2 a DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONOA November 17, 2015 Spruce Avenue and Elm Avenue, within the Community Commercial (CC) Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan at 11070 East Foothill Boulevard. I) III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist I/ with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on November 52015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 16500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2of2 f- DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez November 17, 2015 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-01145 — ALDI — A request to modify the exterior of an existing commercial building of approximately 36,000 square feet located within a shopping center at the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Spruce Avenue and Elm Avenue, in the Community Commercial (CC) Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan at 11070 Foothill Boulevard — APN: 1077-422-31. SIGN PERMIT DRC2015-00847 — ALDI — A request to install one new illuminated wall sign for a grocery store located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Spruce Avenue and Elm Avenue, within the Community Commercial (CC) Development District of the Terra Vista Community Plan at 11070 East Foothill Boulevard — APN: 1077-422-31. Design Parameters: The subject building is located within an existing multi -tenant shopping center, at the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Spruce Avenue and Elm Avenue. The applicant, Aldi, is requesting to subdivide a single -tenant building of approximately 36,000 square feet, into two tenant spaces. In doing so, Aldi is proposing to utilize the western portion of the building, while the existing tenant within the building, Office Depot, reduces their footprint and utilizes the eastern half. The building currently has one main entrance along the front (south) elevation. The Minor Design Review involves a request to add a new tower and cart wall along the front (south) elevation, remove storefront glass along the front (south) and left (west) elevations and construct a new electrical room addition along the rear (north) elevation. The tower is proposed to be located at the new Office Depot entrance, near the eastern end of the front elevation. The fagade and design of the tower will match the material, style, texture and color of the existing building by incorporating stucco walls and tile roof with matching eaves and decorative brackets, similar to the existing tower entrance for the building. The cart wall, which will be used to screen and house the shopping carts for the grocery store, will be located along the exterior of the front elevation, just west of the Aldi entrance. The wall will incorporate tile to match the existing tile along the storefront and will have an approximate height of 3 to 4 feet. The building currently has storefront glass placed throughout the front elevation and along the southern portion of the left elevation. The storefront glass along the southwest corner of the building will be removed and replaced with a solid wall to match the existing material, style, texture and color of the existing building by incorporating a stucco wall with a decorative tile wainscot along the base of the building. The new electrical room addition will be located along the rear elevation and will have a width of 8 feet and a depth of 4.5 feet for a total of 36 square feet. The exterior of the electrical room will match the existing building by incorporating new painted louvered doors, as well as a new cornice, stucco walls and new wainscot trim to wrap over the doorway to match the existing design. The Sign Permit involves a request to install a new 6-foot tall illuminated wall sign, approximately 30 square feet in size, to be located along the front elevation. The sign will exceed the maximum height of 36 inches allowed for Sub -Major tenants per Uniform Sign Program (USP)134. The sign program classifies Sub -Major tenants as businesses occupying between 7,000 and 34,999 square feet. Per USP 134, signs are permitted to exceed the height limitation with the Design Review Committee approval: The new wall sign will have a maximum height of 6 feet on the existing tower along the front building elevation. The sign is in conformance with the maximum width of 25 feet as well as the maximum area allowed per sign of 75 square feet as stated by USP 134. Staff Comments: The applicant's architect designed the new exterior building fagade in keeping with the style, material and color of the existing building and shopping center. Staff has determined that the proposed project meets all related design and technical requirements for the exterior building modifications related to the minor design review. In regards to the sign permit, the applicant is requesting to install a wall sign that only includes a logo box with a height of 6 feet and a width of 5 feet - 1 inch. Per the applicant, the 6-foot tall logo is necessary to allow the "Aldi" lettering in the logo box to be legible. The submitted plans shows the Aldi lettering will be approximately 12 inches tall. Although the sign exceeds the maximum height allowed by USP 134, the sign does comply with the maximum allowable width and area. Furthermore, Staff has found the proposed sign to be consistent with other signs within the center that have been approved by the Design Review Committee. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: No major issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. No secondary issues. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Minor Design Review for the proposed exterior building changes as well as approval of the Sign Permit for the proposed wall sign along the south building elevation. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA October 20, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL To ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca Alternates: Candyce Burnett Ray Wimberly _ Rich Macias Donald Granger X Lou Munoz_ Additional Staff Present: Tabe Van der Zwaag, Assistant Planner II - II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00893 — PETE VOLBEDA — A request for site plan and architecture review of a 7,302 square foot two- story single-family residence and an attached 1,012 square foot garage on a 25,273 square foot lot located in the Very Low (VL) Zoning District at 9251 loamosa Court; APN: 1061-611-15. VARIANCE DRC2014-00894 — PETE VOLBEDA —A request to reduce the rear yard setback related to the construction of a single-family residence on a project site located in the Very Low (VL) Zoning District (.1 to 2 dwelling units per acre) at 9251 loamosa Court; APN: 1061-611-15. 7:00 p.m. A. DRC2014-00893 - Committee recommended approval and forwarded project to PC. 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO c`C"ONCA October 20, 2015 B. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT19945 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A tentative tract map for a proposed 193 unit multi -family apartment project with a potential future retail component on a 7.95 acre site located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's. 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Design Review DRC2014-01130, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, General Plan Amendment DRC2014-01133, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-01130 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC —A design review of a proposed 193 unit multi -family apartment project with a potential future retail component on a 7.55 acre site located at the north west corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2014-01134 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC -A request to remove trees in conjunction with a proposed 193 unit multi- family apartment project with a potential future retail component on a 7.55 acre site located at the north west corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS 11 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT 11 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. B. DRC2014-01130 - Committee recommended approval and forwarded project to PC with the direction that the new Mixed Use standards require a minimum of two uses on the project site and the project would need to comply with this requirement. The Committee also stated they accept the concept of reduced parking on the project site as long as the submitted parking study was corroborated by peer review, as required by the new Mixed Use development standards. 8:37 p.m. 2 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA WNCHO Cuc ONce October 20, 2015 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on October 8, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3of3 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA MON October 20, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER 71 Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias II. 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 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. A. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00893 — PETE VOLBEDA — A request for site plan and architecture review of a 7,302 square foot two- story single-family residence and an attached 1,012 square foot garage on a 25;273 square foot lot located in the Very Low (VL) Zoning District at 9251 loamosa Court; APN: 1061-611-15. VARIANCE DRC2014-00894 — PETE VOLBEDA — A request to reduce the rear yard setback related to the construction of a single-family residence on a project site located in the Very Low (VL) Zoning District (.1 to 2 dwelling units per acre) at 9251 loamosa Court; APN: 1061-611-15. 1 of 2 - DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA October 20, 2015 B. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT19945 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A tentative tract map for a proposed 193 unit multi -family apartment project with a potential future retail component on a 7.95 acre site located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Design Review DRC2014-01130, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, General Plan Amendment DRC2014-01133, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-01130 - FOOTHILL &EAST, LLC—A design review of a proposed 193 unit multi -family apartment project with a potential future retail component on a 7.55 acre site located at the north west corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2014-01134 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to remove trees in conjunction with a proposed 193 unit multi- family apartment project with a potential future retail component on a 7.55 acre site located at the north west corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. III. 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. IV. 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, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on October 8, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag October 20, 2015 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00893 — PETE VOLBEDA — A request for site plan and architecture review of a 7,302 square foot two-story single-family residence and an attached 1,012 square foot garage on a 25,273 square foot lot located in the Very Low (VL) Zoning District (.1 to 2 dwelling units per acre) at 9251 loamosa Court; APN: 1061- 611-15. VARIANCE DRC2014-00894 — PETE VOLBEDA — A request to reduce the rear yard setback related to the construction of a single-family residence on a project site located in the Very Low (VL) Zoning District (.1 to 2 dwelling units per acre) at 9251 loamosa Court; APN: 1061-611-15. Project Proposal: The applicant proposes constructing a 7,302'square foot two-story single-family residence with an attached 1,055 square foot garage on a 25,273 square foot lot at the end of the cul-de-sac on loamosa Court. The project includes a Variance to reduce the required 60 foot rear yard setback to 30 feet. Staff supports the Variance request as the approved Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16461) for all the homes along the loamosa Court including a Variance (DRC2003-00902) which reduced the required 200- foot lot depth. The subject lot is approximately 122 feet deep along the north property line and 188 feet deep along the east property line, making it difficult to design a residence without the requested rear yard setback reduction. There is a 15-foot wide equestrian trail easement along the south and west property lines and the Site Plan shows the required 24 x 24-foot horse corral area. There is a 12- foot wide utility easement along the east property line. The proposed front setback is 44 feet from the curb face in excess of the 42-foot minimum front yard setback. The proposed side yard setbacks are 16 feet and 19 feet, in excess of the 10/15-foot minimum side yard setback. The structure is approximately 28 feet tall, below the maximum permitted 35-foot height limit. Lot coverage is 23 percent, below the maximum permitted 25 percent lot coverage Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the overall design of the residence. The Mediterranean architectural theme and wall plane articulation is carried to all elevations. The project conforms to all Development Code requirements except for the previously discussed Variance for a reduction in the required rear yard setback. Major Issues: None Secondary Issues: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for final approval as presented. Desian Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag October 20, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01130 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 193 unit multi -family residential development . with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space for a site located on 7.95 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07.. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Proiect Overview: The applicant is requesting to construct a 193 unit multi -family residential development on 7.95 acres of land at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue. The project includes a 3,246 square foot area that can be converted from the proposed residential use (3 one bedroom units) to leasable commercial tenant space in the future. A Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT19945) is included with the project for the creation of a one lot condominium map. The project site currently has a zoning designation of Community Commercial (CC) and a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (GC). The City is in the process of initiating a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation to Mixed -Use. The project includes a request to change the zoning designation from Community Commercial to Mixed -Use, in conformance with the proposed General Plan land use designation. The Development Code does not currently include development standards for mixed -use development. The City Council is scheduled to review proposed Mixed -Use Development Standards at the October 21, 2015 City Council meeting. The project has been designed to conform to the new Mixed -Use Standards except for parking and the required mix of uses, which is discussed further below. The project is designed with units directly facing Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue, with one gated vehicle entrance provided on each street frontage. The leasing office and major recreation facility are located near the center of the project site, at the terminus of the Foothill Boulevard vehicle entrance. The buildings have a contemporary appearance and include a variety of building types and configurations. The building elevations are accentuated through the use of four-story tower elements, patios/balconies, which provide variation in the wall and roof planes, The project is made up of a single -story retail/residential building along with two, three and four-story residential buildings. The project includes a mix of 72 one -bedroom units, 107 two -bedroom units and 14 three - bedroom units. The units range in size from 774 to 1,352 square feet. Each unit includes a private courtyard or balcony that range in size from 65 square feet to 120 square feet. Parking is provided in enclosed garages, in carports and through the use of open surface parking. The onsite recreational amenities include a clubhouse, fitness center, pool and spa, a tot lot, dog park, and an open play area. Landscaped seating areas are provided adjacent to each of the residential buildings. The recreational amenities are easily accessible to each of the units and centrally located. An additional courtyard is provided at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue, adjacent to the commercial tenant space. The outdoor common open spaces, vehicle entrances and pedestrian crossings each include enhanced paving and landscaping. Parking Analysis: The project provides 384 parking spaces, 44 parking spaces less than what is currently required by Development Code for multi -'family projects. The Mixed -Use Development Standards set for review by the City Council October 21, 2015, stipulate parking for mixed -use projects is based on the Development Code requirement for the individual uses within the development and verified through a parking study, which reviews the adequacy of the number of proposed parking spaces. The parking study is then required to be reviewed by an independent peer review consultant. If it is determined that a reduced number of parking spaces is adequate for all of the uses within a mixed -use project, the applicant will be required to submit an application for a Minor Exception or Variance to reduce the required number of parking spaces. The applicant has submitted a parking study (LSA; August 18, 2015) which finds that the proposed number of parking spaces is adequate to meet the parking demand of the project. The parking study reviewed the parking demand of similar mixed -use projects in other cities in Southern California and found that the proposed parking ratio of 1.99 parking spaces per dwelling unit (2.2 required by Rancho Cucamonga Development Code) exceeds the parking ratios provided by similar projects reviewed in the study. The parking study outlines project specific design elements provided by the project that reduce the total parking demand. The project includes the potential mix of residential and commercial uses which have different peak parking demand times. The 13 parking spaces dedicated to the retail use, which has peak parking demand in the afternoon and early evenings, can be used by the residential units in the evenings. The project is located adjacent to a transit stop, which has been found to reduce parking demand by 2 percent. The project provides 174 secure bicycle storage spaces, which has been found to reduce parking demand by 1 vehicle parking space for each 3 bicycle storage spaces. The parking study concludes that through the use of the above design elements, through the use of lease agreements and parking passes limiting the number of permitted on -site vehicles and through restrictions on personal storage inside the garage areas, the project provides adequate parking to meet the project parking demand. It should be noted that 58 of the parking spaces are located on Southern California Gas Company and Southern California Edison easements that run along the western boundary of the project. These easement holders have conceptually approved parking within their easement areas. The easement holders, however, will not permit the planting of trees within the easement area and there is always the risk that the parking spaces may be temporarily displaced during maintenance of the underlying utilities. Tree Removal Permit: The project includes a Tree Removal Permit (DRC2014-01134) requesting the removal of 152 eucalyptus trees. The project site was historically used as a wood lot with eucalyptus trees planted in rows. The project currently consists of a combination of mature, young and dying eucalyptus trees. The arborist report (Kinsinger Environmental Consultants; December 17, 2014) recommends the removal of all the on - site eucalyptus trees and the replanting of 152 peppermint gum (E. nicholii) trees along the northern and western property lines of the project site. The Development Code requires the planting of a total of 440 trees on the project site, far surpassing the number of trees being removed. Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the overall site layout and building design of the proposed mixed -use development. The architecture has a contemporary appearance and includes design elements which provide wall and roof plan articulation. The project includes a variety of recreational amenities and outdoor gathering areas which are centrally located. The project complies with all the Development Code criteria for mixed - use developments which are scheduled for City Council review on October 21, 2015, except for the number of parking spaces provided and the proposed conversion of the commercial tenant spaces to residential units. Staff is concerned, that the number of proposed parking spaces, which is approximately 9 percent below that required by the Development Code, may not be adequate as has been found with other multi -family projects within the city. A potential solution to the parking shortfall is for the applicant to acquire the property to the west which is also encumbered by utility easements and may be willing to sell. Staff also does not accept the concept of delaying the development of the 3,246 square feet of commercial tenant space for use as residential units. The new Mixed -Use Standards require two uses on the project site. The applicant has informed staff that the vacancy rate of commercial lease space on Foothill Boulevard east of the 1-15 Freeway exceeds that of commercial space in the rest of the city. The proposed retail tenant space is approximately 1 percent of the total area of the entire project. The retail space is also used in the parking study to help make the argument that the 13 parking spaces dedicated to the commercial use will be used by the residential use in the evenings, which in turn negatively impacts the parking deficit. Finally, staff believes any mechanism put into place that requires the future conversion of the 3,246 square feet back to a commercial use will be difficult to enforce. Maior Issues: Whether there is adequate on -site parking to meet the project parking demand. 2. Whether it is acceptable to permit the proposed 3,246 square feet of planned commercial tenant space to intermittently be used as residential units. Secondary Issues: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the issues raised by staff and determine whether the project may move forward to the Planning Commission for their review or determine the project requires additional work. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO 6b t Ocoer CUCAMONGA , 2015 - % : 0 0 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL To ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias Additional Staff Present: Tabe Van de Zwaag, Assistant Planner II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015- 00386 - LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS — A request for site plan and architectural review of a 100, 1 35-square-foot 9 building multi -tenant retail center that includes a 44,988-square-foot major tenant building, a 15,207- square-foot pad building, a 9,160 inline tenant building, a 7,560-square- foot inline tenant building, a 4,500-square-foot inline tenant building, two 3,780 inline tenant buildings and a future 3,600-square-foot pad building on 10.93 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Day Creek 1 of 2 7:00 p.m. A. DRC2015-00386 Committee recommended approval and forwarded project to PC with the requirement that the applicant add historical/design DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA 1cn CHO C°10NC" October 6, 2015 Boulevard and Base Line Road in the Medium (M) Zoning District of the elements reflecting Victoria Community Plan - APN: 1089-031-15, 16, 35 and a portion of the Citys wine 1089-031-14. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of growing history, environmental impacts for consideration. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00388, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2014-00390, Tentative Tract Map SUBTPM1.9637, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00387 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00391. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. IV. ADJOURNMENT 111 7:32 p.m. 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. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 23, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO 6b t Ocoer CUCAMONGA , 2015 - 7 : 0 0 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL To ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias II. 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015- 00386 - LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS — A request for site plan and architectural review of a 100,135-square-foot 9 building multi -tenant retail center that includes a 44,988-square-foot major tenant building, a 15,207- square-foot pad building, a 9,160 inline tenant building, a 7,560-square- foot inline tenant building, a 4,500-square-foot inline tenant building, two 3,780 inline tenant buildings and a future 3,600-square-foot pad building on 10.93 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road in the Medium (M) Zoning District of the Victoria Community Plan - APN: 1089-031-15, 16, 35 and a portion of 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA October 6, 2015 1089-031-14. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00388, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2014-00390, Tentative Tract Map SUBTPM19637, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00387 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00391. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist II with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 23, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. � Tabe van der Zwaag October 6, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00386 = LEWIS RETAIL CENTERS — A request for site plan and architectural review of a 100,135- square foot 9 building multi -tenant retail center that includes a 44,988-square foot major tenant building, a 15,207-square foot pad building, a 9,160 inline tenant building, a 7,560-square foot inline tenant building, a 4,500-square foot inline tenant building, two 3,780 inline tenant buildings and a future 3,600-square foot pad building on 10.93 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road in the Medium (M) Zoning District of the Victoria Community Plan - APN: 1089-031-15, 16, 35 and a portion of 1089-031-14. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00388, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2014-00390, Tentative Tract Map SUBTPM19637, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00387 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00391. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Project Overview The applicant proposes constructing a 100,135-square foot multi -tenant retail center on 10.93 acres of land located on the northwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. The applicant is in the process of purchasing 14.08 acres of land from the Successor Agency of the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency. A 10.08 acre portion of the project site purchased from the Successor Agency will be used for the proposed project with the remaining 4 acres of land to be planned for the future development of an affordable senior housing development. The applicant is also in the process of purchasing .86 acres of land from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District for the development of Pad B and to provide access to the project site from Base Line Road. The future building on the San Bernardino County Flood Control District parcel of land will be reviewed at a later date when that purchase is complete, though this piece of land is being included in the project layout and is calculated into the total project size for purposes of the environmental review and Conditional Use Permit. Surrounding Area To the north of the project site is Firehouse Court, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station Number 173 and vacant land; to the south is Base Line Road; to the west is a San Bernardino County Flood Control District maintenance yard; and, to the east, is Day Creek Boulevard. The project will take vehicular access from Day Creek Boulevard, Firehouse Court and Base Line Road. As part of the project, a new signalized intersection is being proposed on Base Line Road, approximately 600 feet west of Day Creek Boulevard. Emergency Vehicular Access will be provided through the project site to the future residential development to the north, in order to provide that development with two points of vehicle access. The San Bernardino County Flood Control maintenance yard will take access from the project entry from Base Line Road. Proiect Proposal The project site currently has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Low Medium (LM) Residential. The project site is within the Victoria Community Plan with a Zoning Designation of Medium (M) Residential. The applicant has submitted a General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan Land Use Designation to Neighborhood Commercial. A Victoria Community Plan Amendment has been submitted to change the Victoria Community Plan Zoning Designation to Village Commercial (VC), which is the Victoria Community Plan equivalent to the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation. The Victoria Community Plan Amendment also includes a text amendment stating that project setbacks for master -planned commercial developments will be determined on a case -by -case basis through the development review process. The Victoria Community Plan is currently silent on commercial development setbacks and therefore the Development Code standards would apply. The project is oriented with the 44,998 square foot major tenant building angled towards the intersection of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. Three inline tenant buildings are plotted adjacent to the major tenant building. Additionally, two (2) pad buildings are plotted adjacent to Day Creek Boulevard and three (3) pad buildings are plotted adjacent to Base Line Road. The main pedestrian entrance will be at the Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road intersection and will include a large outdoor seating area with decorative arbors. Pedestrian access to the major tenant building will provide a tree and arbor lined walkway from the Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road intersection. A second pedestrian orientated focal point is proposed for the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Firehouse Court and will include picnic benches, a drinking fountain and a bike rack/repair station to service the Pacific Electric Trail to the north. Multiple outdoor eating areas are also provided throughout the project. The project is designed with Craftsman-themed architecture that includes wood siding, stone veneer, exposed rafter tails and wood support structures. Each building incorporates multiple tower elements. A clock tower is proposed adjacent to the major tenant building. Decorative arbors and green screens with climbing vines are used to accent each building and tie the buildings together. Decorative paving is provided at each vehicle entrance and pedestrian crossings as well as at the outdoor eating areas. The drive through lanes will be screened by low walls and landscaping, and will include concrete paving. A decorative bus shelter will be provided on Base Line Road and will carry over the design of the center. Trash enclosures will be constructed of split face block, decorative stone veneer columns, a wood overhead trellis and a roll -up door. The project complies with all related Victoria Community Plan and Development Code requirements with the reduced setbacks permitted by the proposed Victoria Community Plan Amendment. The Victoria Community Plan is currently silent on building and parking setbacks and the Development Code setbacks of 45 feet from curb face would apply. The proposed setbacks along the Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard range from 24 feet to 55 feet, as measured from curb face. A total of 506 parking stalls are provided on the project site, 6 parking stalls over the minimum requirement based on 1 parking stall per 200 square feet of gross floor area. Landscape coverage is 18 percent, in excess of the 10 percent landscape coverage required by the Development Code. Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the design and layout of the project and is in support of the applicant request to change the General Plan Land Use and Victoria Community Plan Zoning Designations of the project site from Low Medium (LM) and Medium (M) Residential to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Village Commercial (VC), respectively. Staff is also in support of the Victoria Community Plan Amendment adding language permitting setbacks for master planned commercial to be determined on a case -by -case basis. This change will provide commercial developments with the flexibility to place buildings closer to the right-of-way and provide more visual interest of along the street frontage. The buildings are well -designed and include extensive use of wood siding and stone veneer. All structures within the development have a cohesive design theme that is carried over to the on -site amenities and landscape treatment. The project will provide a visually appealing street scene that includes multiple pedestrian access points from each intersection and from the Pacific Electric Trail. The number of drive- uses have been reduced from 4 to 3 from the original layout presented to the Planning Commission Workshop on February 11, 2015. Staff remains concerned that the Pad A drive-thru lane may not be adequately sized and configured to prevent vehicles from backing up into the adjacent drive aisle and blocking through traffic. The Development Code requires that the applicant submit traffic studies by a traffic engineer for each drive-thru at the time of Building Department plan check, analyzing the functionality of the two drive-thru lanes adjacent to Base Line Road. Staff is less concerned with respect to the drive-thru lane for the drug store in the building labeled Major "B" on the site plan, as the traffic levels for drug store drive-thru lanes are not significant. Major Issues: The drive-thru lane for the proposed coffee tenant in Pad A may not be adequately sized and configured to service this type of tenant without creating queueing and congestion issues in this part of the center. Secondary Issues: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project and determine whether it can be moved forward to the Planning Commission or if additional modifications to the layout are necessary. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, and Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA R°HO CUCAMONGA p Se tember 15, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett A Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias Additional Staff Present: Mayuko Nakamura, Assistant Planner, Tom Grahn, Assistant Planner II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES - A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) R Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081-25. 7.00 p.m. A. SUBTT18908 - Committee recommended approval and forwarded project to PC for review and action. 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA Rkrrcxo CUC"°NCA September 15, 2015 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015- 00165 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The proposed development of a 112-unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00555, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-00166 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The proposed development of a 112-Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19619 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to subdivide a 9.55 acre parcel into two (2) lots in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015- 00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2015-00555 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request to amend the Development Code to conditionally permit Residential Care Facilities in the Low (L) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts for the proposed development of a 112- unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055- 49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. 2 of 3 B, C, D and E. DRC2015-00165 DRC2015-00166 SUBTPM19619 DRC2015-00555 Committee recommended approval, subject to the following: In keeping with the overall architectural theme, the applicant should evaluate the project design to determine where additional arch elements could be located. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA C°or°c,+ September 15, 2015 II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. II IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September3, 2015, at least 72 hours priorto the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3 of 3 7:22 p.m. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA September 15, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Alternates: Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz Rich Macias II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES - A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) R Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081-25. 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 15, 2015 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW-DRC2015- 00165 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The proposed development of a 112-unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00555, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-00166 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The proposed development of a 112-Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19619 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to subdivide a 9.55 acre parcel into two (2) lots in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015- 00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2015-00555 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request to amend the Development Code to conditionally permit Residential Care Facilities in the Low (L) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts for the proposed development of a 112- unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055- 49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. 2 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 15, 2015 II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 3, 2015,'at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga- 3 of 3 DRC AGENDA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 - RICHLAND VENTURES September 15, 2015 Page 1 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima September 15, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 - RICHLAND VENTURES - A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN`. 1087-081-25. Project Description, Background and Design: The applicant is proposing to subdivide a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low. (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081-25. The project site consists of approximately 10.6 acres of undeveloped land in the northern portion of the City, located west of the northern terminus of East Avenue and north of Wilson Avenue. The project site lies within the historic East Etiwanda Creek alluvial fan at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains. The site is characterized by vacant land to the north, east, south, and west. The zoning of the property and the surrounding properties to the north and west is in the Low (L) Residential District, ENSP. The surrounding properties to the east and south is in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, ENSP. The project is adjacent to an approved Tentative Tract Map 16072, which is consistent with the Low (L) Residential District. There is no house product proposed at this time. The average lot area is 10,007 square feet and the minimum net average for the Low (L) Residential District in the ENSP is 10,000 square feet. The site layout is consistent with the ENSP development standards such as street widths, landscape requirements, and wall designs. The slopes along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will be a private landscape easement and will be maintained by an HOA. The "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood entry monument will be installed at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue in accordance with the attached Exhibit 25(A) of the ENSP. A 30-inch max cut stone wall with a concrete cap and low pilaster shall be used consistent with the Exhibit. The material and color of the wall will match with what is existing at the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Wilson Avenue. The theme wall concrete block cap will be "natural gray," stucco color that will match with what is existing in the surrounding area; the stone used in the monument entry and theme wall columns is Coronado stone and the color is "chablis." The landscape palette for trees, shrubs and groundcover is generally consistent with the ENSP landscape standards. The final landscape plan shall be fully consistent with, "Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood entry," Exhibits 25 (A) & (B) (pages III-78 & 79). The applicant shall work with the Engineering and Public Works Department at plan check for any minor revisions such as changing the Sophora japonica 'Regent' (Chinese Scholar Tree) to Magnolia grandiflora 'D.D. Blanchard', since the Sophora is not on the list of the City's acceptable street tree species. The final landscape and irrigation plan shall show the exact location of, and irrigation for trees, shrubs, and ground cover. The final landscape plan shall include, at a minimum, plant name, plant quantity, plant size, location of impervious surfaces, utilities and lighting, irrigation system, and plans for tree retention and removal where applicable. The final landscape plan should also include a water budget that includes the estimate water use (in gallons), the irrigated area (in square feet), precipitation rate, and flow rate (in gallons per minute), consistent with Chapter 17.82 Water Efficient Landscaping. DRC AGENDA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 - RICHLAND VENTURES September 15, 2015 Page 2 The highest pad elevation is at 1,645 feet and lowest elevation at 1,635 feet. There are 2:1 slopes along the northern and northwestern portion of the site and also within the landscape easement along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue. The project will be irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by the Development Code shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 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. None. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. The street trees along East Avenue need to be changed from Sophora japonica 'Regent' (Chinese Scholar Tree) to Magnolia grandiflora 'D.D. Blanchard'. The Sophora is not on the list of the City's acceptable street tree species. 2. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. Policy Issues: The proposed plan is conceptually compliant with policy. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger ELEVATION ^s //,Im PINES W MAX CUT STONE WI CONt CAP i LOW MASTER LANDSCAPE EASEMENT SIDEWALK PLAN REDBUD CANARY ISLAND PINE JAPANESE PAGODA TREE TUFT GROUNOCCVEA AND SHRUBS 1WHOM CUT STONE VIENEER WALL W/ CONC. CAP & PILASTER EXHIBIT 25 (A) Etiwanda Nort, III-78 Specific Plan I _ City of IPA SECTION x 6' CUT STONE VENEER WALL W/ CONCRETE CAP MAXCUT STONE VENEER SIGN WALL W/CONCRETE CAP MAX. CUT STONE MEANDERING BATTERED WALL NEIGHBORHOOD ENTRY SECTION EXHIBIT 25YB Etiwanda North ' III_79 Specific Plan City of Rancho Cucamonga DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. TOM GRAHN September 15, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00165 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The proposed development of a 112-unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 020105549. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-00166 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The proposed development of a 112- Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the ,Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 020105549. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTAND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19619 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to subdivide a 9.55 acre parcel into two (2) lots in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 020105549. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00555 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request to amend the Development Code to conditionally permit Residential Care Facilities in the Low (L) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts for the proposed development of a 112-unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201- 055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015- 00166, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. Design Parameters: The Merrill Gardens project site is the mostly vacant portion of a property currently developed with the Highland Avenue Community Church and School, which is located on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue. The overall site is 9.5 acres, with an east -west dimension of approximately 637 feet and a north -south dimension of approximately 652 feet. The existing parcel will be subdivided into 2 parcels; Parcel 1 is a proposed 4.07 acre parcel for the Merrill Gardens facility, and Parcel 2 is a proposed 5.43 acre parcel for the church. To the north and east of the site are single-family homes, immediately to the west of the project site is a San Bernardino County Flood Control Channel (partially underground) and beyond that are multi -family homes, and to the south is the 210 Freeway. Vegetation on the project site consists of low growing grass and weeds as well as a variety of trees; a total of 35 trees are proposed for removal, however none of the trees meet the heritage tree requirements of the Development Code. As noted above, the majority of the Merrill Gardens project site is vacant; however, along the north boundary of the site the church has several recreational amenities (i.e., playground, basketball court, and shade structures) that will be removed. Access to the site is by way of two existing driveways on Highland Avenue; both of these driveways are on the easterly half of the project site and adjacent to the church. The easterly driveway will remain in place and the westerly driveway will be closed and a joint use driveway between the Merrill Gardens facility and the church will be developed at the approximate midpoint of the Highland Avenue street frontage. The proposed Merrill Gardens Residential Care Facility will provide for the development of a three -level, 96-unit, Assisted Living building totaling 111,684 square feet and a one -level, 16-unit, Memory Care building totaling 10,870 square feet. The Assisted Living and Memory Care buildings will be located at the south and north sides of the project site, respectively. The maximum building height of the Assisted Living will be approximately 34 feet and Memory Care buildings will be approximately 24 feet. The project was designed so that the massing, finish, materials, and height of the buildings are compatible with the existing residential character of the surrounding neighborhood. The building design reflects a Spanish style and character and includes an earth toned stucco finish, multi -paned windows, clerestory windows, decorative balconies with metal railing, decorative tile, clay tile roof, hip and gable roofs, tower elements, and composite trellis. The overall building height for the Assisted Living building, although designed as a three level building (basement, and levels 1 and 2), the structure maintains a two-story massing as the building follows the topography of the site along the front and side elevations, and the Memory Care building is a one-story structure. The two-story Assisted Living building is consistent in height with the adjacent two-story multi -family units to the west and the single -story Memory Care building is lower than the adjacent two-story residential buildings to the north, but is consistent in height with the existing church buildings to the east. The project proposes an enhanced streetscape with large tree plantings, terraced planting area, colored concrete stairway, and masonry retaining walls, as well as landscaping adjacent to both structures and along the perimeter of the project site. There will be a large rectangular landscaped courtyard of approximately 17,000 square feet in the center of the Assisted Living building. An additional landscaped courtyard of approximately 2,400 square feet will be at the rear of the Memory Care building. Additionally, raised planter beds with areas for planting of seasonable vegetables will be located to the east of the Assisted Living building. Other landscape features include a dry cobble stream bed, terraced landing areas with seating and arched trellis, large accent trees, shrub plantings, potted accent plants, and an enhanced entry landscape area. Perimeter walls include a six (6) foot high combination block wall with galvanized steel guardrail above, and an eight (8) foot high combination retaining wall with green screen fencing around the entire perimeter of the Memory Care rear yard area. Parking for the facility will be located between the Assisted Living and Memory Care buildings; a total of 64 parking spaces will be provided, and the principal entrance for both buildings will face the parking lot. The Assisted Living building will provide a total of 114 beds, based on a unit mix of 19 studio, 59 1-bedroom, and 18 2-bedroom units, and the Memory Care building will provide 16 1-bedroom units, for a total of 130 beds within the entire facility. Parking is required at a ratio of 1 parking space for each 4 beds, or a total of 33 parking spaces; the project proposes a total of 64 parking spaces. Improvements proposed on the Church parcel include a redesign of the parking lot adjacent to Highland Avenue, and a relocation of the existing westerly driveway to a shared driveway for the Church and Merrill Gardens facility. The resulting parcel for the church will still conform with all applicable development standards. Due to the placement of the Assisted Living building on the project site, the Fire Department is only able to access the north, east, and south elevations. The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District development standards require accessibility on all sides of the structure. To meet this access requirement the applicant is working with the San Bernardino County Flood Control District to use the paved portion of the existing channel west of the project site for emergency vehicle access. This reciprocal use agreement between the SBCFCD, Merrill Gardens, and the RCFPD must be in place prior to scheduling the project and related applications for Planning Commission consideration. The project is located within the Low (L) Residential District, which does not permit Residential Care Facilities. The applicant has submitted Development Code Amendment (DCA) DRC2015- 00555 to conditionally permit Residential Care Facilities within the Low (L) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts. This DCA application is being processed concurrently with the Design Review, CUP, and Tentative Parcel Map applications and will be subject to Planning Commission review and City Council approval. The proposed DCA would require that Residential Care Facilities be located on a minimum 3 acre project size, which would affect approximately 13 parcels in the L and LM Residential Districts. Staff Comments: Maior Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: No Primary design issues have been identified; however, the placement of the proposed buildings on the project site are dependent upon the applicant obtaining an access easement from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District for use of the channel as emergency vehicle access. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: No Secondary issues have been identified. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: No policy issues have been identified. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee recommend approval of Design Review DRC2015-00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, SUBTT19619. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA I ;RANCHO CUCAMONCA September 1, 2015 Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER 711 Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 26, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA C oNGh August 18, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER 71 Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher x Francisco Oaxaca x Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2015-00595 — KARLA BROCK — A request to change the paint color of multiple buildings within the Foothill Crossings commercial center located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard at Day Creek Boulevard in the Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RRO/C) within the Victoria Community Plan —APNs: 0229-021-68, 69, 71, 73, 75, 77, 78 and 79. 1 of 2 7:00 p.m. Staff attendance: Mike Smith Dominick Perez A. DRC2015-0095 Committee recommended approval. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA 66lNCHO ` MONC" August 18, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, .accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 5, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 7:20 p.m. adjoumment THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO August 18 2015 - 7:00 P.M. f CUCAMONGA g Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2015-00595 — KARLA BROCK — A request to change the paint color of multiple buildings within the Foothill Crossings commercial center located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard at Day Creek Boulevard in the Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RRO/C) within the Victoria Community Plan — APNs: 0229-021-68, 69, 71, 73, 75, 77, 78 and 79. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RnrrCHO CUCIONGA August 18, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. 11 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. II IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 5, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez August 18, 2015 Project Description: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2015-00595 — KARLA BROCK — A request to change the paint color of multiple buildings within the Foothill Crossings commercial center located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard at Day Creek Boulevard in the Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RRO/C) within the Victoria Community Plan — APNs: 0229-021-68, 69, 71, 73, 75, 77, 78 and 79. Site Characteristics: The project site is an existing commercial complex that consists of twelve parcels with a combined area of approximately 31.5 acres. The site is situated on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, on the east and west side of Day Creek Boulevard and is located within the Regional Related Office/Commercial (RRO/C) District of the Victoria Community Plan. The site contains a total building area of 312,030 square feet. Desiqn Parameters: The proposal applies to eight of the twelve buildings within the complex (Vitamin Shoppe, Friar Tux, Office Depot, Pieology/Sake 2 Me Sushi, Century 21, Ortho Mattress, Total Wine and Vision Center). The applicant is requesting to change the building colors of these subject buildings within this center in an effort to beautify the center, clearly define the buildings and to allow the center to standout when compared to surrounding shopping centers. The proposal does not include any changes to the architecture, materials, decorative features, and/or floor area of any of the buildings. Each of the eight buildings in question will be painted a combination of three colors: one color for the building projections, one color for the recessed wall plane and one color for the decorative wood elements. The recessed wall planes and decorative wood elements, such as the corbels used on the raised towers and trellises attached to the trash enclosures found on each building, will be painted to match each other. This will allow the center to maintain uniformity and compatibility. However, the projected elements on each building, such as entrance towers, will be painted a color that is primarily unique to each building. Three of the subject buildings are proposed to use bolder colors, including the Total Wine, Vision Center and Vitamin Shoppe. Although these colors, as shown in the table below, are not consistent with the existing color theme, the new colors are complimentary and work well with the other proposed colors. Buildings Projected wall color Recessed wall color Decorative wood color Vitamin Shoppe Hamilton Blue Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Friar Tux Center Ride Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Office Depot Center Ride Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Pieology/ Sake 2 Me Sushi River Rocks Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Century 21 Wheat Bread Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Ortho Mattress S'mores Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Total Wine Burnt Crimson Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Vision Center Hamilton Blue Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Buffalo Wild Wings Not a Part Sears Grand Red Robin Joe's Crab Shack The remaining four buildings within the complex (Sear's Grand, Red Robin, Joe's Crab Shack and Buffalo Wild Wings) are not included with this project. The Sears Grand and Buffalo Wild Wings buildings were not included in this request and will remain as is, but will generally be compatible with the proposed color scheme for the subject eight buildings since the buildings DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2015-00595 — KARLA BROCK August 18, 2015 Page 2 currently utilize similar colors. The Joe's Crab Shack and Red Robin buildings each currently have unique architectural styles that set these buildings apart from the rest of the center and are therefore not included within this request. 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: No major issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: All wood features throughout the site are currently painted green (see attached existing photos) including the Buffalo Wild Wings building, which is not included in this paint change request. In order to maintain good design and consistency throughout the center, a condition of approval will be added that will require the wood elements on the eight buildings in question as well as the Buffalo Wild Wings building to be painted the proposed "Chocolate Chunk". 2. Upon visiting the site, staff verified that a number of buildings contain one or more wall planes with areas in disrepair due to the past removal of wall signs. Therefore, staff is including a condition that requires all buildings to be repaired and patched concurrently with the installation of the new paint. 3. Although the color renderings that were provided by the applicant only shows each building's main entrance elevation, the applicant has indicated that the color placement for the remaining sides of each building will be consistent with these renderings. Therefore, staff is requiring that all sides of the eight subject buildings match the same color theme as the front elevation shown in the attached renderings. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved, subject to the recommended conditions, and forwarded to the Planning Director for review and action. Attachments: Exhibit A - Foothill Crossings Map Exhibit B - Site Plan Exhibit C - Existing Colors Exhibit D - Proposed Colors SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2015-00595 FOOTHILL CROSSINGS MAP }�(�k1l, r �•S� S _ al s "�1 '�'' � r f i 1 � '�}3 �'fTI] p+�' L` .Oaf `Y; f R V" { '�r� {� �y,,/.y,� ,r Ak'10, P '.f -i'�i' a ,r�.ijn3` F✓�lt, � 4, � �"' � ;�i�'J � x h it 4-.'!''• 2 ,{.) i,:Fr ,t NAP ;t ►_,+ s-�.a��.�} .' NAP ; A 671 NAP �. 04*4 t —1,]#, f— '11 � Vq � s t.? r r i t o pi NAP,;C� t T «.�.• 4 'tom. Ae 115 t. • T� . '�r.� ��},'�y` , r v f f n � � f t l r i t i C a ? .. • �. .r a it �! r+� { ijF �'t Legend: 1. Vitamin Shoppe .2. Friar Tux 3. Office Depot 4. Pieology 5. Century 21 6. Ortho Mattress 7. Total Wine 8. Vision Center EXHIBIT A bu 1 ssOJ D II iy100J IV a31lj.47 IlVlg?i M3N -qic— z EXHIBIT B Existing Colors Foothill Crossings EXHIBIT C perfect palette,, Allison Garcia, Property Sales Rep, 909-486-0425, allisoti.garcia@dLIririedwards.corTi ORIGINAL PHOTO I - Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNK-EDWARDS'i' Color Rendering Department perfect palette Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, All ison. Ga rc aCaW u n I iedwa rds.com ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNK-EDWARDS't) Color Rendering Department Allison Garcia, Property Sales Rep, 909-486-0425, allison.garciaCa)dunnedwards.corn Vu Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNK-EDWARDS° Color Rendering Department pe rf ect pa I ettee PAINTS Allk-uri Garcia, Dunn -Edwards Specialisl, 909-486-0425, Lillisc)ri.Farcia@C]LlririedwLircis.corri A)B'Mnn�� ORIGINAL. PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNK-EDWARDS8 Color Rendering Department perfect pa l ette,9 Foothill Crossings• • • - Allison Garcia, Dunn -Edwards Shccialisl, 909 486-0425, allisun.garciandunnedwards.cunr ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNN-EDWARDSCw Color Rendering Department perfect palettee PAINTS 4 Allison Garcia, Propertv Services Rep, 909-486-0415. Allison. i. Garcia' 4)dLJ1 I I iedwa rds.con i ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNN-EDWARDS CD Color Rendering Department fiA'I N,perfect palettee Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, All ison.Garcia@dunnedwards.com ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNN-EDWARDS`H' Color Rendering Department Proposed Colors Foothill Crossings GYuIarr n I perfect palette Foothill CrossingOffice Depot Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, All ison.Garcla@clurinedwards.coffl Scheme 2 © Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage ® Pop -Out Front Wall - M6230 Center Ridge ® Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk i t' G 7 cy -z-'— , I,z�-;z")'5 -I (ll (�)(L/d Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guaranree is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent. 11 per pa I ette� • • • - • • Allison Garcia, Property Sales Rep, 909-486-0425, all ison.8arciaOdunnedwards.com Scheme ® Back Body - DEC764 Inside. Passage ® Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6061 River Rocks ® Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk 131 Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building ovmer or the owner's agent. `eperfect paletteqD Allison Garcia, Dunn -Edwards Specialist, 909-486-0425, allison.garcia@durtnedwards.coni Scheme Back Body DEC764 Inside Passage f Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6333 Hamilton Blue I3 WOOD - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. Noguarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's went. AMW perfect pa � ette® • • • • • • - Allison Garcia, Dunn -Edwards Specialist, 909-486-0425, allison.garciaLdunriedwards.corri Scheme © Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage © Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6333 Hamilton Blue i ® WOOD - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk I i i i Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent. perfect pa I ette@ J• W M Allison Garda, Properly Services Rep, 909-486-0425, Allison.Garcia@dunnedwards.com Scheme © Back Body - DE0764 Inside Passage ® Pop -Out Front Wall - DE5360 Wheat Bread © Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk H El ❑3 ��5 "i ti e= y�Ya•. Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent c l!_1(11111-( (hlitz7(Id: perfect �. palette, ' I �.O PAINTS Allison Garcia, Property Sales Rep, 909-486-0425, all ison.garcia@?dunnedwards.corn AL— d' Wr�:. s vkt,�tk i,' v 7 r,� ��I- l1/l , J Scheme ® Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage ® Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6111 S'Mores ® Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk t�fa R • I fir^. ��' i Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsihility of the huilding ovnler or the or,vner's agent. PAINTS perfect palette Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, Allison.GarciaCOdunnedwards.corn ' IN 44, Ta"10 h t i Rif xy Scheme ® Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage ® Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6230 Center Ridge i 311 Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk © ® _- Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. Noguarantee is intended and approvN of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the o:vner"s agent. Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias 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 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. A. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2015-00595 — KARLA BROCK — A request to change the paint color of multiple buildings within the Foothill Crossings commercial center located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard at Day Creek Boulevard in the Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RRO/C) within the Victoria Community Plan — APNs: 0229-021-68, 69, 71, 73, 75, 77, 78 and 79. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE .ANCHO CUCAMONGA August 18, 201511 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. 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. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 1I for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 5, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2of2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez August 18, 2015 Protect Description: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2015-00595 — KARLA BROCK — A request to change the paint color of multiple buildings within the Foothill Crossings commercial center located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard at Day Creek Boulevard in the Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RRO/C) within the Victoria Community Plan — APNs: 0229-021-68, 69, 71, 73, 75, 77, 78 and 79. Site Characteristics: The project site is an existing commercial complex that consists of twelve parcels with a combined area of approximately 31.5 acres. The site is situated on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, on the east and west side of Day Creek Boulevard and is located within the Regional Related Office/Commercial (RRO/C) District of the Victoria Community Plan. The site contains a total building area of 312,030 square feet. Design Parameters: The proposal applies to eight of the twelve buildings within the complex (Vitamin Shoppe, Friar Tux, Office Depot, Pieology/Sake 2 Me Sushi, Century 21, Ortho Mattress, Total Wine and Vision Center). The applicant is requesting to change the building colors of these subject buildings within this center in an effort to beautify the center, clearly define the buildings and to allow the center to standout when compared to surrounding shopping centers. The proposal does not include any changes to the architecture, materials, decorative features, and/or floor area of any of the buildings. Each of the eight buildings in question will be painted a combination of three colors: one color for the building projections, one color for the recessed wall plane and one color for the decorative wood elements. The recessed wall planes and decorative wood elements, such as the corbels used on the raised towers and trellises attached to the trash enclosures found on each building, will be painted to match each other. This will allow the center to maintain uniformity and compatibility. However, the projected elements on each building, such as entrance towers, will be painted a color that is primarily unique to each building. Three of the subject buildings are proposed to use bolder colors, including the Total Wine, Vision Center and Vitamin Shoppe. Although these colors, as shown in the table below, are not consistent with the existing color theme, the new colors are complimentary and work well with the other proposed colors. Buildings Projected wall color Recessed wall color Decorative wood color Vitamin Shoppe Hamilton Blue Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Friar Tux Center Ride Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Office Depot Center Ride Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Pieology/ Sake 2 Me Sushi River Rocks Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Centwy 21 Wheat Bread Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Ortho Mattress S'mores Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Total Wine Burnt Crimson Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Vision Center Hamilton Blue Inside Passage Chocolate Chunk Buffalo Wild Wings Not a Part Sears Grand Red Robin Joe's Crab Shack The remaining four buildings within the complex (Sear's Grand, Red Robin, Joe's Crab Shack and Buffalo Wild Wings) are not included with this project. The Sears Grand and Buffalo Wild Wings buildings were not included in this request and will remain as is, but will generally be compatible with the proposed color scheme for the subject eight buildings since the buildings DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2015-00595 — KARLA BROCK August 18, 2015 Page 2 currently utilize similar colors. The-Joe's Crab Shack andRedRobin buildings each currently have unique architectural styles that set these buildings apart from the rest of the center and are therefore not included within this request. 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. No major issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. All wood features throughout the site are currently painted green (see attached existing photos) including the Buffalo Wild Wings building, which is not included in this paint change request. In order to maintain good design and consistency throughout the center, a condition of approval will be added that will require the wood elements on the eight buildings in question as well as the Buffalo Wild Wings building to be painted the proposed "Chocolate Chunk". 2. Upon visiting the site, staff verified that a number of buildings contain one or more wall planes with areas in disrepair due to the past removal of wall signs. Therefore, staff is including a condition that requires all buildings to be repaired and patched concurrently with the installation of the new paint. 3. Although the color renderings that were provided by the applicant only shows each building's main entrance elevation, the applicant has indicated that the color placement for the remaining sides of each building will be consistent with these renderings. Therefore, staff is requiring that all sides of the eight subject buildings match the same color theme as the front elevation shown in the attached renderings. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved, subject to the recommended conditions, and forwarded to the Planning Director for review and action. Attachments: Exhibit A - Foothill Crossings Map Exhibit B - Site Plan Exhibit C - Existing Colors Exhibit D - Proposed Colors SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2015-00595 FOOTHILL CROSSINGS MAP Legend: 1. Vitamin Shoppe 2. Friar Tux 3. Office Depot 4. Pieology 5. Century 21 6. Ortho Mattress 7. Total Wine 8. Vision Center EXHIBIT A II so PARCEL I F I�LMFN! F 0 0 ------- T ------- H ------- I ------- L ------- L ------------- 8 7 L, L — E v A R D -- ----- ---------------- ----------------- PARCEL 2 Jw PARKING CALCULATION ENTER-ARCII PARCEL 3 PA 4 [ 'Rz _TOUT., PARCEL 10 PARCEL 11 UJ �41' .... ....... 44 PARCEL 7 PARCEL 5onY 1 119 J 67-77 -ARCEL 6 ZJ ji 11.1111=1_111 - ll.A�l iLUJ —'Ltf i I i It j11TFF PARCEL 2 PARCEL 8 f t /. j —4 I 1 11 ITIMaI - 5 1 T E P L A N 4v 1 0 & S Addl, I—EIT- ry Y OS Shut A-2 Existing Colors Foothill Crossings EXHIBIT C M 41b A O O O L4 Wz ao CK 0 , 0 perfect palette° Foothill Crossings- • • Allison Garcia, Property Sales Rep, 909-486-0425, allison.garcia@dunnedwards.com ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNN-EDWARDS0 Color Rendering Department m perfect pa I ette° Footh i I I CrossiOff ice Depot Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, Allison.Garcia@dunnedwards.com ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNN-EDWARDS0 Color Rendering Department cuin-(-rhva&d4 perfectpalette& PAINTS M�= Allison Garcia, Property Sales Rep, 909-486-0425, allison.garcia@dunnedwards.com ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNN-EDWARDS6 Color Rendering Department . , perfect pa I ette° 7 Foothi• Allison Garcia, Dunn -Edwards Specialist; 909-486-0425, allison.garcia@dunnedwards.corn ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNN-EDWARDS6 Color Rendering Department o perfect pa I ette° Foothill Crossings• • • - Allison Garcia, Dunn -Edwards Specialist, 909-486-0425, allison.garcia@dunnedwards.corn ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNK-EDWARDS° Color Rendering Department perfect palette • •Century 21 Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, Allison.Garcia@dunnedwards.com ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNK-EDWARDS° Color Rendering Department perfect ill Crssing - Friar Tux fect pa Foot h o Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, Alliso[i.Garcia@duniiedwards.coi-n ORIGINAL PHOTO Color Schemes For Your Consideration DUNN-EDWARDS ®R Color Rendering Department Proposed Colors Foothill Crossings EXHIBIT D I Scheme 2 perfect pa I ette® • • • Office Depot Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, All ison. Garcia@dunnedwards.corn © Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage © Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6230 Center Ridge © Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk zS ( C, C) --)�) A , I � �L-) - � �� I vd Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent.1 .. perfect palette® Foothiill Crossings-• •: Allison Garcia, Property Sales Rep, 909-486-0425, allison.garcia@dunnedwards.com Scheme H Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage © Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6061 River Rocks ® Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk 0 D� C�tz-ems. Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent. AU - perfect pa I ette® Fooffiilll CrossingsVision Allison Garcia, Dunn -Edwards Specialist, 909-486-0425. allison.garcia@dunnedwards.com Scheme ® Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage 2 © Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6333 Hamilton Blue ® WOOD - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk + V�Y'f✓SxW4. �§$ty Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent. .m perfect pa Iette° • • • • • • - Allison Garcia, Dunn -Edwards Specialist, 909-486-0425, allison.garcia©dunnedwards.com Scheme ® Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage © Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6333 Hamilton Blue ® WOOD - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk i Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent. . , perfect palette@ 0 f 0 Scheme © Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage © Pop -Out Front Wall - DE5360 Wheat Bread © Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, Allison.Garcia@duniiedwards.com Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent. perfect p a . o PAI NT5 Allison Garcia, Property Sales Rep, 909-486-0425, allisori.garcia@dunnedwards.com is 1rexY C ! A 0 n N• t � �1 j til Scheme © Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage ® Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6111 S'Mores ® Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent. �ruerr•L {tua:zr�� perfect ee , , e e o QD Allison Garcia, Property Services Rep, 909-486-0425, Allison.Garcia@dunriedwards.com Y Scheme © Back Body - DEC764 Inside Passage © Pop -Out Front Wall - DE6230 Center Ridge © Wood - DE6070 Chocolate Chunk G Paint colors represented are approximations and are not exact matches. No guarantee is intended and approval of final colors, and color placement is the responsibility of the building owner or the owner's agent. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION `AGENDA jZaxceo CUCAMONGA AUGUST 4 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher x . Francisco Oaxaca x Staff attendance: Tom Grahn Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger x Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18960 — WILSON ESTATES, LLC -The A. SUBTT18960 subdivision of 4.36 acres into 12 residential lots in the Low (L) Residential Committee District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located on the north side of Wilson recommended Avenue, west of Etiwanda Avenue, at the southwest corner of Altura Drive and approval. Tejas Court; APN: 1087-261-12. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP B. SUBTT19917 SUBTT19917 - SHAREEF AWAD - A request to subdivide 7.17 Committee q recommended acres into 10 lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District of the approval. 1 of 2 A�NCHO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA AUGUST 4, 2015 CoNcA Etiwanda Specific Plan, located north of the 210 Freeway and east of East Avenue at the easterly extension of Wilshire Drive and Copley Drive; APN: 0226-102-30. 11 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS IIIIII 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 23, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 7:17 p.m. adjournment THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA AUGUST 4 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II. 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 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. A. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18960 — WILSON ESTATES, LLC - The subdivision of 4.36 acres into 12 residential lots in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda North.Specific Plan located on the north side of Wilson Avenue, west of Etiwanda Avenue, at the southwest corner of Altura Drive and Tejas Court; APN: 1087-261-12. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT19917 - SHAREEF AWAD - A request_ to subdivide 7.17 acres into 10 lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District of the 1 of 2 zDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA T AUGUST 412015 RANCHO CUCAMONCA Etiwanda Specific Plan, located north of the 210 Freeway and east of East Avenue at the easterly extension of Wilshire Drive and Copley Drive; APN: 0226-102-30. III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 23, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2of2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. TOM GRAHN August 4, 2015 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18960 — WILSON ESTATES, LLC - The subdivision of 4.36 acres into 12 residential lots in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located on the north side of Wilson Avenue, west of Etiwanda Avenue, at the southwest corner of Altura Drive and Tejas Court; APN: 108726112. Design Parameters: On September 28, 1988, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract 13527 for the subdivision of 88 acres into 252 single-family lots in the Low Residential District, generally located north of Wilson Avenue and west of Etiwanda Avenue. The Planning Commission's approval provided for the subdivision of the project site into the proposed 12 lots; however, during the plan check phase it was determined that the area would be needed to construct an interim detention basin for drainage purposes. Due to upstream improvements, that basin is no longer necessary, and the applicant has proposed a new subdivision of the project site. The proposed subdivision is identical to the original subdivision of the project area. Lots within the subdivision range in size from 9,520 square feet to 25,278 square feet, with an average lot size of 12,439 square feet. These lot sizes exceed both the 7,200 square foot minimum lot size and 10,000 minimum net average lot size requirements of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The proposed subdivision meets all other applicable development standards of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: There are no major design issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: There are no secondary design issues. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: No policy issues have been identified. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee recommend approval of Tentative Tract SUBTT18960. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. TOM GRAHN August 4, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT19917 - SHAREEF AWAD - A request to subdivide 7.17 acres into 10 lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located north of the 210 Freeway and east of East Avenue at the easterly extension of Wilshire Drive and Copley Drive; APN: 022610230. Design Parameters: The proposed project is located directly north of the 210 Freeway, south of Tract 18708 (a 7-lot subdivision), east of Tract 18122 (a 76-lot subdivision currently under construction), and west of East Etiwanda Creek and the San Sevaine Flood Control Basin. Access to the proposed subdivision will occur through two streets on the project site to the west. Lots within the subdivision range in size from 23,276 square feet to 26,557 square feet, with an average lot size of 25,078 square feet. These lot sizes exceed both the 20,000 square foot minimum lot size and 25,000 minimum net average lot size requirements.,of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The proposed subdivision meets all other applicable development standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: There are no major design issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: There are no secondary design issues. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: No policy issues have been identified. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee recommend approval of Tentative Tract SUBTT19917. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA J U LY 14, 2015 - 7:00 P. M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 1, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ACT/OW RANCHO CUCAMONGA JUNE 30, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00111 — PULTE HOMES — A request for the architectural and site design of 5-lots in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Golden Prairie Drive and Etiwanda Avenue. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Negative Declaration on July 12, 1989, in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map 14139 and no further environmental review is required. 1 of 2 TOO PM The Committee recommended approval subject to staffs comments and suggested conditions. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA J U N E 309 2015 RANCHO CucAMONGA B. DRC2015-00580 — Pulte Homes - A request to increase the allowable wall The Committee heights for a total height of 8 feet along the side yards of Lots 1 and 5 in recommended connection with the proposed development (Design Review approval subject to DRC2015-00111) of 5 residential homes located at the southeast corner of staffs comments and suggested conditions Etiwanda Avenue and Golden Prairie Drive. None III. 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. 7:25 PM IV. 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, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 18, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA JUNE 30, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00111 — PULTE HOMES —A request for the architectural and site design of 5-lots in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Golden Prairie Drive and Etiwanda Avenue. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Negative Declaration on July 12, 1989, in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map 14139 and no further environmental review is required. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA JUNE 309 2015 RANCHO CuCAMONGA B. DRC2015-00580 — Pulte Homes - A request to increase the allowable wall heights for a total height of 8 feet along the side yards of Lots 1 and 5 in connection with the proposed development (Design Review DRC2015-00111) of 5 residential homes located at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Golden Prairie Drive. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS IF 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 18, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez June 30, 2015 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00111 — PULTE HOMES — A request for the architectural and site design of 5-lots in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Golden Prairie Drive and Etiwanda Avenue. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Negative Declaration on July 12, 1989 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map 14139 and no further environmental review is required. MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2015-00580 — PULTE HOMES — A request to increase the allowable wall heights for a total height of 8 feet along the side yards of Lots 1 and 5 in connection with the proposed development (Design Review DRC2015-00111) of 5 residential homes located at the southwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Golden Prairie Drive. Background: On July 12, 1989, the Planning Commission approved a 119-lot single-family residential subdivision (Tract 14139), which included the subdivision of the subject five lots. Then on March 22, 1995, the Planning Commission approved a Design Review (DR 14139) to construct homes within the tract. Because the site lacked permanent drainage improvements, an on -site storm water detention basin was required to be constructed within Lots 1 through 5 as an interim drainage solution. As of result of having to construct the detention basin, Lots 1 through 5 were unable to be developed along with the remaining lots in this tract. The temporary detention basin remained until 2012, at which time the Planning Director approved a Minor Design Review (DRC2012-00196) to allow for the demolition of the detention basin and the grading of Lots 1 through 5. The basin has since been filled and the lots are currently semi -rough graded and vacant with all necessary street improvements already in place. Design Parameters: The subject property is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP), which requires development to comply with specific site and architectural design guidelines. Particular "primary" architectural styles, such as Bungalow, Ranch, and San Juan are required to be used on at least two-thirds of the proposed units. The applicant has chosen to use only primary architectural styles and will therefore be in compliance with this requirement. The San Juan elevation incorporates a stucco exterior, exposed rafter tales, shed roof awning with wood braces, and recessed windows with decorative shutters. The Ranch style incorporates brick veneer wainscot, decorative gables, decorative shutters, and exposed wood headers. The Bungalow style incorporates stone wainscot and porch column bases with battered columns, decorative gables and shake siding as well as twelve inch and eighteen inch decorative corbels. The applicant initially proposed solid covered patios as an option along the rear elevation of all residences. The Planning Department has requested that because of the lack of building articulation along the rear elevation, that the solid covered patio be provided (not optional) on all residences. The plans have since been revised to reflect this comment and the patio covers along the rear elevations on all lots are now provided (not optional). The ENSP Low Residential District development standards require a maximum lot coverage of forty (40) percent, maximum height of thirty-five (35) feet, minimum front yard setback of thirty-two (32) feet with an average front yard setback of thirty seven (37) feet (measured from the right-of-way), five (5)- and ten (10)- foot side yard setback measured from the property lines and twenty (20)- foot rear yard setbacks measured from property line. The ENSP also requires that all lots have decorative driveway treatments and at least thirty (30) percent of all homes within a phase/tract to have a recessed, side -on or detached garage. The applicant initially did not meet this requirement, but has since revised the plans to provide decorative driveway treatments and two lots with recessed garages. Furthermore, staff has verified that the site layout is now in compliance with the ENSP development standards. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2015-00111 AND DRC2015-00580 — PULTE HOMES June 30, 2015 Page 2 There are a total of three floor plans proposed that range in size from a 3,253 square foot plan to a 4,168 square foot plan. One of the homes is single -story, while the other four are two-story, which is in compliance with the ENSP requirement that a minimum of twenty-five (25) percent of the lots contain single -story homes. The Conceptual Landscape Plan shows the proposed landscape throughout the front yard areas as well as along the rear yard slopes and along the corner side yard (east perimeter). Based on the size of the landscape area of the site, the types of proposed landscape and plant materials, and the regional location, the water budget calculations show that the project will be in compliance with the City's water budget requirement. The Conceptual Landscape Plan also indicates that the applicant is proposing 990 square feet of new Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) area in addition to the 3,300 square feet of existing LMD area. Staff expressed to the applicant that the addition of new LMD area would only be supported by staff if the entire new area as well as an equally sized area within the existing LMD were designed to incorporate material that does not require water usage. The applicant is now proposing to install rockscape (native gray cobble rock) within the 990 square feet of new LMD area as well as within 910 square feet of the existing LMD area. Related Cases: The project involves a request for a Minor Exception to allow for an additional 2 feet of wall height. The requested increase in height will only occur on the corner side yard (east perimeter) of Lot 1 as well as on the interior side yard (west perimeter) of Lot 5. According to the rough grading plan and details, the proposed pad grades match the Conceptual Grading Plans that were approved by the Planning Department and no changes are being requested. Staff is in the process of notifying the adjacent property owners of the Minor Exception request and will update the Design Review Committee on any feedback received. 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: Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that the architectural styles listed above are accurately represented. There are, however, a few minor elements that staff recommends should be incorporated into the design of the proposed plans/elevations: a. Plan 1 Ranch incorporates a covered porch entrance along the front elevation. However, the plans are not clear as to whether the siding will wrap around the side elevations of the projection. Therefore, staff recommends requiring the siding on the porch to be wrapped along the side elevations. b. Plan 2 San Juan incorporates a shed roof awning above the first floor window on front elevation. Staff recommends that the awning have exposed rafter tales to match the eave design along the rest of the house. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2015-00111 AND DRC2015-00580 — PULTE HOMES June 30, 2015 Page 3 C. Plan 3 Bungalow incorporates battered stucco columns along the front and rear elevations. Staff recommends using a different material, such as wood, that is more complimentary to this architectural style. d. Plan 3 Bungalow shows a mix of different window types, from horizontal sliders to double hung. For consistency purposes, staff recommends providing double hung windows along the second -story of the front elevation. e. The applicant was previously encouraged to provide additional design elements/materials along the rear elevation. In doing so, material/stone wainscot was added. Staff does not find the addition of this material to be in good design and requests that the material be removed. Four of the proposed homes have decorative shutters. However, the submitted plans do not show the type of material that will be used for the shutters. In an effort to keep other materials from being used that may not be complimentary to the design of the home, staff recommends that the applicant use a high density wood grain foam for all shutters. g. The submitted plans show that all elevations on all homes are designed to have foam window and door trim. Staff recommends that the window trim as well as door headers be designed to be trowel -smoothed stucco. h. Various elevations include white garage doors. However, staff is concerned that this color is too generic and could be changed to something that will compliment the color palette of these homes. Therefore, staff suggests providing a condition that allows the Planning Director to review and approve an alternative garage color in place of the proposed white garage doors. 2. The Conceptual Landscape Plan does not indicate the proposed methods of irrigation throughout the project site. Due to the recent drought related changes, the State of California Water Board (Executive Order B-29-15) is prohibiting irrigation with potable water outside of newly constructed homes that is not delivered by drip or micro spray systems. Therefore, staff recommends including a condition that requires micro spray or drip irrigation only to be provided. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of the project subject to the applicant revising the plans to resolve the above -mentioned Secondary issues. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA J U N E 16, 2015 - 7 : 00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist Il for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 16, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA J U N E 29 2015 - 7 : 00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on May 20, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MAY 19, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher x Francisco Oaxaca x Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger x Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00216 —SPECTRUM SERVICES FOR VERIZON WIRELESS - A request to construct a 70-foot tall co - locatable monopine wireless communication facility at Price Self Storage located on the east side of Haven Avenue and south of the 1-210 Freeway within the Low (L) Zoning District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 6599 Haven Avenue — APN: 1076-331-31. 1 of 3 ACTION 7:00 P.M. A. The Committee recommended the project move forward to the Planning Commission for review but with the requirement that the mono -pine have branches of adequate length to screen the antennas. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO MAY 19, 2015 CUCAMONGA B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00609 - SMARTLINK FOR AT&T B. The Committee - A request to construct a 70-foot tall co -locatable monopine wireless recommended . the communication facility at Price Self Storage located on the east side of Project move forward Haven Avenue and south of the 1-210 Freeway within the Low (L) Zoning to the Planning District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 6599 Haven Avenue — Commission forreview but with the APN: 1076-331-31. requirement that the mono -pine have branches of adequate length to screen the antennas. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00931— C. The Committee DON CLOUGHESY FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONA FIRE PROTECTION recommended the DISTRICT (RCFPD) - A request for site plan and architectural review of a project move forward proposed Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) training center to the Planning at the existing Jersey RCFPD Station #174 within Medium Impact Heavy Commission for Industrial (MIHI) Development District, located at 11297 Jersey Boulevard — review. APN: 0229-111-34. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT D. The Committee DRC2014-00932 — DON CLOUGHESY FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA recommended the FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (RCFPD) - A request to operate a Fire Training project move forward Center at an existing Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) to the Planning Station #174 within the Medium Impact Heavy Industrial (MIHI) Development Commission for District, located at 11297 Jersey Boulevard — APN: 0229-111-34. Staff has review. prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW E. The Committee DRC2014-01139 — FRITO-LAY - A request to construct a 46,836 square recommended the foot warehouse addition to an existing 430,643 square foot office, Project move forward warehouse, and manufacturing facility on 37.05 acres of land within the to the Planning General Industrial GI District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Commission for ( ) review. Avenue and Fourth Street - APN: 021007128. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2014-01135, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01136. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT F. The Committee DRC2014-01135 — FRITO-LAY - A request to exceed the 75-foot recommended the maximum building height for the construction of a 92-foot high, project move forward 46,836 square foot warehouse addition to an existing 430,643 square foot to the Planning Commission for office, warehouse, and manufacturing facility on 37.05 acres of land within review. 2of3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO MAY 19, 2015 Ca'UCAMONGA the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street - APN: 021007128. Related Files: Design Review DRC2014-01139 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01136. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. II IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 3 of 3 None. 8:27 P.M. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MAY 19, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00216 —SPECTRUM SERVICES FOR VERIZON WIRELESS - A request to construct a 70-foot tall co - locatable monopine wireless communication facility at Price Self Storage located on the east side of Haven Avenue and south of the 1-210 Freeway within the Low (L) Zoning District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 6599 Haven Avenue — APN: 1076-331-31. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00609 - SMARTLINK FOR AT&T - A request to construct a 70-foot tall co -locatable monopine wireless communication facility at Price Self Storage located on the east side of 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO MAY 19, 2015 CUCAMONGA Haven Avenue and south of the 1-210 Freeway within the Low (L) Zoning District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 6599 Haven Avenue — APN: 1076-331-31. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00931 — DON CLOUGHESY FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (RCFPD) - A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) training center at the existing Jersey RCFPD Station #174 within Medium Impact Heavy Industrial (MINI) Development District, located at 11297 Jersey Boulevard — APN: 0229-111-34. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00932 — DON CLOUGHESY FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (RCFPD) -A request to operate a Fire Training Center at an existing Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) Station #174 within the Medium Impact Heavy Industrial (MINI) Development District, located at 11297 Jersey Boulevard — APN: 0229-111-34. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-01139 — FRITO-LAY - A request to construct a 46,836 square foot warehouse addition to an existing 430,643 square foot office, warehouse, and manufacturing facility on 37.05 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street - APN: 021007128. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2014-01135, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01136. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-01135 — FRITO-LAY - A request to exceed the 75-foot maximum building height for the construction of a 92-foot high, 46,836 square foot warehouse addition to an existing 430,643 square foot office, warehouse, and manufacturing facility on 37.05 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street - APN: 021007128. Related Files: Design Review DRC2014-01139 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01136. 2 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO MAY 19, 2015 CiUCAMONOA II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. II IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on May 7, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag May 19, 2015 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00216 — SPECTRUM SERVICES, INC. FOR VERIZON WIRELESS — A request to construct a 85-foot high co -locatable wireless communication facility in the form of a pine tree at Price Self Storage located on the east side of Haven Avenue and south of the 210 freeway within the Low (L) Zoning District (2- 4 dwelling units per acre) at 6599 Haven Avenue — APN: 1076-331-34. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00609 — SMARTLINK FOR AT&T — A request to construct a 85-foot high co -locatable wireless communication facility in the form of a pine tree at Price Self Storage located on the east side of Haven Avenue and south of the 210 freeway within the Low (L) Zoning District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 6599 Haven Avenue — APN: 1076-331-34. Background: The City has received applications from Verizon and AT&T for the development of two separate wireless communication facilities at Price Self -Storage, which is located on the east side of Haven Avenue and south of the 210 freeway - Conditional Use Permit DRC2014-00216 (Verizon) and Conditional Use Permit DRC2014-00609 (AT&T). Verizon proposes locating their facility at the northeast corner of the self -storage facility, with their equipment within one of the adjacent self -storage units. AT&T, originally proposed placing their facility closer to the center of the self - storage facility, with the trunk of the facility rising out of a storage unit and the equipment located in an adjacent storage unit. Staff encouraged the applicants to work together on a single co -located facility. Staff also informed both carriers that AT&T's proposed location close to the center of the project site was preferred as it was further from the adjacent single family residences to the east and was less visible from public view. At this time, both Verizon and AT&T have jointly agreed to move forward with one wireless facility located at the northeast corner of project site (Verizon's proposed location). The applicants have informed staff that this location was chosen as AT&T was not prepared to construct their facility until an undetermined date in the future, while Verizon was prepared to construct their facility immediately. The originally proposed facility by both carriers had a height of 70 feet. The new co -located facility has a height of 85 feet; the extra height necessary to meet both carriers' coverage needs. Project Overview: The applicants propose constructing an 85-foot tall, co -located wireless communication facility at Price Self -Storage. The tower and support equipment will be located at the northeast corner of the site, approximately 55 feet from the east property line. The tower will be in the form of a pine tree with the ground mounted equipment for both carriers located within separate storage units adjacent to the tower. Verizon's antennas will be mounted 76 feet above ground level, with AT&T's antennas mounted 64 feet above ground level. The proposed equipment includes a backup generator for Verizon which will be located on the opposite side of the tower from the equipment enclosure. The project site is directly adjacent to a single-family Residential Zoning District. Section 17.106.030 of the Development Code requires that wireless communication facilities located within 300 feet of residential structures be co -locatable and be approved by a DRC AGENDA CUP DRC2014-00216 & CUP DRC2014-00609 SPECTRUM SERVICES, INC. FOR VERIZON WIRELESS & SMARTLINK FOR AT&T May 19, 2015 Page 2 Conditional Use Permit. Staff sent out a notice to all property owners located within 660 feet of the project site for Verizon's application on March 19, 2014, and on July 9, 2014, for AT&T's application, as required by the Development Code for Conditional Use Permits. Staff received two phone calls and two emails from property owners concerned about Verizon's project and two calls related to ATT's project. The residents felt that the Verizon facility would block their views of the surrounding landscape and that both facilities would potentially cause negative health impacts. It should be noted that the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) limits municipalities from denying wireless communication facilities based on health concerns. Staff requested that each applicant explore relocating their facilities to one of the commercial centers located at the northeast and northwest corners of Haven Avenue and the 210 freeway. The applicants informed staff, after researching both prospective sites, that there was not adequate lease area available for their equipment shelter at the site at the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and the 210 Freeway, as the site is already developed with a wireless communication facility. The property owners of the commercial center at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and the 210 Freeway were not interested in placing a wireless facility within their development as they felt that it may hinder future development on the site. Neighborhood Meetinq: Verizon held a neighborhood meeting to discuss their project with the surrounding property owners at 5:00 p.m. on January 21, 2015, at Central Park, with approximately 15 residents in attendance. Issues raised at the meeting included the height of facility, which was felt would block their views, and health impacts related to living adjacent to a wireless communication facility. The residents informed the applicant that the existing self -storage facility had created some adverse impacts, such as light and noise issues. The residents felt that it would be more appropriate to relocate the facility to one of the commercial centers on the north side of the 210 freeway. The applicant stated that the height of the facility was necessary to meet their coverage requirements and to provide adequate area for a second carrier to co -locate on the facility. Regarding the issue of perceived health impacts, there are no studies which show that living adjacent to a wireless communication facility causes negative health impacts. The (FCC) regulations restrict municipalities from denying a wire communication facility based on health concerns. Staff Comments: Staff has informed both applicants that the City does not support the proposed location at the northeast corner of the self -storage facility, as it is too close to the adjacent single-family residences to the east and is too visible from public view. Based upon the site, community input, the adjacent Residential District and the concurrent request from two wireless carriers, it is staff's conclusion that both carriers co -locate on a facility located nearer the center of the storage facility as originally proposed by AT&T (see Attachment A). This location will reduce the visual impact of the facility on the adjacent single-family residences and from the adjacent public streets, and provide a greater distance separation from the residences. DRC AGENDA CUP DRC2014-00216 & CUP DRC2014-00609 SPECTRUM SERVICES, INC. FOR VERIZON WIRELESS & SMARTLINK FOR AT&T May 19, 2015 Page 3 Major Issues: The Committee should provide input and direction on both proposals and which location is better suited to lessen the visual impact, blend with the built environment, be sensitive to the adjacent Residential District and provide one facility that will serve two carriers. Secondary Issues: None Staff Recommendation: Based upon the issues outlined the Staff Report, staff recommends that the Committee review the project layout and that the applicants be directed to redesign the project with a co -located facility closer to the center of the project site (AT & T location). Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag mm SECTOR IROIOSEG aut 2900 wRN 9A CERRrt05. CA G 902W0] smartlink —D' - N N ANTENNA/RRU SCHEDULES 9 IRNNER CA 92612 R M +rer a<vRm .vmws n2 }tnemtul vum wi e rouu Imlr•wr Raul, tm vrn xcmn I:.) a. anuR w PxAwn9 aaxoa T ` � SECTOR'C'340' _ _ CONNELL DESIGN GROUP, LLC L tti � °eriaueri�,0mr°`'9I9 i t I „ranZD . ITT J ° \ sn SECTOR'A' tt ,,,tee, wR,� ),Ea, nawo• k_ 115° \ avA i ® rvI ,ur umRw vAn i (p) mmo 9wcwc2»n tw wN� ro ^ to w,u • � t: ,mw SECTOR'B' 225° SELFCLV23 �ros9w m„m;mu PRICE SELF STORAGE lieMRnia�`(n nu Wltv[rE vw m�iW 6599 HAVEN AVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91737 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY �a g sNEET rr,tF ANTENNA/RRU SCHEDULE, € EQUIPMENT AND ANTENNA NmE: NE n EF LAYOUTS MONOPIBMNCHES NOT Iv),rer — i SNEEf NUNBER SOWN ON GRAM% TO WMN11 ANTENNA LAYOUT SCALE: � 2 EQUIPMENT LAYOUT �� . 1 /4-2 1/2"=1'-0" 0 t 2 SCALE: m x I Vicinity Map I "Tile Report Legal Description ir; 4 w'c"PQ1... Assessor's Parcel No. ,!a ,se en O u or�cl � o�xl M woos: a wax alone area �'� ,p1,iN ar a,n.I. V� u --aua:spar"�""m�ELLTT ate'n`I V., vv Mwurer.1 •pAa�M, xRvgi2 pv, P�fR, a u�aEm`r slw�r`"'msilai m,xiiu'".s rur, wplwlr.��E,�me�rs�,". a°r�n .s or "•os, a M alla o M mal. n:La�al n�"lKOTrnaa. � on +wc m ms �asnwExr'ru 1m -wx Hi a Qw�,swn Lxurn Ea 11e "•nmsa x'vL i�u'ro r00:a"na: v mla m,xr a alorsi auno�i ,la gw m a ¢minx la xom oa :,mwEm xo 1mi-axir°a°r"m'wnu aws Iao:1m IULat �EIwAaMa ,.awNa.. as aux�x aw T,,, ma w o Access Route/Lease Area/Utility Route Geographic Coordinates at Proposed Monopine w��(a�,n« mvmn•rzsj a a��xs a r�i rm. o.w a i a� A � harts O w sscaas CI m M Qaan xLsuanm mt�s¢w. nL ..w a ttrtmLx a. m�ii Iwws oar mcsrmm umer.•x .ax+L o.lw a Ism M•w ml BasisKof eeaTingsa • I,m,xw m, Bench M arks • I,iq>rRn C0a3'EM�. 0[v,nq'. 119x3 R[I pA'w mG Date of Survey GRAPHIC SCALE 60 0 30 63 IT FEET Boundary Detail I I Legend N w.%a R� o � � � PACARI s� x�al�,rFT I 1 N _STREET + • Detail"A" T— — —T— — T s E: "-a I 1 I I II II PARCEL I PARCEL MAP NO. 18190 P.M.S. .S2119/8J I, In I I I I F= II I E Ig I r J 1 I s`m rzS"s"cn e I J . I I x 1 J - HEATHER STREET k Lease .— r. w x c �/ \ % 1�1 t [Tmc Keanc / \ g I mis':n<ss"�wr L 1 aw 129W PARK PLAZA ERNE CERRITOS. CA 90703 smardink 626 C ADMIRAL DR., SUITE 313 ANNAP0LIS. MD 21401 PHONE: (410) 263-5455 CONNELL DESIGN GROUP, LLC Iwwniam m�soMunAiw`rceaa�rsTua:nm II/N/la PE'nSEa EELCRNnC CmnD. a.NiE , LESL P CAIVADA SURVEYING, INC. .n11 rouTlL cr u 1— CLV2963 PRICE SELF STORAGE 6599 HAVEN AVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91737 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHEET TITLE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY SHEET NUMDER LS-1 s:.aT I L SITE PLAN PROPOSED AT&T EWIPMENi ROOM INSIDE (E) STORAGE SPACES p117.2118 k 2119, TOTAL 600 1 I/ SO.R. NCLUOING OVERHEAD M'tENNA SPACE e PARCEL I PARCEL MAP NO. 18190 E ( I P.MNB.rors I I HEATHER STREET I RIo10� iY °9[ - A��A¢x�Mi ,1101 12 I ENLARGED SITE PLAN I , T6E—TkE— !i II l I. i'II ,/ll,l I� i II;I III! ttt a-aw I 11 SECTOR'B' 225' 1 I'. I� I I I I I � I f NOTE MONOPNE BRMCIN:S NOT sxowN oN DRAvnNG roR cuam SECTOR'C' 300° N• M rs I —ikC—TAF Om4aID-T n� e (EI eaurc SECTOR'A' 115° w0iw+n °ARwc 9'ACE g�a 6y OT 0 10 20' 1 at&t 12900 PARK 1121 DRNE CERFrt09. I 90703 smartlink 18401 VON KARMAN AVE. STE 400 IFNNE LA 92fi12• CONNELL DESIGN T _C „nvn. CLV2963 PRICE SELF STORAGE 6599 HAVEN AVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91737 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHEET TRLE SITE PLAN / ENLARGED SITE PLAN SHEET NUMBER A-1 ^z �n �� at •V a5 � L 5, C13 nE a [[ee k € �Jz<s w i — o ^g Am U4r� v filMe � �'r{ N h t AA - I Ills I I .o-,[ � — Z O I III' �r 3xnxl,Hn wxixry xxrn xYUN .o-.rr Np31xn raa u tvn mwepa .o-,i[ a 3,�p1ur3�rwLxr ,vn mswmu ,a tv W J S O Z N e 4 I I.IIII ti k +4 — r. ro x 1 I .o-.s I � .mum nwvxr x.bm and ,o-,rr V I 3wfll3lxn iea vA Ivly UH1Wd O .o-,i[ �'uxn s»nl. ian msoma.o-.�v F W J W F to sAiaue .a[eown wt so aw .o-A[ y� l ENGINEERING 2013 CA FORK. —1NG CODE "" GLIFORN. FIRE CODE 2013 CAUFORNIA ENERGY CODE 2013 CAIFORNM MECHANICAL CODE WOM-222-G OR IATEST EDITION GENERALNOTES THE FACIUTY R UNMANNED AND NOT FOR HUMAN HABITATION, A TECHNICIAN WILL 7 THE SITE AS REOUIRED FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE. THE PROJECT WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANF DISTURBANCE OR EFFECT ON DRAINAGE: NO SANITARY SEWER SERVICE. POTABLE WATER. OR TRASH DISPO IS REWIRED AND NO COMMERCIAL SGNACE IS PROPOSED. SITE INFORMATION PROPERTY OWNER: PRICE S- STORAGE ADDRESS: 23622 GLB/SA ROAD SURE NO CAV.BA6.A.5. GA 91]02 KT: -N CHISNELL PHONE: I—) A65.5900 , 2 PPU N AppRESS: 12900 PARE PLW 0R, lR0 FLOOR CEW8T05. G 90703 CONTACT: ALO120 LUDO PNONC (562) Al2-6670 AlFUCANEPRESENTATNE: ADCRESSr R 6N01 WN K25=2 AME, STE A00 RnNE. G 92612 TNOE I— 6]): "... 06.03'. 3R.135008 LOMCRUOE (MAD 83): LONGRUDE/URNOE TYPE: -11T 3� 30.91',-1173>5253 MAD 63 GROUND 1465.4 FEET APN A: 1076-]31-31 mnG Ju—ICTON: CITY of RANCHO CUCAMONGA CURRENT 20MNG: POWER COMPANY: iELCO OOUPANY: NO- NE1cH8ORHODD COMMERCIAL SCE VCRDON PROPOSED USE: LEASE AREA (ST7: u ANNED TELECOM FAGLM 600 SF PROJECT TEAM PROJER u E(JQRm: ATAT CONNEu DESIGN GROUP. LL 12900 PARK PLAZA OR. 26A55 RANCNO PKWY BOOTH SRO FLOOR ME FOREST. CA. 9200 C 5 CA TON3 CONNELL URSUU MORA1 "ONET(9� .N16 PHONE (562) 229-2283 6c...eIlOc9nmA6mTgrgmUp,cem BITE Ac 20N1)G; SMAOLWN LLNOL LLC. ITCNE31 BRYAN rtCMELLKBRYANt IBA01 VON 'A RIRUAN AME STE ACO u&01 Al R92612 AYE. STE A00 9N1NE G 92612 mO E. G 92612 PNONG (71A) 72A-2]10 PHONE (71A) 72A-2310 m,mnel.eOc tosmenrm%1lccom ,H.btO AT" BLACK AND TC R. BUG Ax vu1aNDF m PARK Pu7A DRIVE 12>50 [ENTER COURT DRIVE, SR 600 CONTACT: G IMO CONTA-. G 90703 CONTACT: FAUZ YAOOOB CONTACT: KEN PARSONS RNDNE: (06) 253-1190 wnonatpOwSenanGcon(99 n./31500Ptl.cam ctinp.cem SITE NUMBER: CLV2963 SITE NAME: PRICE SELF STORAGE 6599 HAVEN AVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91737 VICINITY MAP FOOTHILL FREEWAY 10 PROJECT LOCATION 4 Q O } < Q Q 2 m 41 Z U > Y � W Q BASELINE ROAD N PALO ALTO STREET PALO ALTO STREET W E 5 THGMAS BROTIERS PAGE NO SCALE DRIVING DIRECTIONS DIRECTIONS OM AT&T OFFICE E 1. START OUTFRGOING EAST ON PARK PLAZA OR TOWARD SHOEMAKER AVE. 2. TURN LEFT ONTO SHOEMAKER AVE. 3. TURN LEFT ONTO ARTESIA BLVD. A. MERGE ONTO CA-91 W/ARTESIA MY W. 5. MERGE ONTO 1-605 N/SAN GABRIEL RIVER MY N VIA EXIT 178. 6. MERGE ONTO 1-210 E/FOOTHILL MY E VIA EXIT 27A TOWARD SAN BERNARDINO 7. 1-210 E/FOOTHILL MY E BECOMES CA-210 E/FOOTHILL MY E B. TAKE THE HAVEN AVE EXIT, EXIT 59. 9. TURN RIGHT ONTO HAVEN AVE. IO.MAKE A U-TURN AT VICTORIA ST ONTO HAVEN AVE. THE SITE IS ON THE RIGHT. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA JAN 2 7 2015 RECEIVED - PLANNING - ZONING DRAWING--1 IF USING 11'X17" PLOT. DRAWINGS WILL BE HALF SCALE PROJECT DESCRIPTION MRELESS PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A WIRELESS ANTENNA SITE. THE SCOPE WILL CONSIST W_ FOLLOW NO On OF ' TALL MONOPINC N TD(12, 8'-0" TALL PANEL ANTENNASNNN (2A, NR (A) DO SURGE SUPPRESSORS 2'-Ob MICROWAVE 015H ANCNw [ONSTRUCTIOv OF A NEW EWIPMENT AACA LOCATED WITHIN — STORAGE UNRS YmH: (1) cPs MET.. (6) EDl11PNEM RACKS (I) EMERGENCY OCxERATOR WITN 210 GALLON DIESEL FUEL LANK ACOA NIERLCUB ES AND NYBfiD FIBER CABLES FROM (P) EWPUENT ROOM TO (P) NAPO TEO AND NO POWER SERVICE FROM (E) P.O.C. TO (P) LEASE AREA. I DRAWING INDEX DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT $UBGON NO DIMENSIONS I E SHALL A CO ALL PUNS A ®SOUTHERN CALIFORNIARN E JCS SITTENQ S1HAL A CEDUN�.TELOr SM07IFY 800-2T2-2800 THE ENGINEER IN wRrtI,. OF ANY w IN¢ RTm[ WA m 015CREPK OR BEFOREI PROC ME WORK OR BE RCSPO.NSYBLE FOR SAVE. at&t 12900 PARK PLAZA DRIVE CE11IT09, CA 90703 smartlink 18401 VON KARMAN AYE. STE A00 IRMNE CA 92612 DONNELL DESIGN GROUP, LLC 1�y/rA CLV2963 PRICE SELF STORAGE 6599 HAVEN AVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91737 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SH TITLE TITLE SHEET SHEET NUMBER T-1 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag May 19, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00931 — DON CLOUGHESY FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (RCFPD) - A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) training center at the existing Jersey RCFPD Station #174 within Medium Impact Heavy Industrial (MIHI) Development District, located at 11297 Jersey Boulevard — APN: 0229-111-34. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00932 — DON CLOUGHESY FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (RCFPD) - A request to operate a Fire Training Center at an existing Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) Station #174 within the Medium Impact Heavy Industrial (MIHI) Development District, located at 11297 Jersey Boulevard — APN: 0229-111-34. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. Background: The Rancho Cucamonga Fire District (RCFPD [applicant]) proposes the expansion of the existing RCFPD Station Number 174, which is located at the southwest corner of Jersey Boulevard and Milliken Avenue at 11297 Jersey Boulevard. Fire Station Number 174 was originally approved on September 27, 1989, (CUP 89-23) that included the fire station, maintenance facility, training center and training tower (36,328 square feet of structures). The approval was modified on December 11, 1991, (CUP Modification 89-23) for phase two of the project which included the design review of the maintenance building and training facility, training tower, and pump test enclosure. The approval was modified again on September 28, 1994, (CUP Modification 89-23) to add a heliport to the fire station. The project site is currently developed with a 17,034 square foot main fire station building, a 14,600 square foot maintenance/service building, a 2,349 square foot warehouse/covered carport, 40 parking stalls and a helipad. The facility also includes a flash over chamber and a two-story burn container structure, both of which are used for live fire demonstrations and training events. Project Overview: The proposed expansion of Fire Station Number 174 includes the construction of a 14,789 square foot, two-story fire training center, a 2,455 square foot parts/storage building, a 3,186 square foot fitness building, a 3,064 square foot training house and a 15,415 square foot multi -story training tower with an adjacent open lattice training structure, for a total of 38,909 square feet of new structures. The project also includes a complete reconfiguration of the parking lot for an overall parking count of 131 spaces. The proposed 70-foot tall live fire training tower will replace the existing two-story live fire training structure. In addition to the new structures, the existing flashover chamber building will be relocated on -site and will include a scrubber to capture and filter emissions created by the live burns. A decomposed granite running track will be located along the perimeter of the site. The new training facility will be used by the RCFPD, local utility agencies and surrounding community colleges with firefighter programs. The hours -of -operation of the new training facility will be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., with seven (7) full time staff members. The existing fire station currently has six (6) firefighters and five (5) maintenance staff on site during the largest shift (firefighters work 24 hour shifts). The training facility will also host fire personnel graduations along with an annual public open house, with approximately 4,000 visitors on -site for a four (4) hour period. A total of 131 on -site parking spaces are proposed. This includes 40 parking spaces available for public use, 56 staff parking spaces behind gates and 35 temporary parking spaces available for special events. Parking for the once yearly open house event will be provided on -site, along Jersey Boulevard and on the vacant lot across Jersey Boulevard from the fire station. DRC AGENDA DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00931 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00932 - DON CLOUGHESY FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT May 19, 2015 Page 2 The new two-story fire training building will be located. between the existing fire station and maintenance/service building and will include an outdoor open plaza and roof top garden. The training building has a modern appearance that includes a two-story glass entrance. The exterior finishes consist of metal panels, sand blasted CMU color matched to the existing fire station and service building, troweled plaster, and a standing seam metal roof. The rooftop equipment will be screened by a corrugated metal enclosure. The fitness building and parts/warehouse building will be located to the south of the new training building and will be constructed color matched CMU block and bead blasted white CMU block. The fire training buildings include a 70-foot tall training tower designed to simulate a multi -story office building that includes an attached single -story building design to simulate an in -line commercial center. Adjacent to the training tower is a detached two-story building designed to simulate a single-family residence. The training buildings will be constructed of color matched CMU along with gray and white split face block. A 70-foot tall open lattice communication tower will be located next to the fire training tower and will also be used for fire training purposes. Metal shipping containers will be located on each floor of the training buildings to contain the live fires during the training exercises. The open flash over chamber building is constructed of metal siding with a metal roof. Staff Comments: The proposed project is well designed and is architecturally integrated with the existing on -site buildings. The main training building has a contemporary appearance that includes the use of sand -blasted CMU block that is color matched to the brick used on the existing fire station. The color matched CMU is carried over fire training buildings to provide a uniform appearance. The main pedestrian walkway from Jersey Boulevard leads past a proposed 9/1.1 Memorial to the main entrance to the training building and the open plaza beyond. The new public parking lot has been redesigned to include a second drive entrance to assist traffic flow through the project site. The project complies with all related Development Code criteria, including building setbacks (45 feet from Milliken Avenue, 35 feet from Jersey Boulevard, and 5 feet from the interior property lines), height limits (70 feet), landscape coverage (5 percent), and Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The project exceeds each of the minimum setbacks, provides 15 percent landscape coverage, and has a FAR of .27 percent, well below the maximum FAR of .50 percent. The site provides adequate on -site parking except for the once yearly public open -house events, which already take place at the existing facility. The training events and graduations may also exceed the proposed permanent parking spaces and will require use of the on -site temporary over -flow parking spaces. Staff feels that the use of temporary and off -site parking is justified by the limited number of special events and training events that will take place and the fact that these events already take place at the project site, which currently has a fewer number of on -site parking spaces. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project layout and architecture and, if they are accepting, forward the project to the Planning Commission for review. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. TOM GRAHN May 19, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-01139 — FRITO-LAY - A request to construct a 46,836 square foot warehouse addition to an existing 430,643 square foot office, warehouse, and manufacturing facility on 37.05 acres of land in the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street; APN: 021007128. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2014-01135, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014- 01136 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-01135 — FRITO-LAY - A request to exceed the 75-foot maximum building height for the construction of a 92 foot high, 46,836 square foot warehouse addition to an existing 430,643 square foot office, warehouse, and manufacturing facility on 37.05 acres of land in the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street; APN: 021007128. Related Files: Design Review DRC2014-01139 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01136. Design Parameters: Frito-Lay currently maintains a 430,643 square foot office, manufacturing, and warehouse facility at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street. This primarily concrete tilt -up building includes a 33,244 square foot office and 397,399 square feet of manufacturing and warehousing floor area. The applicant is proposing a 46,836 square foot warehouse addition on the west side of their existing warehouse building, adjacent to the employee parking area, and roughly parallel to their Archibald Avenue street frontage. The primary feature of the 46,836 square foot warehouse addition is a 32,590 square foot, 92 foot tall Automatic Storage Retrieval System (ASRS) warehouse. An adjacent 14,246 square foot low bay (with mezzanine) warehouse addition will provide 11 dock high doors for truck loading. The architectural design and construction of their existing facility is primarily concrete tilt up. The proposed ASRS building is designed to be constructed of textured panels, painted white and gray, and the low bay warehouse building addition is proposed as concrete tilt -up construction to match the existing facility. The proposed building addition is set back approximately 330 feet from Archibald Avenue and 450 feet from Fourth Street. Within the City's Industrial Districts, buildings are limited to a maximum height of 75 feet, and buildings over 75 feet are subject to review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed ASRS building addition is 92 feet from finish grade. Due to the proximity of the proposed building addition to the Ontario International Airport, the City submitted for, and obtained, FAA approval of the proposed 100-foot high building addition. The FAA approval is very specific, requires the building to be marked/lighted in conformance with FAA advisory circulars, restricts construction equipment to the same height limit, and expires on February 22, 2016. Primary truck traffic will continue from their Fourth Street driveway, located near the southeast corner of the project site. The existing visitor and employee parking located south of the office and west of the ASRS building will remain; additional employee parking is proposed south of their existing parking lot. Parking proposed for the facility substantially exceeds parking requirements. A total of 295 parking spaces are required, and 345 parking spaces will be provided. A total of 54 truck/trailer parking spaces are required at a ratio of 1 parking space for each loading dock door; a total of 43 tractor and 224 trailer parking spaces will be provided on site. All tractor and trailer parking spaces are screened by the existing Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street 10-foot high screen walls. The applicant has provided several perspectives of the proposed building from Fourth Street, Archibald Avenue, and surrounding properties to demonstrate the appearance of the proposed building. These perspectives show current images from Google Maps Street View with comparable renderings of the project. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The project design initially proposed metal siding for the ASRS building addition. The applicant has addressed staff's concerns regarding the metal siding and has proposed using textured panels instead. These textured panels are shown in a horizontal and vertical orientation, which when painted their respective white and gray colors will provide for visual interest. 2. The low bay warehouse building is designed as a concrete tilt -up, painted gray with white accents to match the existing warehouse building; and no variation in building material (concrete, sandblasted concrete, textured block, brick, etc.) are proposed. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: All of the existing perimeter screen walls and perimeter landscaping will remain. Several trees in close proximity to the proposed warehouse expansion and expanded parking area will be removed. Additional trees and shrubs will be provided at the expanded parking area. Additional trees should be planted in proximity to the ASRS and low bay warehouse expansion building. 2. Additional landscape islands, tree wells, etc, should be provided throughout the existing and proposed visitor and employee parking based on the following: a. 1 tree should be provided for each 3 parking spaces. At maturity, trees should reach a minimum height and spread of forty feet (40') so as to form a shade canopy over parking stalls. b. A minimum of 10 percent (10%) of the total off-street parking area (excluding the area for tractor and trailer parking), shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs, and appropriate ground cover. The parking area shall be computed by adding the areas use for access, drive aisles, stalls, maneuvering, and landscaping within that portion of the premises that is devoted to vehicular parking and circulation. Planters shall be separated from maneuvering and parking areas by a six inch (6"), raised concrete curb or equivalent. d. Tree planting wells located at the front of parking stalls shall contain a minimum of twenty-five (25) square feet and the smallest outside dimension shall not be less than five feet (5). e. Landscape planters along the sides of parking stalls shall contain a minimum area of ninety (90) square feet and the smallest outside dimension shall not be less than six feet (6'). Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: No policy issues have been identified. Staff Recommendation: With the Major and Secondary Issues addressed. to the satisfaction of the Committee, Staff recommends the Committee recommend approval of Design Review DRC2014-01139. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONCA MAY 5, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on April 22, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ;CHO CUCAMONGA APRIL 14, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. ACTION 7:00 p.m. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW A. The Committee DRC2014-01048 - RGA Office of Architectural Design for Oakmont Industrial recommended the Group - A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 161,000 square project move forward feet on a parcel of about 322,000 square feet (7.4 acres) within the General to the Planning Industrial (GI) District, located on the east side of Utica Avenue between Commission for 6th Street and 7th Street - APN: 0202-411-36. review. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA �aHG APRIL 14, 2015 CUCAMONGA II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 2 of 2 None. 7:12 p.m. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA CURo cA APRIL 14, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California il I. CALL To ORDER 711 Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01048 - RGA Office of Architectural Design for Oakmont Industrial Group - A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 161,000 square feet on a parcel of about 322,000 square feet (7.4 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located on the east side of Utica Avenue between 6th Street and 7th Street - APN: 0202-411-36. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA APRIL 14, 2015 RANCHO GUCAMONC4 III. 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. IV. 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, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on April 1, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith April 14, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01048 — RGA OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 161,000 square feet on a parcel of about 322,000 square feet (7.4 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located on the east side of the future alignment of Utica Avenue between 6th Street and 7th Street -- APN: 0209-411-36. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Design Parameters: The project site is a parcel with an approximate area of 322,000 square feet (7.4 acres). The parcel is 607 feet (east -west) by 512 feet (north to south). The parcel is vacant and is dominated by short grasses. The project site is one of three parcels that resulted from the subdivision of a property of about 25 acres that was owned by Coca-Cola and partially developed with one of their bottling facilities. That subdivision was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on December 12, 2012 (Related file: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19397). The project site is bound on the north by small industrial buildings and to the east by a logistics building of about 175,000 square feet. To the south is an office complex. Along the west side of the project site will be the future alignment of Utica Avenue which currently terminates near the northwest and southwest corners of the project site. To the west, on the opposite side of the future street, is another vacant parcel (one of the other parcels of the aforementioned subdivision). At the northwest corner of the project site is an easement area of about 3,500 square feet with dimensions of about 70 feet (east -west) and 76 feet (north -south) in favor of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) that is enclosed by a metal rod fence. The zoning of the property and all properties to the north, east, and south is General Industrial (GI) District while the zoning of the property to the west is Industrial Park (IP) District. The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of approximately 1,085 feet and 1,070 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to construct a logistics building of about 161,000 square feet. The height of the proposed building will vary due to the undulating parapet wall and slope of the roof (screened behind it). The building will have a maximum height of about 48 feet when measured from the finished grade to the top of the highest part of the parapet wall while the roof line will be about 1 to 5 feet lower than the adjoining parapet wall height. The building is speculative at this time. Typical for this type of building, there will be an office area located at the southwest corner of the building. The dock loading/storage area with 19 dock doors will be located on the south side of the building. There will be two points of access via new driveways at the southwest and northwest corners of the project site. The building is required to have 90 passenger vehicle parking stalls; 91 parking stalls will be provided. The proposed building will be of concrete tilt -up construction painted with a palette of several colors. The building will have form -lined concrete accents. An additional primary material will be metal accents while a secondary material will be glass panels. Generous amounts of blue -tinted glass have been provided at the office area and at various locations along the wall planes of the building that are most visible. An interesting feature of the building will be the well -articulated wall planes at the office area. Another characteristic that will add interest is the horizontally articulated vertical elements that interrupt the massing of primary wall planes. These vertical elements include glass panels. At various locations there are also horizontal metal accents that project from the wall plane. These accents punctuate the application of glass and provide shade relief. On all corners of the buildings, with the exception of the northeast corner, there are enhancement comprised of glass, DRC AGENDA DRC2014-01048 - RGA OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN April 14, 2015 Page 2 variations in color, metal canopies, score lines, and relief in the wall plane that, altogether, reflect the general appearance of the office corner. _ As is typical for this type of project and due to its operating characteristics and layout, landscaping will be generally concentrated along the street frontage of the project site. The average depth of landscape along the street will comply with the minimum 25 feet as specified in the Development Code. Along the north, south, and east sides of the project site the perimeter landscaping will be at least 5 feet in width with the exception of an area of about 120 feet in length (north to south) near the southeast corner of the building. At this location, the minimum width of the fire lane is 26 feet, as required by the Fire Department, and there are five (5) parallel parking stalls. The landscape strip is only about 2 feet in width adjacent to these parking stalls. However, staff considers this deficit to be acceptable as the landscape strip located between the north end of this set of parking stalls and the northeast corner of the project site (a distance of about 300 feet) is 10 feet wide, i.e. twice the required width. The landscape coverage is 10.8 percent - the minimum requirement is 10 percent for this Development District. The design and layout of the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and the design guidelines of the General Industrial (GI) District. The massing and height of the proposed building is consistent with that of a logistics building and its design will be consistent with the character of its surroundings which is principally industrial in nature. It is not expected that the project as proposed will detrimentally affect the use and operations of neighboring, existing, or future developments nor create traffic or pedestrian hazards. 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. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line -of -sight of the main entrance. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) screened behind a 4-foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of decorative masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone to match the building. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-01048 - RGA OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN April 14, 2015 Page 3 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back -flow devices, 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. 3. The employee lunch area shall have an overhead trellis with cross members spaced no more than 18 inches on center with minimum dimensions of 4 inches by 12 inches. Each support column shall have a decorative base that incorporates the architectural design and finishes/trim used on the building. The trellis shall be painted to match the building, and tables, chairs/benches, and waste receptacles shall be provided. 4. 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. 5. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 6. All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public view shall be constructed of decorative masonry blocks, i.e. slump stone, split -face, or have a decorative finish such as stucco. 7. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public right-of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the 25-foot setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway. 8. 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 project to the Planning Commission, and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA C ONCA MARCH 31, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Tri-Communities Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California il I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC — A request to subdivide 8.32 acres of land into 17 lots (Lots 1-16 for residential purposes and Lot 17 for an existing church) for a site located within the Very Low (VL) Zoning District (.1 - 2 units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0227-061-03 and 82. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, and Variance DRC2014-00219. 1 of 2 ACTION TOO P.M. A. The Committee recommended the project move forward to the Planning Commission for review. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MARCH 31, 2014 UCA CHO Nova II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. The meeting was attended by approximately 50 community members from Cross and Crown Lutheran Church and residents from the surrounding neighborhood. The church members were generally in favor of the modified project layout presented by the applicant. Residents to the north expressed opposition and submitted a petition signed by 86 residents. Their concerns included: • removal of a portion of a wall along the south side of Carnesi Drive; • a perceived reduction of neighborhood cohesion; • an increase in traffic; and • a perceived loss of property value due to smaller lot size. The residents felt the applicant should be required to redesign the project with access from Etiwanda Avenue through the Cross and Crown Church parking lot. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT 11 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. 2 of 2 7: 52 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag March 31, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC — A request to subdivide 8.32 acres of land into 17 lots (Lots 1-16 for residential purposes and Lot 17 for an existing church) for a site located within the Very Low (VL) Zoning District (.1 - 2 units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0227-061-03 and 82. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, and Variance DRC2014-00219. Background: The applicant, Storm Western Development, Inc., submitted an application for the subdivision of 8.32 acres of land into 17 lots. Sixteen lots for residential purposes, and with Lot 17 providing the new boundaries for Cross and Crown Lutheran Church, which is located on a portion of the project site (Exhibit I). Cross and Crown Lutheran Church, located at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Carnesi Drive (Exhibit B), is selling a portion of their property to the applicant, which was originally master -planned for expansion of the educational program of the church. The application includes General Plan and Etiwanda Community Plan Amendments to change the land use and zoning designations from Very Low (VL) Residential (.1-2 DU per acre) to Low (L) Residential (2-4 DU per acre) and a Variance for property line walls that range in height from 7 to 11 feet along the rear property lines of all 16 residential lots. House product for the lots is not a part of the project scope and will be submitted at a later date. Project Overview: The project site is vacant with the exception of Cross and Crown Lutheran Church at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Carnesi Drive and a perimeter wall along Carnesi Drive. The site is currently zoned Very Low (VL) residential and is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area. The narrowness of the site precludes developing a double -loaded street with lots that meet the 200-foot lot depth requirement. The applicant has requested to change the zoning designation to Low (L) Residential, which requires 100-foot lot depths. The existing single-family residences to the east were developed prior to incorporation of the City and are within the Low (L) Zoning District (Exhibits A and C). These existing lot sizes average approximately 7,500 square feet, below the 15,000 square foot average lot size required by the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The proposed lots comply with the 80-foot lot width and 100-foot lot depth requirements of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and range in size from 11,597 to 19,938 square feet, with an average lot size of 15,010 square feet. The applicant believes that the zone change will allow for the creation of a double -loaded new street that provides a density transition from the existing smaller lot development to the east and the existing larger one-half acre lot size development to the north. The new lots would also be compatible to the existing lots to the west, along Etiwanda Avenue, which range in size from 15,000 and 16,000 square feet (Exhibit C). The applicant is also requesting a Variance to permit combination walls (up to 5-foot retaining walls) with a maximum measured height of 11 feet for all 16 residential lots. The additional height is necessary to raise the rear yard areas of the lots in order for them to drain to the public street and to accommodate a waste water system. The applicant was unable to obtain an off -site drainage easement from the Mormon Church DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18936 — STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC. March 31, 2015 Page 2 to the south. The Mormon Church submitted a letter stating that they would rather face an 11-foot wall than disrupt their site to install the drainage facility. The applicant has also contacted homeowners to the east and west who will face the 7- to 10-foot high walls along the perimeter of the project and have obtained letters of acceptance for the additional wall heights. Access to the project will be from Carnesi Drive. The applicant submitted a Traffic Evaluation (Trames Solutions, Inc., August, 2104) which states that based on the trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment of the project, it is anticipated that the project will have a nominal impact on the surrounding roadway network. The Etiwanda Avenue/Carnesi Drive intersection would expect to have 7 additional trips in the morning and 10 additional trips in the evening because of the proposed project. The project is expected to add less than 100 trips per day to Carnesi Drive. The additional delays because of the proposed project are very minimal and are not anticipated to result in a significant traffic impact. The City's Traffic Engineer has reviewed the submitted traffic evaluation and concurs with the conclusions of the study that the proposed project will only have a minimal impact on Carnesi Drive and the nearest intersections. Meeting History: The project was originally deemed complete for Committee review on April 1, 2014. Since that date, the project has been reviewed by the public at two neighborhood meetings on April 14, 2014, and June 19, 2014, by the Design Review Committee on May 6, 2014, and at a Planning Commission Workshop on August 27, 2014. Neighborhood Meeting #1: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on April 14, 2014, at 6:00 p.m. at the Four Points Sheraton, with approximately 80 persons in attendance. Three main issues were raised at the meeting: The property owners to the east were in opposition to the previously proposed street connection to Pinon Street. These property owners stated that opening up Pinon Street, which currently dead ends into the project site, would greatly increase traffic due to vehicles looking for a shorter route to Etiwanda Avenue (Exhibit A). The property owners to the north (along Carnesi Drive) were in opposition to the demolition of the wall along the north side of the project site (south side of Carnesi Drive) to develop a public street to access the project site (Exhibit D). The property owners to the north were also in opposition to the proposed land use change from Very Low (VL) (25,000 square foot average lots) to Low (L) (15,000 square foot lots)(Exhibit C). The residents stated that it would increase traffic and decrease their property values. They also indicated that they did not want smaller lot homes facing their larger lot homes to the north. Design Review Committee Meetinq #1: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on May 6, 2014, at 7:00 p.m. The Committee recommended that the project be redesigned taking the concerns of the community into consideration. The meeting was attended by approximately 30 residents from the Toll Brothers neighborhood, which DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18936 — STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC. March 31, 2015 Page 3 is north of the project site. The Toll Brothers residents were in opposition to the project taking access from Carnesi Drive and the proposed General Plan and Etiwanda Specific Plan amendments. The residents stated that the wall along the south side of Carnesi Drive defined their community and removing it would negatively impact the aesthetics of the neighborhood and that changing the land use would lower their property values. The residents felt that the project should take access through the property of the church from Etiwanda Avenue. Neighborhood Meeting #2: The applicant held a second neighborhood meeting on June 19, 2014, at 6:00 p.m. at Etiwanda Gardens, with approximately 100 persons in attendance. The developer presented an updated layout which reduced the amount of wall to be removed along Carnesi Drive from 642 to 60 feet. The new layout created a cul-de-sac off of Carnesi Drive with an Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) gate instead of a through connection to Pinon Street and relocated the 4 lots facing Carnesi Drive to facing the new interior street. The Toll Brothers residents remained in opposition to the new layout, not wanting any portion of the wall removed in order to provide access to Carnesi Drive. The residents insisted that access should be taken from Etiwanda Avenue through the church property. The church members in attendance raised concerns that accessing the site through the church parking lot would potentially encumber the future expansion plans of the church. Planning Commission Workshop: The applicant held a Planning Commission Workshop in the Tri-Communities Room of City Hall on August 27, 2014, at 8:20 p.m. At the Workshop, the applicant outlined the advantages and disadvantages of 4 potential layouts of the project site (Exhibits E — H) and how they arrived at their decision to move forward with Layout #2 (Exhibit F), which takes access from Carnesi Drive with a cul-de-sac design. They felt that Layout #2 addressed the concerns of the property owners to the east, who were opposed to the project directly connecting to Pinion Street, and, the property owners to the north, who were opposed to the project removing the wall along Carnesi Drive and having smaller size lots homes facing their larger lot homes. Layout #2 provides a cul-de-sac with an emergency vehicle access gate, rather than a direct connection to Pinon Street, reducing the linear feet of the wall removed along Carnesi Drive from 642 to 60 feet and reorients the lots facing Carnesi Drive to face the new project street. The Commissioners commented that while the original layout (Layout #1 — Exhibit E) had many positive features, Layout #2 (Exhibit F) addressed many of the concerns raised by the neighboring property owners. The Commission observed that Layout #3 (Exhibit G), which was designed to meet the current Very Low (VL) zoning requirements, required the removal of more linear feet of wall along Carnesi Drive, created lots that were over 30 percent larger than and almost twice as deep as the lots to the north and eliminated the opportunity for an emergency vehicle access gate to provide a second access point to the existing development to the east. The Commissioners commented that Layout #4 (Exhibit H), which takes access from Etiwanda Avenue through the church parking lot with a double cul-de-sac, created an awkward street layout with multiple flag lots and greatly encumbered any future expansion of the church. The Commissioners concluded the meeting outlining that the applicant's next step would be to submit the layout they wished to move forward with for staff review. DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18936 — STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC. March 31, 2015 Page 4 Correspondences: Staff has received letters in opposition to the project from the property owners to the north of the project site. The letters outline the residents' objections to the removal of the wall along the south side of Carnesi Drive, stating that the wall was constructed by the developer of their homes, Toll Brothers, and that the, removal of the wall would negatively impact their property values and diminish the cohesiveness of their neighborhood. The residents are also opposed to the proposed, zone change, stating that the reduced lot sizes would increase traffic and lower their property values. Letters of support were received from members of the Cross and Crown Lutheran church outlining why they are selling the property and that the developer has modified the design of the project to address the concerns of the residents. Staff Comments: Staff supports the proposed layout (Layout #2 — Exhibit F), the related General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments to change the land use to Low (L) Residential and the Variance for the increased wall heights. The proposed layout is the best compromise when balancing the future expansion plans of the church, concerns of the surrounding residents, and good site planning. Without the land use amendments, the required lot dimensions would negate plotting houses on the both sides of the new public street and would require that an equestrian trail be plotted adjacent to the existing non -equestrian lots. The amendments allow for good street design, livability, and transition in density. The lots meet all other requirements of the Low (L) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, including lot depth (100 feet), width (80 feet) and average lot size (15,000 square feet). The average lot size is 15,039 square feet, with the lots ranging in size from 10,014 square feet to 28,150 square feet. Staff believes that the applicant has addressed many of the issues raised by the neighbors. The applicant has modified the original proposed connection to Pinion Street with a cul-de-sac, reduced the amount of wall to be removed along Carnesi Drive from 642 to 60 feet, and moved the lots facing Carnesi Drive to the interior Street. As discussed at the Planning Commission Workshop, the three alternative layouts each create design and neighborhood compatibility issues which negate Staff from being able to support these layouts. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the proposed project (Layout #2 — Exhibit F), provide input as necessary and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee recommended the project move forward to the Planning Commission for review. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA C oNM MARCH 31, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Tri-Communities Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC — A request to subdivide 8.32 acres of land into 17 lots (Lots 1-16 for residential purposes and Lot 17 for an existing church) for a site located within the Very Low (VL) Zoning District (.1 - 2 units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0227-061-03 and 82. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, and Variance DRC2014-00219. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA CRANMARCH 31, 2014 CHO UCAMONCA III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 18, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag March 31, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC — A request to subdivide 8.32 acres of land into 17 lots (Lots 1-16 for residential purposes and Lot 17 for an existing church) for a site located within the Very Low (VL) Zoning District (.1 - 2 units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0227-061-03 and 82. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, and Variance DRC2014-00219. Background: The applicant, Storm Western Development, Inc., submitted an application for the subdivision of 8.32 acres of land into 17 lots. Sixteen lots for residential purposes, and with Lot 17 providing the new boundaries for Cross and Crown Lutheran Church, which is located on a portion of the project site (Exhibit 1). Cross and Crown Lutheran Church, located at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Carnesi Drive (Exhibit B), is selling a portion of their property to the applicant, which was originally master - planned for expansion of the educational program of the church. The application includes General Plan and Etiwanda Community Plan Amendments to change the land use and zoning designations from Very Low (VL) Residential (.1-2 DU per acre) to Low (L) Residential (2-4 DU per acre) and a Variance for property line walls that range in height from 7 to 11 feet along the rear property lines of all 16 residential lots. House product for the lots is not a part of the project scope and will be submitted at a later date. Project Overview: The project site is vacant with the exception of Cross and Crown Lutheran Church at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Carnesi Drive and a perimeter wall along Carnesi Drive. The site is currently zoned Very Low (VL) residential and is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area. The narrowness of the site precludes developing a double -loaded street with lots that meet the 200-foot lot depth requirement. The applicant has requested to change the zoning designation to Low (L) Residential, which requires 100-foot lot depths. The existing single-family residences to the east were developed prior to incorporation of the City and are within the Low (L) Zoning District (Exhibits A and C). These existing lot sizes average approximately 7,500 square feet, below the 15,000 square foot average lot size required by the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The proposed lots comply with the 80-foot lot width and 100-foot lot depth requirements of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and range in size from 11,597 to 19,938 square feet, with an average lot size of 15,010 square feet. The applicant believes that the zone change will allow for the creation of a double -loaded new street that provides a density transition from the existing smaller lot development to the east and the existing larger one-half acre lot size development to the north. The new lots would also be compatible to the existing lots to the west, along Etiwanda Avenue, which range in size from 15,000 and 16,000 square feet (Exhibit C). The applicant is also requesting a Variance to permit combination walls (up to 5-foot retaining walls) with a maximum measured height of 11 feet for all 16 residential lots. The additional height is necessary to raise the rear yard areas of the lots in order for them to drain to the public street and to accommodate a waste water system. The applicant was unable to obtain an off -site drainage easement from the Mormon Church DRC AGENDA SUBTT18936 — STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC. March 31, 2015 Page 2 to the south. The Mormon Church submitted a letter stating that they would rather face an 11-foot wall than disrupt their site to install the drainage facility. The applicant has also contacted homeowners to the east and west who will face the 7- to 10-foot high walls along the perimeter of the project and have obtained letters of acceptance for the additional wall heights. Access to the project will be from Carnesi Drive. The applicant submitted a Traffic Evaluation (Trames Solutions, Inc., August, 2104) which states that based on the trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment of the project, it is anticipated that the project will have a nominal impact on the surrounding roadway network. The Etiwanda Avenue/Carnesi Drive intersection would expect to have 7 additional trips in the morning and 10 additional trips in the evening because of the proposed project. The project is expected to add less than 100 trips per day to Carnesi Drive. The additional delays because of the proposed project are very minimal and are not anticipated to result in a significant traffic impact. The City's Traffic Engineer has reviewed the submitted traffic evaluation and concurs with the conclusions of the study that the proposed project will only have a minimal impact on Carnesi Drive and the nearest intersections. Meeting History: The project was originally deemed complete for Committee review on April 1, 2014. Since that date, the project has been reviewed by the public at two neighborhood meetings on April 14, 2014, and June 19, 2014, by the Design Review Committee on May 6, 2014, and at a Planning Commission Workshop on August 27, 2014. Neighborhood 'Meeting #1: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on April 14, 2014, at 6:00 p.m. at the Four Points Sheraton, with approximately 80 persons in attendance. Three main issues were raised at the meeting: The property owners to the east were in opposition to the previously proposed street connection to Pinon Street. These property owners stated that opening up Pinon' Street, which currently dead ends into the project site, would greatly increase traffic due to vehicles looking for a shorter route to Etiwanda Avenue (Exhibit A). The property owners to the north (along Carnesi Drive) were in opposition to the demolition of the wall along the north side of the project site (south side of Carnesi Drive) to develop a public street to access the project site (Exhibit D). The property owners to the north were also in opposition to the proposed land use change from Very Low (VL) (25,000 square foot average lots) to Low (L) (15,000 square foot lots)(Exhibit C). The residents stated that it would increase traffic and decrease their property values. They also indicated that they did not want smaller lot homes facing their larger lot homes to the north. Design Review Committee Meeting #1: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on May 6, 2014, at 7:00 p.m. The Committee recommended that the project be redesigned taking the concerns of the community into consideration. The meeting was attended by approximately 30 residents from the Toll Brothers neighborhood, which DRC AGENDA SUBTT18936 — STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC. March 31, 2015 Page 3 is north of the project site. The Toll Brothers residents were in opposition to the project taking access from Carnesi Drive and the proposed General Plan and Etiwanda Specific Plan amendments. The residents stated that the wall along the south side of Carnesi Drive defined their community and removing it would negatively impact the aesthetics of the neighborhood and that changing the land use would lower their property values. The residents felt that the project should take access through the property of the church from Etiwanda Avenue. Neighborhood Meeting #2: The applicant held a second neighborhood meeting on June 19, 2014, at 6:00 p.m. at Etiwanda Gardens, with approximately 100 persons in attendance. The developer presented an updated layout which reduced the amount of wall to be removed along Carnesi Drive from 642 to 60 feet. The new layout created a cul-de-sac off of Carnesi Drive with an Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) gate instead of a through connection to Pinon Street and relocated the 4 lots facing Carnesi Drive to facing the new interior street. The Toll Brothers residents remained in opposition to the new layout, not wanting any portion of the wall removed in order to provide access to Carnesi Drive. The residents insisted that access should be taken from Etiwanda Avenue through the church property. The church members in attendance raised concerns that accessing the site through the church parking lot would potentially encumber the future expansion plans of the church. Planning Commission Workshop: The applicant held a Planning Commission Workshop in the Tri-Communities Room of City Hall on August 27, 2014, at 8:20 p.m. At the Workshop, the applicant outlined the advantages and disadvantages of 4 potential layouts of the project site (Exhibits E — H) and how they arrived at their decision to move forward with Layout #2 (Exhibit F), which takes access from Carnesi Drive with a cul-de-sac design. They felt that Layout #2 addressed the concerns of the property owners to the east, who were opposed to the project directly connecting to Pinion Street, and, the property owners to the north, who were opposed to the project removing the wall along Carnesi Drive and having smaller size lots homes facing their larger lot homes. Layout #2 provides a cul-de-sac with an emergency vehicle access gate, rather than a direct connection to Pinon Street, reducing the linear feet of the wall removed along Carnesi Drive from 642 to 60 feet and reorients the lots facing Carnesi Drive to face the new project street. The Commissioners commented that while the original layout (Layout #1 — Exhibit E) had many positive features, Layout #2 (Exhibit F) addressed many of the concerns raised by the neighboring property owners. The Commission observed that Layout #3 (Exhibit G), which was designed to meet the current Very Low (VL) zoning requirements, required the removal of more linear feet of wall along Carnesi Drive, created lots that were over 30 percent larger than and almost twice as deep as the lots to the north and eliminated the opportunity for an emergency vehicle access gate to provide a second access point to the existing development to the east. The Commissioners commented that Layout #4 (Exhibit H), which takes access from Etiwanda Avenue through the church parking lot with a double cul-de-sac, created an awkward street layout with multiple flag lots and greatly encumbered any future expansion of the church. The Commissioners concluded the meeting outlining that the applicant's next step would be to submit the layout they wished to move forward with for staff review. DRC AGENDA SUBTT18936 — STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC. March 31, 2015 Page 4 Correspondences: Staff has received letters in opposition to the project from the property owners to the north of the project site. The letters outline the residents' objections to the removal of the wall along the south side of Carnesi Drive, stating that the wall was constructed by the developer of their homes, Toll Brothers, and that the removal of the wall would negatively impact their property values and diminish the cohesiveness of their neighborhood. The residents are also opposed to the proposed zone change, stating that the reduced lot sizes would increase traffic and lower their property values. Letters of support were received from members of the Cross and Crown Lutheran church outlining why they are selling the property and that the developer has modified the design of the project to address the concerns of the residents. Staff Comments: Staff supports the proposed layout (Layout #2 — Exhibit F), the related General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments to change the land use to Low (L) Residential and the Variance for the increased wall heights. The proposed layout is the best compromise when balancing the future expansion plans of the church, concerns of the surrounding residents, and good site planning. Without the land use amendments, the required lot dimensions would negate plotting houses on the both sides of the new public street and would require that an equestrian trail be plotted adjacent to the existing non -equestrian lots. The amendments allow for good street design, livability, and transition in density. The lots meet all other requirements of the Low (L) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, including lot depth (100 feet), width (80 feet) and average lot size (15,000 square feet). The average lot size is 15,039 square feet, with the lots ranging in size from 10,014 square feet to 28,150 square feet. Staff believes that the applicant has addressed many of the issues raised by the neighbors. The applicant has modified the original proposed connection to Pinion Street with a cul-de-sac, reduced the amount of wall to be removed along Carnesi Drive from 642 to 60 feet, and moved the lots facing Carnesi Drive to the interior Street. As discussed at the Planning Commission Workshop, the three alternative layouts each create design and neighborhood compatibility issues which negate Staff from being able to support these layouts. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the proposed project (Layout #2 — Exhibit F), provide input as necessary and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: ITabe van der Zwaag Members Present: •s- r y rw iql.� >• i I - 77 y , u d ` f� e e 7, IA 1, NOW EXHIB mow- s ++ +j 1 yp� _ i Stsda o �- m ■x i 15,000 SF lots (12k-22k SF) 71500 S F 0 EXHIBIT E 0 EXHIBIT F 0 EXHIBIT G '' 0 -4 0 EXHIBIT H -.�<z E!e p EQ t .5 1 e ° i9�p�e`e f (D I r) 0 i 00 Z' a gs' U f- n' a o W 5 o Q Z Lu F- z yy � L �_ �■� Hill 11 � ter. iR 5�g'- > a E Bigtse ais �l1 it } l � Sig P � tl —pro iGi II i .� ■� EXHIBIT YGEGIeF°tY t • i P90RreaER., .re ,1 1.4 Al 1 �,°•< 4 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA MARCH 17, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 4, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MARCH 3, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Alternates: Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Mike Smith X Ray Wimberly Lou Munoz Frances Howdyshell_ II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00545 - C&C DEVELOPMENT - The request to develop a 60-unit senior apartment complex on 2.25 acres of land within the Low (L) Residential District (the associated General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment applications propose the High (H) Residential District and the Zoning Map Amendment also proposes establishing the Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District (SH) on the project site), located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line 1 of 2 ACTION 7:00 p.m. A. Approved. aDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA T MARCH 3, 2015 CHO ONOA Road - APN: 0208-631-58 and 0208-031-59. Related files: Development Agreement DRC2014-00610, CEQA Review CEQA2014-00008, General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00546, and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00547. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00745 B. Approved. — KARISH ARCHITECHTS - Site plan and architectural review of a 15,821 square foot office/warehouse building on a .89 acre project site located within the General Industrial (GI) Zoning District at the southeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Feron Boulevard- APN: 0209-032-57. None. III. 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. 7:45 p.m. IV. 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. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn March 3, 2015 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00545 - C&C DEVELOPMENT - The request to develop a 60-unit, three-story senior apartment complex on 2.25 acres of land within the Low (L) Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) (the associated General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment applications propose the High (H) Residential District (24-30 dwelling units per acre) and the Zoning Map Amendment also proposes establishing the Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District (SH) on the project site), located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 0208-031-58 and 0208-031-59. Related files: Development Agreement DRC2014- 00610, CEQA Review CEQA2014-00008, General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00546, and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00547. Design Parameters: On November 11, 1995, the Planning Commission approved Development Review DR 95-22 for the development of a 158-unit, three-story, senior housing project within the High (H) Residential District (24-30 dwelling units per acre), located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue. This complex was subsequently developed in the mid to late 1990s. The current project site is located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road. The property to the north includes the Archibald Library in the Office Professional (OP) District and the existing Villa Pacifica Senior Apartment complex in the High (H) Residential District and Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District (SHOZD). The property to the south contains a church within the Low (L) Residential District, and the property to the east and west contain existing single-family residences within the Low (L) Residential District. The project was designed to be compatible with and connect to the existing Villa Pacifica complex to the north. The design of the building has a similar building massing; however, the project architecture has been revised to include additional accent material. Additionally, the project was designed to physically connect with the existing Villa Pacifica complex through the connection of the project driveway at the western edge of the project site, various sidewalk connections along the projects northern boundary, and through the removal of the existing wall along the south boundary of the existing Villa Pacifica complex. Staff has encouraged the applicant to establish a shared driveway approach with the adjacent church property to the south. Although this agreement has not yet been finalized, the site plan does identify a shared driveway both entirely within the project site and an alternative design shared between the two properties. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee _discussion regarding this project: DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00545 — C&C DEVELOPMENT March 3, 2015 Page 2 The applicant worked with staff during the initial review of the project to incorporate recommended design modifications to the project architecture; consequently, there are no major design issues to address. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: There are no secondary design issues. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: The Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District allows the City to grant a developer various development incentives in order to reduce development costs associated with the construction of housing oriented toward senior citizens of low and moderate income. Development incentives can include a reduction in on -site parking, a density bonus, and various fee waivers/reductions. 2. The applicant submitted a Development Agreement that in addition to establishing occupancy criteria, identifies two development incentives. This includes: a. Density Bonus: A request to increase the maximum project density from 24 dwelling units per acre to a maximum of 26.6 dwelling units per acre. On larger parcels a project within the High Residential District is permitted a density range from 24 to 30 dwelling units per acre. Projects under 3 acres in size are restricted to developing at the lower end of the density range, which limits the permitted density to 24 dwelling units per acre. b. Recreational Amenities: A request to duplicate recreational amenities in order to fulfill the total number of recreational amenities for the project. Developments under 100 units are required to provide 4 recreational amenities including, 1) large lawn area, 2) enclosed tot lot, 3) spa or pool, and 4) barbecue facilities. The applicant is proposing to duplicate amenities including 2 large lawn areas and 2 barbecue facilities. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee recommend approval of Design Review DRC2014-00545. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, and Smith Staff Planner: Tom Grahn DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag - March 3, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00745 — KARISH ARCHITECHTS - Site plan and architectural review of a 15,821 square foot office/warehouse building on a .89 acre project site located within the General Industrial (GI) Zoning District at the southeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Feron Boulevard- APN: 0209-032-57. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to construct a 15,821 square foot industrial building on a .89 acre project site that is located at the southeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Feron Boulevard. There is existing industrial development to the east, west, and south and a vacant lot to the north. The project will take vehicle access from a new extension of Feron Boulevard. The project is in conformance will all development standards of the Development Code including parking, setbacks, landscape coverage, site improvements and building design. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is .39 percent which is below the maximum permitted .60 percent FAR. Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the site layout and building design. The architecture has a contemporary appearance that incorporates extensive use of tinted glazing with a metal canopy over the front entrance. The glazing used at the front entrance is carried over to a southwest corner of the building, creating visual interest and continuity along the Hellman Avenue right-of-way. Form lines and narrow rectangular glazing is provided on each elevation, carrying the architectural theme to all elevations. The perimeter walls are designed to match the building providing a seamless appearance. A large outdoor eating area is provided on the south side of the building with a metal canopy. Major Issues: None Secondary Issues: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for final review. Desian Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, and Smith Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MARCH 3, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger — Alternates: Ray Wimberly — Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II. 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00545 - C&C DEVELOPMENT - The request to develop a 60-unit senior apartment complex on 2.25 acres of land within the Low (L) Residential District (the associated General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment applications propose the High (H) Residential District and the Zoning Map Amendment also proposes establishing the Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District (SH) on the project site), located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 0208-031-58 and 0208-031-59. Related files: Development Agreement DRC2014-00610, CEQA Review CEQA2014-00008, General Plan Amendment DRC2014700546, and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00547. 1 of 2 ADESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA 3, 2015 �NCHORHOMARCH GUCAMONGA B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00745 — KARISH ARCHITECHTS - Site plan and architectural review of a 15,821 square foot office/warehouse building on a .89 acre project site located within the General Industrial (GI) Zoning District at the southeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Feron Boulevard- APN: 0209-032-57. III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on February 19, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2of2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn March 3, 2015 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00545 - C&C DEVELOPMENT - The request to develop a 60-unit, three-story senior apartment complex on 2.25 acres of land within the Low (L) Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) (the associated General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment applications propose the High (H) Residential District (24-30 dwelling units per acre) and the Zoning Map Amendment also proposes establishing the Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District (SH) on the project site), located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 0208-031-58 and 0208-031-59. Related files: Development Agreement DRC2014- 00610, CEQA Review CEQA2014-00008, General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00546, and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00547. Design Parameters: On November 11,.1995, the Planning Commission approved Development Review DR 95-22 for the development of a 158-unit, three-story, senior housing project within the High (H) Residential District (24-30 dwelling units per acre), located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue. This complex was subsequently developed in the mid to late 1990s. The current project site is located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road. The property to the north includes the Archibald Library in the Office Professional (OP) District and the existing Villa Pacifica Senior Apartment complex in the High (H) Residential District and Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District (SHOZD). The property to the south contains a church within the Low (L) Residential District, and the property to the east and west contain existing single-family residences within the Low (L) Residential District. The project was designed to be compatible with and connect to the existing Villa Pacifica complex to the north. The design of the building has a similar building massing; however, the project architecture has been revised to include additional accent material. Additionally, the project was designed to physically connect with the existing Villa Pacifica complex through the connection of the project driveway at the western edge of the project site, various sidewalk connections along the projects northern boundary, and through the removal of the existing wall along the south boundary of the existing Villa Pacifica complex. Staff has encouraged the applicant to establish a shared driveway approach with the adjacent church property to the south. Although this agreement has not yet been finalized, the site plan does identify a shared driveway both entirely within the project site and an alternative design shared between the two properties. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The applicant worked with staff during the initial review of the project to incorporate recommended design modifications to the project architecture; consequently, there are no major design issues to address. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00545 — C&C DEVELOPMENT March. 3, 2015 Page 2 There are no secondary design issues. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: The Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District allows the City to grant a developer various development incentives in order to reduce development costs associated with the construction of housing oriented toward senior citizens of low and moderate income. Development incentives can include a reduction in on -site parking, a density bonus, and various fee waivers/reductions. 2. The applicant submitted a Development Agreement that in addition to establishing occupancy criteria, identifies two development incentives. This includes: a. Density Bonus: A request to increase the maximum project density from 24 dwelling units per acre to a maximum of 26.6 dwelling units per acre. On larger parcels a project within the High Residential District is permitted a density range from 24 to 30 dwelling units per acre. Projects under 3 acres in size are restricted to developing at the lower end of the density range, which limits the permitted density to 24 dwelling units per acre. b. Recreational Amenities: A request to duplicate recreational amenities in order to fulfill the total number of recreational amenities for the project. Developments under 100 units are required to provide 4 recreational amenities including, 1) large lawn area, 2) enclosed tot lot, 3) spa or pool, and 4) barbecue facilities. The applicant is proposing to duplicate amenities including 2 large lawn areas and 2 barbecue facilities. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Committee recommend approval of Design Review DRC2014-00545. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tom Grahn Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag March 3, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00745 — KARISH ARCHITECHTS - Site plan and architectural review of a 15,821 square . foot office/warehouse building on a .89 acre project site located within the General Industrial (GI) Zoning District at the southeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Feron Boulevard- APN: 0209-032-57. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to construct a 15,821 square foot industrial building on a .89 acre project site that is located at the southeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Feron Boulevard. There is existing industrial development to the east, west and south and a vacant lot to the north. The project will take vehicle access from a new extension of Feron Boulevard. The project is conformance will all development standards of the Development Code including parking, setbacks, landscape coverage, site improvements and building design. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is .39 percent which is below the maximum permitted .60 percent FAR. Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the site layout and building design. The architecture has a contemporary appearance that incorporates extensive use of tinted glazing with a metal canopy over the front entrance. The glazing used at the front entrance is carried over to a south west corner of the building, creating visual interest and continuity along the Hellman Avenue right-of-way. Form lines and narrow rectangular glazing is provided on each elevation, carrying the architectural theme to all elevations. The perimeter walls are designed to match the building providing a seamless appearance. A large outdoor eating area is provided on the south side of the building with a metal canopy. Major Issues: None Secondary Issues: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for final review. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca and Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA 6,'�,,Nmc.H,,0,rA FEBRUARY 17, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL To ORDER ACTION Roll Call 7.00 p.m. Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00168 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. A. The Design Review Architecture and site plan review of 7 single-family residences related to Committee Tentative Tract Ma SUBTT18034 for a site located at the southwest recommended approval p subject to adding arches corner of East Avenue and Chickasaw Road within the Very Low (VL) to the rear elevation of Residential Development District: of the Etiwanda Specific Plan — the two Spanish plans APN: 0225-381-06 and 07. along with an arched treatment over the master bedroom windows. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA PNCHORHO FEBRUARY 17, 2015 CUCAMONOA B. VARIANCE DRC2014-00403 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. —A request to 8. Approved. reduce the required 25-foot street side setback to 18 feet related to Design Review DRC2014-00168 for a site located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Chickasaw Road within the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan — APN: 0225-381-06 and 07. None. III. 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. 7.28 p.m. IV. 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. 2of2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag February 17, 2015 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00168 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. Architecture and site plan review of 7 single-family residences related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18034 for a site located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Chickasaw Road within the Very Low (VL) Residential Development District: of the Etiwanda Specific Plan - APN: 0225-381-06 and 07. VARIANCE DRC2014-00403 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. - A request to reduce the required 25-foot street side setback to 18 feet related to Design Review DRC2014-00168 for a site located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Chickasaw Road within the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan - APN: 0225-381-06 and 07. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting Design Review of 7 single-family residences related to a 7-lot subdivision (SUBTT18034) that was previously approved on December 13, 2006. The project site is vacant and generally drains from north to south. It is approximately 950 feet from east to west and 217 feet from north to south. Lot #1 includes a triangular piece of land that is separated from the rest of the lot by an equestrian trail. The future homeowner of this lot will be responsible for the maintenance of this area. A gate has been added to access and secure this area from the equestrian trail. The project is designed to comply with all related development criteria for the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, except for the street side setback of the residence on Lot #7. There is an approximate 50-foot encroachment into Lot #7 along the east property line by a portion of land owned by Caltrans. This encroachment makes it difficult to develop the lot without the approval of a Variance. The applicant is requesting a 7-foot reduction in the required 25 foot street side setback. The lots range in size from 23,870 to 25,959 square feet and the units range in size from 3,503 to 3,804 square feet. Lot coverage ranges from 18.24 to 22.84 percent, below the maximum 25 percent permitted lot coverage. Horse corrals are plotted on each lot on the grading plan which comply with the required 70 foot separation from the residences on the adjacent lots. A 15-foot wide equestrian trail will be constructed along the south and west property lines of the site with a split face block wall along the north side of the trail easement. Each lot will include a view obscuring wrought iron gate to access and maintain the trail. The project includes two floor plans with three different architectural styles for each floor plan; Spanish, Tuscan and country. Each architectural style includes multiple design elements that emphasize and enhance the overall design theme. These design elements, including stone veneer, wrought iron and wood siding, are carried to each elevation to provide 360 degree architecture. Each plan also includes roof and wall plane articulation along with 3 color schemes to provide visual interest. The Conditions of Approval for SUBTT18034 require that the applicant plant a eucalyptus windrow along the equestrian trail, on the north side of the wall dividing the DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00168 AND DRC2014-00403 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. February 17, 2015 Page 2 yard area from the equestrian trail. The project site is in a high fire hazard area as determined by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFPD), which requires that the spacing between the trees be increased to reduce the potential for fire hazard. The Landscape plan shows the required trees at the spacing (30 feet on center) approved by the RCFPD. The project was also conditioned to construct a 16-foot tall sound wall along the Caltrans right-of-way. The wall will be maintained by the individual property owners with Caltrans managing graffiti removal and landscape maintenance along their right-of-way. The applicant has submitted a follow up sound study (Urban Crossroads, September 2014) that reviewed the adequacy of the approved sound wall and makes recommendations to bring the interior noise levels of the residences into compliance with the City's interior noise standards. The applicant will be required to submit a second follow up sound study at the time of Building Department plan check to verify that the construction drawings are in accord with the sound study recommendations. Staff Comments: The proposed project meets all the related design and technical requirements for the Very Low (VL) Development District, except that the residence plotted on Lot #7 is 7 feet deficient in meeting the required 25 foot street side setback. Staff supports the Variance request as the Caltrans encroachment into Lot #7 makes it difficult to develop the lot without the street side setback reduction. The residences are well designed and the design elements of each architectural style is carried to all of the elevations including roof and wall plane articulation. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The Design Review Committee recommended approval subject to adding arches to the rear elevation of the two Spanish plans along with an arched treatment over the master bedroom windows. The project may move forward to Planning Commission once staff is satisfied with the changes. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA FEBRUARY 17, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL To ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly._ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz._ II. 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00168 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. Architecture and site plan review of 7 single-family residences related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT1-8034 for a site located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Chickasaw Road within the Very Low (VL) Residential Development District: of the Etiwanda Specific Plan — APN: 0225-381-06 and 07. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO FEBRUARY 17, 2015 CUCAMONGA - B. VARIANCE DRC2014-00403 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. — A request to reduce the required 25-foot street side setback to 18 feet related to Design Review DRC2014-00168 for a site located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Chickasaw Road within the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan — APN: 0225-381-06 and 07. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on February 4, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag February 17, 2015 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00168 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. Architecture and site plan review of 7 single-family residences related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18034 for a site located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Chickasaw Road within the Very Low (VL) Residential Development District: of the Etiwanda Specific Plan - APN: 0225-381-06 and 07. VARIANCE DRC2014-00403 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. - A request to reduce the required 25-foot street side setback to 18 feet related to Design Review DRC2014-00168 for a site located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Chickasaw Road within the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan - APN: 0225-381-06 and 07. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting Design Review of 7 single-family residences related to a 7-lot subdivision (SUBTT18034) that was previously approved on December 13, 2006. The project site is vacant and generally drains from north to south. It is approximately 950 feet from east to west and 217 feet from north to south. Lot #1 includes a triangular piece of land that is separated from the rest of the lot by an equestrian trail. The future homeowner of this lot will be responsible for the maintenance of this area. A gate has been added to access and secure this area from the equestrian trail. The project is designed to comply with all related development criteria for the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, except for the street side setback of the residence on Lot #7. There is an approximate 50-foot encroachment into Lot #7 along the east property line by a portion of land owned by Caltrans. This encroachment makes it difficult to develop the lot without the approval of a Variance. The applicant is requesting a 7-foot reduction in the required 25 foot street side setback. The lots range in size from 23,870 to 25,959 square feet and the units range in size from 3,503 to 3,804 square feet. Lot coverage ranges from 18.24 to 22.84 percent, below the maximum 25 percent permitted lot coverage. Horse corrals are plotted on each lot on the grading plan which comply with the required 70 foot separation from the residences on the adjacent lots. A 15-foot wide equestrian trail will be constructed along the south and west property lines of the site with a split face block wall along the north side of the trail easement. Each lot will include a view obscuring wrought iron gate to access and maintain the trail. The project includes two floor plans with three different architectural styles for each floor plan; Spanish, Tuscan and country. Each architectural style includes multiple design elements that emphasize and enhance the overall design theme. These design elements, including stone veneer, wrought iron and wood siding, are carried to each elevation to provide 360 degree architecture. Each plan also includes roof and wall plane articulation along with 3 color schemes to provide visual interest. The Conditions of Approval for SUBTT18034 require that the applicant plant a eucalyptus windrow along the equestrian trail, on the north side of the wall dividing the DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00168 AND DRC2014-00403 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. February 17, 2015 Page 2 yard area from the equestrian trail. The project site 'is in a high fire hazard area as determined by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFPD), which requires that the spacing between the trees be increased to reduce the potential for fire hazard. The Landscape plan shows the required trees at the spacing (30 feet on center)- approved by the RCFPD. The project was also conditioned to construct a 16-foot tall sound wall along the Caltrans right-of-way. The wall will be maintained by the individual property owners with Caltrans managing graffiti removal and landscape maintenance along their right-of-way. The applicant has submitted a follow up sound study (Urban Crossroads, September 2014) that reviewed the adequacy of the approved sound wall and makes recommendations to bring the interior noise levels of the residences into compliance with the City's interior noise standards. The applicant will be required to submit a second follow up sound study at the time of Building Department plan check to verify that the construction drawings are in accord with the sound study recommendations. Staff Comments: The proposed project meets all the related design and technical requirements for the Very Low (VL) Development District, except that the residence plotted on Lot #7 is 7 feet deficient in meeting the required 25 foot street side setback. Staff supports the Variance request as the Caltrans encroachment into Lot #7 makes it difficult to develop the lot without the street side setback reduction. The residences are well designed and the design elements of each architectural style is carried to all of the elevations including roof and wall plane articulation. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None . Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CoCAMONCA FEBRUARY 3, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 22, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA L;UCAMONGA ;CHO JANUARY 20, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. AMON Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL To ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher x Francisco Oaxaca x Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger x Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01061 — ALTOON PARTNERS FOR FOREST CITY - A review of proposed revisions to the streetscape (comprised of expanding the hardscape areas, new sidewalk paving, modified plaza areas, new ground cover and trees, lighting, and several small structures) along Monet Avenue, a private street within Victoria Gardens, in the Mixed Use (MU) District. 1 of 2 ACTION 7.00 P.M. A. Approved. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA aHa JAN UARY 20, 2015 WN CUC"ONGA II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. IV. ADJOURNMENT 111 7.19 P.M. 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. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 P.M. Mike Smith January 20, 2015 MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01061 —ALTOON PARTNERS FOR FOREST CITY - A review of proposed revisions to the streetscape (comprised of expanding the hardscape areas, new sidewalk paving, modified plaza areas, new ground cover and trees, lighting, and several small structures) along Monet Avenue, a private street within Victoria Gardens, within the Mixed Use (MU) District - APN: 1090-551-03 and -04. Design Parameters: The project site is within Victoria Gardens, a regional commercial complex comprised of multiple buildings, private streets/drive aisles (hereon referred to as "streets"), and large parking areas that are generally located between Foothill Boulevard, Day Creek Boulevard, Church Street, and I-15 Freeway to the south, west, north, and east, respectively. The specific location of the project site is the segment of Monet Avenue, a north to south private street, between North Mainstreet and Versailles Street, located at the west side of Victoria Gardens. The length of the segment of the street that is subject to this project is approximately 916 feet long. Monet Avenue, as with most of the streets within Victoria Gardens, is a two-lane (one lane in each direction) street developed with a combination of decorative landscaping consisting of ground cover, planters, and trees, and hardscape. Beyond the landscape and hardscape areas (collectively referred to as "the streetscape"), the street is flanked with commercial buildings plotted and oriented in a manner reflective of a downtown urban environment. On both sides of the street are sets of parallel parking stalls. Improvements along Monet Avenue also include light poles and fixtures, wayfinding signs, benches, and trash receptacles. The applicant proposes to revise the streetscape along both sides of Monet Avenue in order to enhance the pedestrian environment along the street (Exhibit A and Sheet L003 of the plans.). The revisions are comprised of new trees, planters, ground cover, sidewalk pavers, seating of various types, and redesigned light poles and fixtures. Also, twenty (20) parking stalls along will be removed to allow the expansion of the landscaped areas and sidewalks along the street. Refer to Sheets L1005 and L201 — L205 for the landscape revisions, and Sheets L1004 and L101 — L105 for the hardscape revisions. In addition to the "surface" improvements on either side of the street, the applicant also proposes to construct two (2) structures - a wood -clad `arch' above the drive aisle between Buildings 110013 and 3000C (Sheet A1.0), and a trellis in the open area at the southwest corner of Monet Avenue and South Mainstreet, and at the northeast corner of JC Penney (Sheet A2.0), The arch will have an overall height of 24 feet and will be situated above a drive aisle 'that is generally used for service/delivery access for the buildings in the area. The trellis constructed with a combination of metal and wood elements will have an overall height of 31 feet with dimensions of about 110 feet in length and 40.5 feet in width. Beneath this trellis structure will be three (3) new decorative water fountains and seating. The applicant does not propose any revisions to the existing buildings along Monet Avenue. At this time, the proposed revisions to the streetscape are limited to Monet Avenue. The twenty (20) parking stalls that are removed will have a minimal impact as there are a large number of parking stalls available within the open parking areas of Victoria Gardens. 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. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-01061 — ALTOON PARTNERS FOR FOREST CITY January 20, 2015 Page 2 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. None. Staff Recommendation: Staff anticipates that the proposed revisions to the landscaping and hardscape will be a positive update to the property and will ensure that it is "current" with visitors' expectations and interests, and the business goals of the property owners and their tenants. Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Director and forward it to her for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the proposal and accepted the project as proposed. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, and Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA HO CRAMoNGA JAN UARY 20, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger_ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01061 — ALTOON PARTNERS FOR FOREST CITY - A review of proposed revisions to the streetscape (comprised of expanding the hardscape areas, new sidewalk paving, modified plaza areas, new ground cover and trees, lighting, and several small structures) along Monet Avenue, a private street within Victoria Gardens, in the Mixed Use (MU) District. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO JANUARY 20, 2015 CUCAMONCA II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. II IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 8, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 P.M. Mike Smith January 20, 2015 MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01061 —ALTOON PARTNERS FOR FOREST CITY A review of proposed revisions to the streetscape (comprised of expanding the hardscape areas, new sidewalk paving, modified plaza areas, new ground cover and trees, lighting, and several small structures) along Monet Avenue, a private street within Victoria Gardens, within the Mixed Use (MU) District - APN: 1090-551-03 and -04. Desiqn Parameters: The project site is within Victoria Gardens, a regional commercial complex comprised of multiple buildings, private streets/drive aisles (hereon referred to as "streets"), and large parking areas that are generally located between Foothill Boulevard, Day Creek Boulevard, Church Street, and 1-15 Freeway to the south, west, north, and east, respectively. The specific location of the project site is the segment of Monet Avenue, a north to south private street, between North Mainstreet and Versailles Street, located at the west side of Victoria Gardens. The length of the segment of the street that is subject to this project is approximately 916 feet long. Monet Avenue, as with most of the streets within Victoria Gardens, is a two-lane (one lane in each direction) street developed with a combination of decorative landscaping consisting of ground cover, planters, and trees, and hardscape. Beyond the landscape and hardscape areas (collectively referred to as "the streetscape"), the street is flanked with commercial buildings plotted and oriented in a manner reflective of a downtown urban environment. On both sides of the street are sets of parallel parking stalls. Improvements along Monet Avenue also include light poles and fixtures, wayfinding signs, benches, and trash receptacles. The applicant proposes to revise the streetscape along both sides of Monet Avenue in order to enhance the pedestrian environment along the street (Exhibit A and Sheet L003 of the plans.). The revisions are comprised of new trees, planters, ground cover, sidewalk pavers, seating of various types, and redesigned light poles and fixtures. Also, twenty (20) parking stalls along will be removed to allow the expansion of the landscaped areas and sidewalks along the street. Refer to Sheets L1005 and L201 — L205 for the landscape revisions, and Sheets L1004 and L101 — L105 for the hardscape revisions. In addition to the "surface" improvements on either side of the street, the applicant also proposes to construct two (2) structures - a wood -clad 'arch' above the drive aisle between Buildings 110013 and 3000C (Sheet A1.0), and a trellis in the open area at the southwest corner of Monet Avenue and South Mainstreet, and at the northeast corner of JC Penney (Sheet A2.0). The arch will have an overall height of 24 feet and will be situated above a drive aisle that is generally used for service/delivery access for the buildings in the area. The trellis constructed with a combination of metal and wood elements will have an overall height of 31 feet with dimensions of about 110 feet in length and 40.5 feet in width. Beneath this trellis structure will be three (3) new decorative water fountains and seating. The applicant does not propose any revisions to the existing buildings along Monet Avenue. At this time, the proposed revisions to the streetscape are limited to Monet Avenue. The twenty (20) parking stalls that are removed will have a minimal impact as there are a large, number of parking stalls available within the open parking areas of Victoria Gardens. 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. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-01061 — ALTOON PARTNERS FOR FOREST CITY January 20, 2015 Page 2 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. None. Staff Recommendation: Staff anticipates that the proposed revisions to the landscaping and hardscape will be a positive update to the property and will ensure that it is "current" with visitors' expectations and interests, and the business goals of the property owners and their tenants. Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Director and forward it to her for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: 17 November 2014 Mrs. Charlene Young CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA , Project Developer Forest City NOV 2 4 2014 949 S. Hope Street Los Angeles, CA 90015 RECEIVED -PLANNING 617 West 7th Street Victoria Gardens -Monet Avenue 2.0 Suite 400 Victoria Gardens, Rancho Cucamonga, California Los Angeles • CA 90017 T +1 213 225 1900 Executive Summary F +1 213 225 1901 altoonpartners.com This project focuses on refreshing, renewing and making contemporary the spaces and places at the successful Victoria Gardens retail center. The scope of the urban interventions is bounded by the buildings along Monet Avenue, from North Mainstreet for three "blocks" south, to Versailles Architecture Street. This refreshment and renewal takes place through enhancements and designed Planning interventions to things under foot, at eye level and the overhead plane — intended for both Urban Design day and evening visitors. Through these changes the goal is to strengthen the ambiance, the . Graphic Design visual environment and the sense of place for all visitors and the encourage better pedestrian interaction to and in this precinct of Victoria Gardens from Town Square, and both North and South Mainstreet. The interventions are trained on key existing points, as well as providing new Partners touch points for visitor experience. These will encourage more casual pedestrian interactions Ronald A Altoon FAIA and create an additional draw for the retailers and other tenants in this precinct. Gary K Dempster FAIA William J Sebring AIA These Enhancements for Monet Avenue will be accomplished principally through coordinated, James C Auld AIA focused design interventions involving Architecture, Structural Engineering, Landscape, Hardscape, Irrigation, Amenities, Lighting, Interiors, Environmental Art, Signage, Way finding, and Environmental Graphics as depicted in the submission documents. It is primarily a landscape/ hardscape project, with additional three-dimensional design interventions at the JC Penney plaza, the open space between buildings 3000C and 110013, as well as the paseo between buildings1200 and 5300. Sincerely, ALTOON + PORTER ARCHITECTS LLP James C Auld, AIA Partner EXHIBIT A ALTOON PARTNERS LLP LOS ANGELES • AMSTERDAM • SHANGHAI THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ;CHO AGENDA CUlCAMONGA JANUARY 6, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER 71 Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December 16, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA CUONGA DECEMBER 16, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18508 — CALDWELL LAND SERVICES - A request to subdivide 6.5 acres of land into 31 single-family lots within the Low Medium Residential District (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the northwest corner of Kenyon Way and Lark Drive - APN: 1089-011-04. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. Related cases: Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00560 and Environmental Review and Community Plan Amendment DRC014-00561. 1 of 3 ACTION 7:00 P.M. A. Approved. ,®r DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DECEMBER 16, 2014 CHO UCAMONOA B. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00620 — BENCHMARK COMMUNITIES - A request for the architectural and site plan review of 95 single-family homes located within the Rancho Etiwanda Estates adjacent to Indian Wells Place approximately 1,800 feet north of Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 1087-071-15. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226-2. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City Council on August 1, 2001) and there are no new environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. - A proposal to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet with 105 rooms on a vacant parcel of about 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres) within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD) located on the west side of Pittsburgh Drive, near the intersection with Mission Vista Drive, about 700 feet north of 4th Street - APN: 0229-341-11. Related file: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00877 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00879. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D. SIGN PERMIT PERMANENT DRC2014-01054 - MICHAEL ESCHGER FOR WSS EUROSTAR, INC. - A request for 3 wall signs that propose larger sign area than allowed in Uniform Sign Program #134 for sub -major tenants at the Terra Vista Town Center within the Community Commercial (CC) District in the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at 10690 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 1077-422-69. 2 of 3 B. Approved. C. The Committee approved the revisions made. D. The Design Review Committee approved the revised plans. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DECEMBER, 16, 2014 CR CHO ucAMONOA 11 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 3of3 None. 7:37 p.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag December 16, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18508 — CALDWELL LAND SERVICES - A request to subdivide 6.5 acres of land into 31 single-family lots within the Low Medium Residential District (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the northwest corner of Kenyon Way and Lark Drive - APN: 1089-011-04. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. Related cases: Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00560 and Environmental Review and Community Plan Amendment DRC014-00561. Project Overview: The applicant proposes subdividing the 6.5-acre project site into 31 lots for the development of single-family residences. The site is located at the southwest corner Kenyon Way and Lark Drive and is adjacent to a City park (Kenyon Park). There is a community trail that runs along the south and west property lines. The site is approximately 650 feet from east to west and approximately 400 feet from north to south. The site drains roughly north to south and is covered with scrub brush. The project site is currently designated as a park site in the General Plan and a school site in the Victoria Community Plan. The City has no plans to develop the site as a park as there is an existing City park to the west. The school district has determined that site was no longer needed to meet student demand and was sold off as surplus property. The applicant is requesting to change the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan land use designations to Low Medium (LM) residential, in conformance with the existing land use designation for the residential development to the north, south, and east. The project is designed to comply with all related development criteria for the Low Medium (M) Development District of the Victoria Community Plan, except for the depth of Lot #19. The Development Code defines, lot depth as the horizontal distance between the midpoint of the front lot line and the midpoint of the rear lot line. The lot is approximately 114 feet deep along the west property line and approximately 20 feet deep along the east property line. At the midpoint, the lot is approximately 71 feet deep, 19 feet less than the 90-foot minimum lot depth requirement. Staff is in support of granting a Variance for lot depth because of the odd shape of Lot #19 and the fact that the lot is over 50 percent larger than the minimum 6,000 lot size requirement (for lots over 55 feet wide). The large lot size will enable the lot to be developed with a single-family residence that meets all related setback and lot coverage requirements. The Victoria Community Plan requires a minimum lot width of 50 feet and minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. The Community Plan also requires that lots 55 feet wide or greater have a lot size of 6,000 square feet to provide variety. The smallest lot size in the development is 5,025 square feet and the largest lot size is 11,210 square feet, with an average lot size of 6,807 square feet. The project includes three lettered lots that will be maintained by the Landscape Maintenance District in the area. Lot "A" was created on the south side of Lark Drive in order to get the intersection of the new project street and the existing street across DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18508 — BRENT CALDWELL December 16, 2014 Page 2 Kenyon Way (Lark Drive) to line up. Lots "B" and "C" were necessary in order to provide line -site visibility for the interior streets of the project where they intersect Kenyon Way, which is curvilinear along the project boundary. The Engineering Services Department has agreed to accept dedication and maintenance of the lettered lots. Staff Comments: The proposed project is well designed and meets all the related development criteria, except that Lot #19 does not meet the minimum lot depth requirement. Staff is in support of a Variance for Lot #19 as it is justified due to the odd shape and large size of the lot. The project provides a variety of lot sizes and dimensions which will create a varied street scene. The project layout provides two points of vehicular access which line up with two existing public streets. Staff is in support of the General Plan Amendment and Victoria Community Plan Amendment, as the project site is no longer needed as either a park or school site. The view to the south property line will be open to the existing landscape area and community trail, providing a pleasing view for the south facing lots along the new portion of Lark Drive. Major Issues: Whether the Committee agrees with staff and is in support of a Variance to reduce the lot depth requirement from 90 feet to 71 feet for Lot #19. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project layout and the related General Plan Amendment, Victoria Community Plan Amendment, and Variance. If they are accepting of all of the proposed entitlements, forward the project to the Planning Commission for review. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee approved the project as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez December 16, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00620 — BENCHMARK COMMUNITIES - A request for the architectural and site plan review of 95 single-family homes located within the Rancho Etiwanda Estates adjacent to Indian Wells Place approximately 1,800 feet north of Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 1087-071-15. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226-2. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City Council on August 1, 2001) and there are no new environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report. Background: On July 24, 2002, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226, which permitted the subdivision of 265 residential lots on 92.78 acres of land located north of the intersection of Day Creek Boulevard and Indian Wells Place. This tract is part of a 632-unit Master Planned Community known as Rancho Etiwanda Estates. The site has since been divided into multiple phases, all of which have been approved for development except for the subject 95-lots that are located within the remaining 37.43 acres at the northwest corner of Rancho Etiwanda Estates. This property was previously rough -graded. Additionally, perimeter block walls as well as homeowner association maintained walls, fences, and landscaping have been installed along Indian Wells Place. Desiqn Parameters: The subject property is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP), which requires development to comply with specific site and architectural design guidelines. Particular "primary" architectural styles, such as Bungalow, Ranch, Monterey, and San Juan are required to be used on at least two-thirds of the proposed units. The applicant has chosen to use only primary architectural styles and will, therefore, be in compliance with this requirement. The San Juan elevation incorporates wrought iron details, shed roof awning with decorative wood braces, and exposed rafter tales. The Country style incorporates decorative gables, louvered shutters, and stucco window trim. The Bungalow style incorporates stone wainscot and porch column bases with dual post columns, decorative beams and brackets at gables, and wood shingle siding. The Monterey style incorporates decorative shutters, wood balcony, beams, and railing as well as exposed rafter tails. All homes will also incorporate decorative garage doors. The ENSP also requires residential projects of this size to incorporate a minimum of eight (8) housing footprints with a minimum of four (4) elevations per footprint. The ENSP allows for reverse footprints to count as an additional footprint. The ENSP also allows for plans with courtyard walls and patios along the front elevation to count as an additional elevation. As seen in the chart below, the proposed development will be in compliance with these minimum requirements. Floor Plan/Elevation Configuration San Juan Ranch Bungalow Monterey Courtyard Wall Porch Alternate Total Elevations Plan 1* x x x x 4 Plan 2* x x x x 4 Plan 3* x x x x 4 Plan 4* x x x x 4 * Reverse footprint will also be provided. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00620 — BENCHMARK COMMUNITIES December 16, 2014 Page 2 The floor plans range in size from a 2,689 square foot plan to a 4,055 square foot plan. One (1) of the four (4) floor plans will be single -story, while the other three (3) are two-story. The plans submitted indicate that twenty-five (25) percent of the lots will contain single -story homes, which is a requirement specified in the ENSP. Additionally, a Development Agreement was approved in 2001 that required compliance with the Low Residential District standards for all lots within this tract (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226). Development standards for the Low Residential District include, but are not limited to, maximum lot coverage of forty (40) percent, maximum height of thirty-five (35) feet, minimum front yard setback of eighteen (18) feet with an average front yard setback of twenty (20) feet (measured from the right-of-way), a fifteen (15)-foot minimum building separation on side yards with a five (5)- and ten (10)-foot side yard setback measured from the property lines. In reviewing the site plan, staff found that Lots 12, 24, and 35 do not comply with the five (5)- and ten (10)-foot side yard setback requirement, Lot 55 does not comply with the fifteen (15)-foot usable rear yard setback, and Lots 87 and 88 do not comply with the fifteen (15)-foot minimum building separation requirement. Aside from these items, all other lots comply with the required development standards for this area. 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: The applicant has worked diligently with staff; there are no major issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: As noted above, the following are a list of lots that are not in compliance with one or more development standards: a. Lots 12, 24, and 35 do not comply with the five (5)- and ten (10)-foot side yard setback requirement specified in the development agreement. b. Lot 55 does not comply with the fifteen (15)-foot usable rear yard setback requirement specified in the development agreement. C. Lots 87 and 88 do not comply with the fifteen (15)-foot minimum building separation requirement specified in the development agreement. 2. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that the architectural styles listed above are accurately represented. There are, however, a few minor elements that staff recommends should be incorporated into the design of specific plans/elevations: a. The wrought iron patio gate used on the front porch of the Residence Two San Juan elevation should incorporate decorative elements (i.e., knuckles, collars, etc). b. Decorative corbels should be used appropriately along visible sides (front and street side yard) of the San Juan elevations of Residence Two, Three, and Four. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00620 — BENCHMARK COMMUNITIES December 16, 2014 Page 3 C. Additional window treatment, such as a pot shelf with exposed beams, should be added along the first floor window at the front of the Residence Three, Bungalow elevation. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of the project subject to the applicant revising the plans to resolve the above -mentioned Secondary issues and code compliance issues. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee briefly discussed the project and recommended approval with no issues. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Dominick Perez DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith December 16, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. - A proposal to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet with 105 rooms on a vacant parcel of about 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres) in the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD) located on the west side of Pittsburgh Drive, near the intersection with Mission Vista Drive, about 700 feet north of 4th Street - APN: 0229-341-11. Related file: General. Plan Amendment DRC2014-00877 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00879. Background: The proposed project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on November 18, 2014 (Attachment A). The Committee generally accepted the proposal as submitted but had two (2) items that needed to be addressed before they would make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The first item that the Committee wanted addressed was the proposed color (white) of the stucco -finished wall plane around and above the main entrance of the hotel (on the east elevation). They requested that the applicant change the color of this wall plane to a shade of gray. The second item was the porcelain tile proposed at the wall plane immediately adjacent, and to the north, of the wall plane at the main entrance. The size, texture, and general appearance of the tile was not clear based on the plans that were submitted. The Committee requested a physical sample of this tile. The applicant was directed to provide a set of color elevations/renderings showing the revised stucco color and to provide a sample of the tile for review by the Committee at the next available Design Review Committee meeting. The applicant revised the color as requested (see attached 11-inch by 17-inch color elevations/renderings — Attachment B). Staff notes to the Committee that the applicant also revised the color of the corresponding wall plane on the west elevation of the building. The sample of the tile will be provided by the applicant at the meeting. 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. The policy issues discussed in the previous Design Review Committee report and at the Committee meeting held on November 18, 2015, shall apply. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. December 16, 2014 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Following the Committee's review of the requested color revision and sample tile, staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Staff notes to the Committee that the project will be forwarded to the Planning Commission with the General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Desian Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the revised color of the wall plane around and above the main entrance of the hotel. They also reviewed the sample tile provided by the applicant. They accepted the revision and tile sample as submitted. The Committee recommends that the Planning Commission approve the project. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima December 16, 2014 SIGN PERMIT PERMANENT DRC2014-01054 - MICHAEL ESCHGER FOR WSS EUROSTAR, INC. - A request for 3 wall signs that propose a larger sign area than allowed in Uniform Sign Program #134 for sub -major tenants at the Terra Vista Town Center within the Community Commercial (CC) District in the Terra Vista Planned Community located at 10690 Foothill Boulevard -- APN: 1077-422-69. Background: WSS Eurostar Inc., a shoe retailer, is anticipating to occupy the sub -major tenant building located on the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Avenue. The building is currently vacant and was previously occupied by Party City. Project Proposal: WSS Eurostar Inc. is requesting approval of a Sign Permit to construct three illuminated wall signs that exceed the sign area and height limitation for sub -Major tenants as permitted under Uniform Sign Program (USP) 134. The USP classifies sub -Major tenants as businesses occupying between 7,000 and 34,999 square feet. Under the USP, the signs are permitted by the sign program to exceed the sign area, height, or length with Design Review Committee approval. Allowed per USP 134 Proposed Difference 3 signs per business 3 wall signs same size Conforms Two-line signs shall not exceed Height 20 inches 36 inches in total height including • WSS — 32 inches the space between the line and no • Shoes. Style. Selection. — 14 individual line shall be more than 24 inches inches in height. The space • Logo — 7 feet between lines shall not exceed 1/3 of the letter height of smallest letter. Length of sign shall not exceed Length Conforms. Under 70 70 percent of shop frontage, or • WSS — 11 feet 1 inch percent of shop frontage 25 feet, whichever is less. • Shoes. Style. Selection. — 15 or 25 feet or less feet 8 inches • Logo — 11 feet 1 inch Per sign square footage shall not 95.86 sf per sign 20.86 square feet exceed 75. *There is no reference to the logo size and height in the USP. Staff Comments: Staff believes that the sign is excessive for the scale of the building, and the overall height of the signs should be reduced. The logo is 7 feet tall on a building face that is 28 feet tall, which equates to 25 percent of the building height. Staff has requested the applicant scale the sign sizes down, but the applicant has chosen to move forward to the Design Review Committee as proposed. Furthermore, the Development Code only allows for 2 square feet of sign area per lineal foot of building frontage, at a maximum of 150 square feet per establishment. USP 134 is generous in the sign area that is allowed (225 square feet) compared to what is allowed per the Development Code. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-01054 — MICHAEL ESCHGER FOR WSS EUROSTAR, INC. December 16, 2014 Page The previous tenant, Party City, had three signs which were 23 feet in length with a 30 inch letter height for a total sign area of 57.5 square feet for each sign. Although it did not meet the 24 inch letter height maximum for one line, it still met the length and sign area maximum. A nearby tenant, Chili's Restaurant, is also categorized as a sub -major tenant. Their largest non - illuminated sign is 5 feet, 1-inch- tall and 13 feet, 1-inch in length, calculating out at 67 square feet. Chili's illuminated signage that is visible to Foothill Boulevard is 5 feet, 3-inches tall, 6 feet, 7.5 inches in length, with a total square footage of 35. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staffs conclusion is that a larger letter height than permitted by the LISP is reasonable, but the sign area should be consistent with the 75 square foot maximum per sign. Therefore, staff recommends that the Committee direct the applicant to work with staff to reduce the sign area to 75 square feet per sign. Desian Review Committee Action: The Design Review Committee approved the revised plans. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DECEMBER 16, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly_ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18508 — CALDWELL LAND SERVICES - A request to subdivide 6.5 acres of land into 31 single-family lots within the Low Medium Residential District (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the northwest corner of Kenyon Way and Lark Drive - APN: 1089-011-04. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. Related cases: Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00560 and Environmental Review and Community Plan Amendment DRC014-00561. 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO DECEMBER 16, 2014 CUCAMONOA B. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00620 — BENCHMARK COMMUNITIES - A request for the architectural and site plan review of 95 single-family homes located within the Rancho Etiwanda Estates adjacent to Indian Wells Place approximately 1,800 feet north of Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 1087-071-15. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226-2. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City Council on August 1, 2001) and there are no new environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. - A proposal to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet with 105 rooms on a vacant parcel of about 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres) within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD) located on the west side of Pittsburgh Drive, near the intersection with Mission Vista Drive, about 700 feet north of 4th Street - APN: 0229-341-11. Related file: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00877 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00879. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D. SIGN PERMIT PERMANENT DRC2014-01054 - MICHAEL ESCHGER FOR WSS EUROSTAR, INC. - A request for 3 wall signs that propose larger sign area than allowed in Uniform Sign Program #134 for sub -major tenants at the Terra Vista Town Center within the Community Commercial (CC) District in the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at 10690 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 1077-422-69. 2 of 3 _ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA CRANDECEMBER 16, 2014 CHO UCAMONOA III. 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. IV. 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, Gail Elwood, Office. Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December 4, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag December 16, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18508 — CALDWELL LAND SERVICES - A request to subdivide 6.5 acres of land into 31 single-family lots within the Low Medium Residential District (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the northwest corner of Kenyon Way and Lark Drive - APN: 1089-011-04. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. Related cases: Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00560 and Environmental Review and Community Plan Amendment DRC014-00561. Project Overview: The applicant proposes subdividing the 6.5-acre project site into 31 lots for the development of single-family residences. The site is located at the southwest corner Kenyon Way and Lark Drive and is adjacent to a City park (Kenyon Park). There is a community trail that runs along the south and west property lines. The site is approximately 650 feet from east to west and approximately 400 feet from north to south. The site drains roughly north to south and is covered with scrub brush. The project site is currently designated as a park site in the General Plan and a school site in the Victoria Community Plan. The City has no plans to develop the site as a park as there is an existing City park to the west. The school district has determined that site was no longer needed to meet student demand and was sold off as surplus property. The applicant is requesting to change the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan land use designations to Low Medium (LM) residential, in conformance with the existing land use designation for the residential development to the north, south, and east. The project is designed to comply with all related development criteria for the Low Medium (M) Development District of the Victoria Community Plan, except for the depth of Lot #19. The Development Code defines lot depth as the horizontal distance between the midpoint of the front lot line and the midpoint of the rear lot line. The lot is approximately 114 feet deep along the west property line and approximately 20 feet deep along the east property line. At the midpoint, the lot is approximately 71 feet deep, 19 feet less than the 90-foot minimum lot depth requirement. Staff is in support of granting a Variance for lot depth because of the odd shape of Lot #19 and the fact that the lot is over 50 percent larger than the minimum 6,000 lot size requirement (for lots over 55 feet wide). The large lot size will enable the lot to be developed with a single-family residence that meets all related setback and lot coverage requirements. The Victoria Community Plan requires a minimum lot width of 50 feet and minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. The Community Plan also requires that lots 55 feet wide or greater have a lot size of 6,000 square feet to provide variety. The smallest lot size in the development is 5,025 square feet and the largest lot size is 11,210 square feet, with an average lot size of 6,807 square feet. The project includes three lettered lots that will be maintained by the Landscape Maintenance District in the area. Lot "A" was created on the south side of Lark Drive in order to get the intersection of the new project street and the existing street across DRC AGENDA SUBTT18508 — BRENT CALDWELL December 16, 2014 Page 2 Kenyon Way (Lark Drive) to line up. Lots "B" and "C" were necessary in order to provide line -site visibility for the interior streets of the project where they intersect Kenyon Way, which is curvilinear along the project boundary. The Engineering Services Department has agreed to accept dedication and maintenance of the lettered lots. Staff Comments: The proposed project is well designed and meets all the related development criteria, except that Lot #19 does not meet the minimum lot depth requirement. Staff is in support of a Variance for Lot #19 as it is justified due to the odd shape and large size of the lot. The project provides a variety of lot sizes and dimensions which will create a varied street scene. The project layout provides two points of vehicular access which line up with two existing public streets. Staff is in support of the General Plan Amendment and Victoria Community Plan Amendment, as the project site is no longer needed as either a park or school site. The view to the south property line will be open to the existing landscape area and community trail, providing a pleasing view for the south facing lots along the new portion of Lark Drive. Maior Issues: Whether the Committee agrees with staff and is in support of a Variance to reduce the lot depth requirement from 90 feet to 71 feet for Lot #19. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project layout and the related General Plan Amendment, Victoria Community Plan Amendment, and Variance. If they are accepting of all of the proposed entitlements, forward the project to the Planning Commission for review. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez December 16, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00620 — BENCHMARK COMMUNITIES - A request for the architectural and site plan review of 95 single-family homes located within the Rancho Etiwanda Estates adjacent to Indian Wells Place approximately 1,800 feet north of Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 1087-071-15. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226-2. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City Council on August 1, 2001) and there are no new environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report. Background: On July 24, 2002, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226, which permitted the subdivision of 265 residential lots on 92.78 acres of land located north of the intersection of Day Creek Boulevard and Indian Wells Place. This tract is part of a 632-unit Master Planned Community known as Rancho Etiwanda Estates. The site has since been divided into multiple phases, all of which have been approved for development except for the subject 95-lots that are located within the remaining 37.43 acres at the northwest corner of Rancho Etiwanda Estates. This property was previously rough -graded. Additionally, perimeter block walls as well as homeowner association maintained walls, fences, and landscaping have been installed along Indian Wells Place. Design Parameters: The subject property is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP), which requires development to comply with specific site and architectural design guidelines. Particular "primary" architectural styles, such as Bungalow, Ranch, Monterey, and San Juan are required to be used on at least two-thirds of the proposed units. The applicant has chosen to use only primary architectural styles and will, therefore, be in compliance with this requirement. The San Juan elevation incorporates wrought iron details, shed roof awning with decorative wood braces, and exposed rafter tales. The Country style incorporates decorative gables, louvered shutters, and stucco window trim. The Bungalow style incorporates stone wainscot and porch column bases with dual post columns, decorative beams and brackets at gables, and wood shingle siding. The Monterey style incorporates decorative shutters, wood balcony,. beams, and railing as well as exposed rafter tails. All homes will also incorporate decorative garage doors. The ENSP also requires residential projects of this size to incorporate a minimum of eight (8) housing footprints with a minimum of four (4) elevations per footprint. The ENSP allows for reverse footprints to count as an additional footprint. The ENSP also allows for plans with courtyard walls and patios along the front elevation to count as an additional elevation. As seen in the chart below, the proposed development will be in compliance with these minimum requirements. Floor Plan/Elevation Confi uration San Juan Ranch Bungalow Monterey Courtyard Wall Porch Alternate Total Elevations Plan 1* x x x x 4 Plan 2* x x x x 4 Plan 3* x x x x 4 Plan 4* x x x x 4 * Reverse footprint will also be provided. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00620 —BENCHMARK COMMUNITIES ' December 16, 2014 Page 2 The floor plans range in size from a 2,689 square foot plan to a 4,055 square foot plan. One (1) of the four (4) floor plans will be single -story, while the other three (3) are two-story. The plans submitted indicate that twenty-five (25) percent of the lots will contain single -story homes, which is a requirement specified in the ENSP. Additionally, a Development Agreement was approved in 2001 that required compliance with the Low Residential District standards for all lots within this tract (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226). Development standards for the Low Residential District include, but are not limited to, maximum lot coverage of forty (40) percent, maximum height of thirty-five (35) feet, minimum front yard setback of eighteen (18) feet with an average front yard setback of twenty (20) feet (measured from the right-of-way), a fifteen (15)-foot minimum building separation on side yards with a five (5)- and ten (10)-foot side yard setback measured from the property lines. In reviewing the site plan, staff found that Lots 12, 24, and 35 do not comply with the five (5)- and ten (10)-foot side yard setback requirement, Lot 55 does not comply with the fifteen (15)-foot usable rear yard setback, and Lots 87 and 88 do not comply with the fifteen (15)-foot minimum building separation requirement. Aside from these items, all other lots comply with the required` development standards for this area. 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: The applicant has worked diligently with staff; there are no major issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: As noted above, the following are a list of lots that are not in compliance with one or more development standards: a. Lots 12, 24, and 35 do not comply with the five (5)- and ten (10)-foot side yard setback requirement specified in the development agreement. b. Lot 55 does not comply with the fifteen (15)-foot usable rear yard setback requirement specified in the development agreement. C. Lots 87 and 88 do not comply with the fifteen (15)-foot minimum building separation requirement specified in the development agreement. 2. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that the architectural styles listed above are accurately represented. There are, however, a few minor elements that staff recommends should be incorporated into the design of specific plans/elevations: a. The wrought iron patio gate used on the front porch of the Residence Two San Juan elevation should incorporate decorative elements (i.e., knuckles, collars, etc). b. Decorative corbels should be used appropriately along visible sides (front and street side yard) of the San Juan elevations of Residence Two, Three, and Four. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00620 — BENCHMARK COMMUNITIES December 16, 2014 Page 3 c. Additional window treatment, such as a pot shelf with exposed beams, should be added along the first floor window at the front of the Residence Three, Bungalow elevation. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of the project subject to the applicant revising the plans to resolve the above -mentioned Secondary issues and code compliance issues. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Dominick Perez Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith December 16, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. - A proposal to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet with 105 rooms on a vacant parcel of about 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres) in the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD) located on the west side of Pittsburgh Drive, near the intersection with Mission Vista Drive, about 700 feet north of 4th Street - APN: 0229-341-11. Related file: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00877 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00879. Background: The proposed project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on November 18, 2014 (Attachment A). The Committee generally accepted the proposal as submitted but had two (2) items that needed to be addressed before they would make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The first item that the Committee wanted addressed was the proposed color (white) of the stucco -finished wall plane around and above the main entrance of the hotel (on the east elevation). They requested that the applicant change the color of this wall plane to a shade of gray. The second item was the porcelain tile proposed at the wall plane immediately adjacent, and to the north, of the wall plane at the main entrance. The size, texture, and general appearance of the tile was not clear based on the plans that were submitted. The Committee requested a physical sample of this tile. The applicant was directed to provide a set of color elevations/renderings showing the revised stucco color and to provide a sample of the tile for review by the Committee at the next available Design Review Committee meeting. The applicant revised the color as requested (see attached 11-inch by 17-inch color elevations/renderings — Attachment B). Staff notes to the Committee that the applicant also revised the color of the corresponding wall plane on the west elevation of the building. The sample of the tile will be provided by the applicant at the meeting. 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. . 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. The policy issues discussed in the previous Design Review Committee report and at the Committee meeting held on November 18, 2015, shall apply. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. December 16, 2014 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Following the Committee's review of the requested color revision and sample tile, staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Staff notes to the Committee that the project will be forwarded to the Planning Commission with the General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: Attachment A: Design Review Committee Action Comments dated November 18, 2014 Attachment B: Revised Color Elevations/Renderings DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. ' Mike Smith November 18, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. - A proposal to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet with 105 rooms on a vacant parcel of about 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres) within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD) located on the west side of Pittsburgh Drive, near the intersection with Mission Vista Drive, about 700 feet north of 4th Street; APN: 0229-341-11. Related file: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00877 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00879. Design Parameters: The project site is a parcel with an approximate area 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres). The parcel is approximately 289 feet (east -west) by approximately 308 feet (north to south). The parcel is vacant and is dominated by short grasses/shrubs. The project site is bound on the north by a California Highway Patrol (CHP) station. To south and west are hotels (Towne Place Suites by Marriot and Holiday Inn Express). To the east, on the opposite side of Pittsburgh Avenue, is an industrial office building and another hotel (Homewood Suites by Hilton). The zoning of the property and all properties surrounding it is Industrial Park (IP) District. The property and the properties to the east, west, and south are also within the Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD). The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of approximately 1,050 feet and 1,046 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet and 105 rooms. The hotel will operate as a Fairfield Inn and Suites by Marriot. The building will have a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 67 percent. As the FAR of the proposed hotel exceeds the maximum FAR of 60 percent that is permitted in the Industrial Park (IP) District per Figure LU-2 of the General Plan and Table 17.36.040-1 of the Development Code, the applicant has submitted applications to amend both the General Plan and Development Code (Related files: DRC2014-00877 and DRC2014-00879, respectively) in order to establish a maximum FAR that will be higher than 50 percent and is specific to hotels and motels. The actual FAR that will apply to hotels and motels has not been established as the analysis is ongoing. The entrance and main lobby area will be located at the east side of the building. There will be two points of access — one via an existing driveway that is shared with the property to the north and another driveway that will be constructed at the southeast corner of the property. The parking field will be located on the east and west sides of the project site. The required parking for hotel uses is 107 parking stalls; 108 parking stalls will be provided. The distribution of landscaping will be generally 'equal' throughout the project site. Generous ground cover and trees will be provided along the street frontage at Pittsburgh Avenue, in the area in front of the main entrance, and along all sides of the building. Additional landscaping will be provided along the north, east, and west property lines. Landscape coverage is 16.6 percent; the minimum requirement is 15 percent for this development district. Consistent with other hotels, there will be a recreational area including a pool at the west side of the building. Although there is a wall along the north property line, no new walls are proposed along the south or west property lines. The basic footprint of the hotel will be approximately 15,000 square feet in area. The hotels to the south and west have footprints of approximately 18,000 square feet in area while the hotel to the east has a footprint of approximately 25,000 square feet in area. As noted previously, the proposed hotel will have four (4) floors. The hotel to the west has three (3) floors while the hotels to the south and east have four (4) floors. Thus, the size and massing of the proposed hotel will be similar to that of the existing hotels. The architecture will be relatively unique for this location and the City overall. Unlike the surrounding hotels that were approved and constructed within the last 10 years that have elements incorporated into their design that were derived from classic architectural themes, the architecture of the Attachment A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. November 18, 2014 Page 2 proposed hotel will be more contemporary. As part of an ongoing process of providing high quality design that is interesting, and in order to be current with evolving market requirements and aesthetic tastes, within the last few years the City has approved different commercial and institutional projects that incorporate architectural themes that depart from the dominant themes (inspired by Spanish, Italian, and Craftsman architecture) of existing development in the City. Similarly, it has become common practice to allow tenants/occupants of a building to have signature architecture that reflects their'brand'.. The architecture of the proposed hotel is consistent with these goals. The footprint of the hotel has significant horizontal movement and, as a result, the planes of the exterior walls are significantly articulated. This gives the impression that the hotel is constructed of multiple "blocks" in contrast to a single block and reduces the horizontal and vertical visual mass of the building. Reinforcing this impression will be various finishes including stucco, stackstone veneer, cement board siding. Furthermore, the colors - beige, white, and dark gray - will be varied for each block. Glazing will be the principal element at the main entrance. Although the roofline is flat, vertical articulation will be incorporated by undulating the parapet. At the main entrance there will be a curved, metal canopy that, in addition to establishing the location of the entrance, will provide weather protection and shade. The canopy will be supported by a single, over -sized pillar finished with a stackstone veneer. At the top of the parapet at the same general location as the main entrance there will be another metal (decorative) canopy. Each block will have prominent score lines accented with a contrasting color. Distinguishing details include the alternating color scheme at the blocks located at the northeast and southwest corners of the building and the dark gray stucco finish at the horizontal midpoint of the hotel's east and west elevations and along the first floor. 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. Staff supports the contemporary design. There are no Major Issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 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. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line -of -sight of the main entrance. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) screened behind a 4-foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of decorative masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone to match the building. 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back -flow devices, 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. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. November 18, 2014 Page 3 3. 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. 4. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 5. All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public view shall be constructed of decorative masonry blocks, i.e. slump stone, split -face, or have a decorative finish such as stucco. 6. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public right- of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway. 7. All doors (roll -up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall or glass panel. 8. Consistent with the other hotels in the vicinity, the trash enclosure shall be constructed according to the design standard that applies to commercial projects which requires, at a minimum, a roll -up door and an overhead structure, and a decorative finish such as stucco or decorative veneer such as stackstone to match the building. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Staff notes to the Committee that the project will be forwarded to the Planning Commission with the General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the proposed project and generally accepted the proposal as submitted. However, they had two (2) items that needed to be addressed before they would make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The first item that the Committee wanted addressed was the proposed color (white) of the stucco -finished wall plane around and above the main entrance of the hotel (on the east elevation). They requested that the applicant change the color of this wall plane to a shade of gray. The second item was the porcelain the proposed at the wall plane immediately adjacent, and to the north, of the wall plane at the main entrance. The size, texture, and general appearance of the the was not clear based on the plans that were submitted. The Committee requested a physical sample of this tile. The applicant was directed to provide a set of color elevations/renderings showing the revised stucco color and to provide a sample of the tile for review by the -Committee at the next available Design Review Committee meeting. Members Present: Fletcher., Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima December 16, 2014 SIGN PERMIT PERMANENT DRC2014-01054 - MICHAEL ESCHGER FOR WSS EUROSTAR, INC. - A request for 3 wall signs that propose a larger sign area than allowed in Uniform Sign Program #134 for sub -major tenants at the Terra Vista Town Center within the Community Commercial (CC) District in the Terra Vista Planned Community located at 10690 Foothill Boulevard -- APN: 1077-422-69. Background: WSS Eurostar Inc., a shoe retailer, is anticipating to occupy the sub -major tenant building located on the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Avenue. The building is currently vacant and was previously occupied by Party City. Project Proposal: WSS Eurostar Inc. is requesting approval of a Sign Permit to construct three illuminated wall signs that exceed the sign area and height limitation for sub -Major tenants as permitted under Uniform Sign Program (USP) 134. The USP classifies sub -Major tenants as businesses occupying between 7,000 and 34,999 square feet. Under the USP, the signs are permitted by the sign program to exceed the sign area, height, or length with Design Review Committee approval. Allowed per USP 134 Proposed Difference 3 signs per business 3 wall signs same size Conforms Two-line signs shall not exceed Height 20 inches 36 inches in total height including • WSS — 32 inches the space between the line and no • Shoes. Style. Selection. — 14 individual line shall be more than 24 inches inches in height. The space • Logo — 7 feet between lines shall not exceed 1/3 of the letter height of smallest letter. Length of sign shall not exceed Length Conforms. Under 70 70 percent of shop frontage, or • WSS = 11 feet 1 inch percent of shop frontage 25 feet, whichever is less. • Shoes. Style. Selection. — 15 or 25 feet or less feet 8 inches • Logo — 11 feet 1 inch Per sign square footage shall not 95.86 sf per sign 20.86 square feet exceed 75. *There is no reference to the logo size and height in the USP. Staff Comments: Staff believes that the sign is excessive for the scale of the building, and the overall height of the signs should be reduced. The logo is 7 feet tall on a building face that is 28 feet tall, which equates to 25 percent of the building height. Staff has requested the applicant scale the sign sizes down, but the applicant has chosen to move forward to the Design Review Committee as proposed. Furthermore, the Development Code only allows for 2 square feet of sign area per lineal foot of building frontage, at a maximum of 150 square feet per establishment. USP 134 is generous in the sign area that is allowed (225 square feet) compared to what is allowed per the Development Code. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-01054 — MICHAEL ESCHGER FOR WSS EUROSTAR, INC. December 16, 2014 Page The previous tenant, Party City, had three signs which were 23 feet in length with a 30 inch letter height for a total sign area of 57.5 square feet for each sign. Although it did not meet the 24 inch letter height maximum for one line, it still met the length and sign area maximum. A nearby tenant, Chili's Restaurant, is also categorized as a sub -major tenant. Their largest non - illuminated sign is 5 feet, 1-inch- tall and 13 feet, 1-inch in length, calculating out at 67 square feet. Chili's illuminated signage that is visible to Foothill Boulevard is 5 feet, 3-inches tall, 6 feet, 7.5 inches in length, with a total square footage of 35. Major Issues: None. Seconds Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff's conclusion is that a larger letter height than permitted by the USP is reasonable, but the sign area should be consistent with the 75 square foot maximum per sign. Therefore, staff recommends that the Committee direct the applicant to work with staff to reduce the sign area to 75 square feet per sign. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DECEMBER 2, 2014 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California II I. CALL TO ORDER III Roll Call II. Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II III. PROJECT CONSENT ITEMS III A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00207 - PLAZA DEVELOPMENTS EAST AVE LLC - A design review of six single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 6-lot subdivision on 2.99 acres within the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of East Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of the Victoria Avenue - APN: 0227-121-33. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16578. II IV. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS II 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 to the Planning Commission. 1 of 2 ACTION TOO P.M. A. The Committee reviewed the revised architecture for the project and recommended approval. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DECEMBER 2, 2014 § =Ho CUCAMONOA 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. B. DRC2013-00914 — JW DA - A review of six (6) single-family homes that will be constructed in conjunction with a previously approved subdivision within the Low (L) Residential District, located about 200 feet south of Wilson Avenue on the east side of Winchester Court - APNs: 0201-182-36, -37, and -38. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18391. 11 V. PUBLIC COMMENTS 11 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. 11 VI. ADJOURNMENT 11 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. 2 of 2 B. Approved subject to the revisions discussed in the report and at the meeting to be verified with staff prior to forwarding to the Planning Commission for review and action. None. 7:26 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith December 2, 2014 DRC2013-00914 — JWDA - A review of six (6) single-family homes that will be constructed in conjunction with a previously approved subdivision within the Low (L) Residential District, located about 200 feet south of Wilson Avenue on the east side of Winchester Court - APNs: 0201-182-36, -37, and -38. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18391. Background: A tentative tract map for the purpose of subdividing the property into six (6) lots for.a single-family residential development, filed by Amin Khan, was approved for this project site by the Planning Commission on November 10, 2010 (Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18391). To date, the final map has not been recorded. The property has since been sold to the applicant's client for the development/construction of the homes. Site Characteristics: The project site is comprised of three (3) parcels with, combined dimensions of approximately 659 feet (north to south) by approximately 178 feet (east to west) and an approximate area of 122,000 square feet (2.8 acres). The project site is located approximately 200 feet south of the intersection of Wilson Avenue and Winchester Court, on the east side of Winchester Court. The site is partially developed with a single-family residence which has been determined to not be a significant cultural/historic resource and is pending demolition. To the south, east, and west are single-family residences. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Low (L) Residential District. The subject property slopes north" to south. The elevation at the north side is approximately 1,783 feet. At the south side the elevation is generally approximately 1,767 feet, but because of a significant change in the slope at the south property line of the site, the elevation is approximately 1,755 feet. General: The applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot of the above -noted subdivision for a total of six (6) single-family residences. The floor areas of the houses (including the garages) will range between 4,288 square feet (Plan A) to 5,389 square feet (Plan D). Two (2) of the houses (Plan A and D) will be one-story, while the houses on the remainder of the lots will be two-story. This equates to 33 percent of the lots having single -story houses. This percentage of one- and two-story homes complies with Section 17.122.010 of the Development Code that requires 25 percent of all single-family detached units within single-family residential development consisting of four (4) or more units to be single -story. As noted previously, the project site is mostly bound by existing residential development. The subdivision to the south (Tract 10827) is approximately 10 feet lower in elevation than the project site. Reducing the finished elevations of the proposed subdivision to match Tract 10827 is not possible as the subdivision to the west (Tract 16421) and Winchester Court have finished elevations that are also higher than that of Tract 10827. The finished elevations of the project must be at, or near, the same elevation as the street for practical reasons such as adequate stormwater drainage and homeowner access to each lot. Nevertheless, to mitigate any impact on the properties to the south, staff requested that the applicant construct a single -story house on Lot 6 so that potential impacts to the existing property owners to the south, such as the loss of privacy and/or blocked views because of the grade difference, would be minimized. The staff also requested that the applicant plot the house 10 feet from the south property line instead of at the minimum required setback line of 5 feet. The other single -story house will be on Lot 1. DRC ACTION AGENDA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00914 — JWDA December 2, 2014 Page 2 The project includes the construction of perimeter and interior property line walls. The wall along the east property line will be a conventional screen wall of 6 feet in height. The walls proposed along the north and south property lines will be combination walls comprised of screen walls of 6 feet in height on top of a retaining wall. The retaining wall height will vary depending on the differences between finished grades. The combination wall along the south property line of Lot 6 will be constructed adjacent, and parallel, to an existing property line screen wall. Because of the presence of a concrete V-ditch on the north side of this existing wall, the proposed wall will be off -set from the existing wall a distance generally equivalent to the width of the V-ditch. Since the proposed wall includes a retaining wall, the screen portion of the wall will be slightly higher than the existing wall by approximately 3 feet (Sheet C-3, Section F-F). Staff recommends that the part of the proposed wall that projects above the existing wall be an open wrought iron fence instead to match the existing fence at the top of the wall along the common property line between Tracts 10827 and 16421. The architecture of each house will be consistent with the general design requirements outlined in the Development Code. The applicant proposes a single architectural theme that incorporates the form/massing and details derived from Italian architecture. Staff notes to the Committee that the use of a single theme is consistent with the subdivision located directly to the west (on the opposite side of Winchester Court). Each house will be largely finished with stucco and, with the exception of Plan B, will have some stone veneer. Plan B will be exclusively finished with stucco. All plans will have a two-tone color finish. The roofing will be of barrel tile. The applicant proposes four (4) distinct footprints — Plans A, B, C, and D — and a reverse footprint of Plan C for a total of five (5) footprints. Plans A and D will be one-story, while the others will be two-story. Each house will have an articulated footprint/floor plan and profile with a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. Each house will have a front entrance comprised of either an enclosed courtyard or a covered porch. A decorative trellis is included with Plans A and C. There will also be details such as a well-defined decorative molding (i.e. a "belly band") on Plans B and C, decorative trim around the windows, wrought iron accent features, and decorative garage doors. With the exception of Plan A, each house will have a chimney. The plotting of each house will be at a distance from the street that exceeds the minimum 37-foot setback requirement for the Development District of the project site. The garage doors for Plan B will not face the street. For Plan D, the doors of one of the garages will face the street, while the door of the other garage will face the side yard. The number of available footprints will comply with Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code. However, the number of elevations do not comply. Per the Development Code, two (2) elevations per footprint are required. To address this, staff has provided several solutions (see Major Issues below). 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. Per.Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code, two (2) elevations per footprint are required. The following is recommended in order for the project to comply with this requirement: a. Plan B - Revise either "Unit 2" or "Unit 4" so that they are further differentiated from each other and provide a distinct architectural design theme as follows: incorporate decorative DRC ACTION AGENDA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00914 — JWDA December 2, 2014 Page 3 stackstone veneer on the front and rear elevations (of either Unit 2 or Unit 4); use a different color scheme; and vary the trim and details around the windows and on the second floor decks. b. Plan C - Revise either "Unit 3" or "Unit 5" so that they are further differentiated from each other and provide a distinct architectural design theme as follows: remove the decorative stackstone veneer from all elevations (of either Unit 3 or Unit 5); use a different color scheme; and vary the trim and details around the windows and on the second floor decks. 2. All Plans (with stone veneer) — Increase the quantity of stone veneer on the front elevations and add more stone veneer to the rear elevations to match the quantity of stone veneer that is applied to the front elevations. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. Plan Types A and B — Per Section 17.120.030(A)(1)(c) of the Development Code, "at the primary building entrance provide changes in roof -form, building massing, additional architectural articulation to clearly identify the entry location." To accomplish this, shift the fascia of the tower elements at the entry area of each of these plan types that are on the same plane as, or are behind, the primary wall plane of the house, forward (westward) so they are more prominent. 2. All Plans — The amount of hardscape in front of each house is excessive and there is no interruption between the driveway paving and the wall plane of the west elevation of each house. To address this, provide landscaping in the area immediately adjacent to the wall plane at the front of each house. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant provide the requisite number of elevations and distinct architectural themes as required per the Code. If the applicant revises the number of elevations to the satisfaction of the Committee, subject to the revisions noted above, staff recommends that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. If the applicant does not revise the project to the satisfaction of the Committee, the project will be required to return to the Design Review Committee for review. Design Review Committee Action: Approved subject to the revisions discussed in the report and at the meeting to be verified with staff prior to forwarding to the Planning Commission for review and action. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, and Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA O C;CHUCAMONG& DECEMBER 2, 2014 - 7:00 RM. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly — Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DRC2013-00914 — JW DA - A review of six (6) single-family homes that will be constructed in conjunction with a previously approved subdivision within the Low (L) Residential District, located about 200 feet south of Wilson Avenue on the east side of Winchester Court - APNs: 0201-182-36, -37, and -38. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18391. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DECEMBER 2, 2014 MHO CUCAMONGA III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Gail 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 24, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith December 2, 2014 DRC2013-00914 — JWDA - A review of six (6) single-family homes that will be constructed in conjunction with a previously approved subdivision within the Low (L) Residential District, located about 200 feet south of Wilson Avenue on the east side of Winchester Court - APNs: 0201-182-36, -37, and -38. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18391. Background: A tentative tract map for the purpose of subdividing the property into six (6) lots for a single-family residential development, filed by Amin Khan, was approved for this project site by the Planning Commission on November 10, 2010 (Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18391). To date, the final map has not been recorded. The property has since been sold to the applicant's client for the development/construction of the homes. Site Characteristics: The project site is comprised of three (3) parcels with combined dimensions of approximately 659 feet (north to south) by approximately 178 feet (east to west) and an approximate area of 122,000 square feet (2.8 acres). The project site is located approximately 200 feet south of the intersection of Wilson Avenue and Winchester Court, on the east side of Winchester Court. The site is partially developed with a single-family residence which has been determined to not be a significant cultural/historic resource and is pending demolition. To the south, east, and west are single-family residences. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Low (L) Residential District. The subject property slopes north to south. The elevation at the north side is approximately 1,783 feet. At the south side the elevation is generally approximately 1,767 feet, but because of a significant change in the slope at the south property line of the site, the elevation is approximately 1,755 feet. General: The applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot of the above -noted subdivision for a total of six (6) single-family residences. The floor areas of the houses (including the garages) will range between 4,288 square feet (Plan A) to 5,389 square feet (Plan D). Two (2) of the houses (Plan A and D) will be one-story, while the houses on the remainder of the lots will be two-story. This equates to 33 percent of the lots having single -story houses. This percentage of one- and two-story homes complies with Section 17.122.010 of the Development Code that requires 25 percent of all single-family detached units within single-family residential development consisting of four (4) or more units to be single -story. As noted previously, the project site is mostly bound by existing residential development. The subdivision to the south (Tract 10827) is approximately 10 feet lower in elevation than the project site. Reducing the finished elevations of the proposed subdivision to match Tract 10827 is not possible as the subdivision to the west (Tract 16421) and Winchester Court have finished elevations that are also higher than that of Tract 10827. The finished elevations of the project must be at, or near, the same elevation as the street for practical reasons such as adequate stormwater drainage and homeowner access to each lot. Nevertheless, to mitigate any impact on the properties to the south, staff requested that the applicant construct a single -story house on Lot 6 so that potential impacts to the existing property owners to the south, such as the loss of privacy and/or blocked views because of the grade difference, would be minimized. The staff also requested that the applicant plot the house 10 feet from the south property line instead of at the minimum required setback line of 5 feet. The other single -story house will be on Lot 1. DRC AGENDA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00914 — JWDA December 2, 2014 Page 2 The project includes the construction of perimeter and interior property line walls. The wall along the east property line will be a conventional screen.wall of 6 feet in height. The walls proposed along the north and south property lines will be combination walls comprised of screen walls of 6 feet in height on top of a retaining wall. The retaining wall height will vary depending on the differences between finished grades. The combination wall along the south property line of Lot 6 will be constructed adjacent, and parallel, to an existing property line screen wall. Because of the presence of a concrete V-ditch on the north side of this existing wall, the proposed wall will be off -set from the existing wall a distance generally equivalent to the width of the V-ditch. Since the proposed wall includes a retaining wall, the screen portion of the wall will be slightly higher than the existing wall by approximately 3 feet (Sheet C-3, Section F-F). Staff recommends that the part of the proposed wall that projects above the existing wall be an open wrought iron fence instead to match the existing fence at the top of the wall along the common property line between Tracts 10827 and 16421. The architecture of each house will be consistent with the general design requirements outlined in the Development Code. The applicant proposes a single architectural theme that incorporates the form/massing and details derived from Italian architecture. Staff notes to the Committee that the use of a single theme is consistent with. the subdivision located directly to the west (on the opposite side of Winchester Court). Each house will be largely finished with stucco and, with the exception of Plan B, will have some stone veneer. Plan B will be exclusively finished with stucco. All plans will have a two-tone color finish. The roofing will be of barrel tile. The applicant proposes four (4) distinct footprints — Plans A, B, C, and D — and a reverse footprint of Plan C for a total of five (5) footprints. Plans A and D will be one-story, while the others will be two-story. Each house will have an articulated footprint/floor plan and profile with a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. Each house will have a front entrance comprised of either an enclosed courtyard or a covered porch. A.decorative trellis is. included with Plans A and C. There will also be details such as a well-defined decorative molding (i.e. a "belly band") on Plans B and C, decorative trim around the windows, wrought iron accent features, and decorative garage doors. With the exception of Plan A, each house will have a chimney. The plotting of each house will be at a distance from the street that exceeds the minimum 37-foot setback requirement for the Development District of the project site. The garage doors for Plan B will not face the street. For Plan D, the doors of one of the garages will face the street, while the door of the other garage will face the side yard. The number of available footprints will comply with Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code. However, the number of elevations do not comply. Per the Development Code, two (2) elevations per footprint are required. To address this, staff has provided several solutions (see Major Issues below). 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. Per Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code, two (2) elevations per footprint are required. The following is recommended in order for the project to comply with this requirement: a. Plan B - Revise either "Unit 2" or "Unit 4" so that they are further differentiated from each other and provide a distinct architectural design theme as follows: incorporate decorative stackstone veneer on the front and rear elevations (of either Unit 2 or Unit 4); use a different DRC AGENDA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00914 — JWDA December 2, 2014 Page 3 color scheme; and vary the trim and details around the windows and on the second floor decks. b. Plan C - Revise either "Unit 3" or "Unit 5" so that they are further differentiated from each other and provide a distinct architectural design theme as follows: remove the decorative stackstone veneer from all elevations (of either Unit 3 or Unit 5); use a different color scheme; and vary the trim and details around the windows and on the second floor decks. 2. All Plans (with stone veneer) — Increase the quantity of stone veneer on the front elevations and add more stone veneer to the rear elevations to match the quantity of stone veneer that is applied to the front elevations. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. Plan Types A and B — Per Section 17.120.030(A)(1)(c) of the Development Code, "at the primary building entrance provide changes in roof -form, building massing, additional architectural articulation to clearly identify the entry location." To accomplish this, shift the fascia of the tower elements at the entry area of each of these plan types that are on the same plane as, or are behind, the primary wall plane of the house, forward (westward) so they are more prominent. 2. All Plans — The amount of hardscape in front of each house is excessive and there is no interruption between the driveway paving and the wall plane of the west elevation of each house. To address this, provide landscaping in the area immediately adjacent to the wall plane at the front of each house. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant provide the requisite number of elevations and distinct architectural themes as required per the Code. If the applicant revises the number of elevations to the satisfaction of the Committee, subject to.the revisions noted above, staff recommends that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. If the applicant does not revise the project to the satisfaction of the Committee, the project will be required to return to the Design Review Committee for review. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA R�NCUONGA NOVEMBER 18, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00570 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES — Site plan and architectural review of a 32-unit multi -family project on 3.2 acres of land on the east side of Madrone Avenue between Arrow Route and 9th Street within the Medium (M) Development District - APN: 0207-262-01, 02, and 03. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18976. ACTION 7.00 p.m. A. Approved with minor revisions. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP B. Approved. SUBTT18976 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES —A request to subdivide 3.2 acres of land in order to develop 32 detached residential 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA )aHo NOVEMBER 18, 2014 CUCAMONCA condominiums fora site located on the east side of Madrone Avenue between Arrow Route and 9th Street in the Medium (M) Development District - APN: 0207-262-01, 02 and 03. Related case: DRC2014-00570. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS - A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 116,480 square feet on a parcel of about 249,000 square feet (5.72 acres) within the Industrial Park (IP) District, located at 10220 4th Street about 1,600 feet west of Haven Avenue - APN: 0210-371-02. ' Related cases: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00567 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00845. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC - A proposal to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet with 105 rooms within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD), located on the west side of Pittsburgh Drive, near the intersection with Mission Vista Drive, about 700 feet north of 4th Street - APN: 0229-341-11. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00877 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00879. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18966 — MARC HOMES, LLC - A proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of 1.89 acre into 8 lots within the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, at the south side of Base Line Road between Shelby Place and Emmett Way located at 13025 Base Line Road -APN: 1100-011-02. Related files: Development Review DRC2014-00645 and Tree Removal.Permit DRC2014-00581. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00645 - MARC HOMES, LLC - A proposal to construct eight (8) single-family residences in conjunction with a subdivision of a vacant parcel of 1.89 acre into 8 lots within the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, at the south side of Base Line Road between Shelby Place and Emmett Way located at 13025 Base Line Road -APN: 1100-011-02. Related cases: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18966 2 of 3 C. The Committee accepted the proposal subject to the revisions as noted and recommend approval to the Planning Commission. D. Needs revisions on stucco wall color and clarification on size, texture, and appearance of tile for the wall plane. Return to 12-6-14, DRC meeting. E. Approved. F. Approved. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA aHo NOVEMBER 18, 2014 WN CUCAMONGA and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00581. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. 11 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 3 of 3 None. 8:27 p.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag November 18, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00570 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES — Site plan and architectural review of a 32-unit multi- family project on 3.2 acres of land located on the east side of Madrone Avenue between Arrow Route and 9th Street in the Medium (M) Development District - APN: 0207-262- 01, 02 and 03. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18976. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18976 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES — A request to subdivide 3.2 acres of land in order to develop 32 detached residential condominiums for a site located on the east side of Madrone Avenue between Arrow Route and 9th Street in the Medium (M) Development District - APN: 0207-262-01, 02 and 03. Related case: DRC2014-00570. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to subdivide approximately 3.2 acres of land in order to develop a 32-unit detached residential condominium project located on the east side of Madrone Avenue, between Arrow Route and 9th Street. The project site is approximately 350 feet from north to south and 369 feet from east to west and is comprised of three parcels that are developed with two homes (8551 and 8583 Madrone Avenue). The homes have been determined to not be an historic resource and will be demolished to make way for the project. The site is relatively flat and contains multiple mature trees, which will be removed to make way for the development. To the north are two lots developed with single-family residences; to the south is a future City park site that is currently developed with multiple unoccupied buildings; and, to the east and west, are multi -family developments. The project is designed to comply with all related development criteria for the Medium (M) Development District, except for the setback of one unit (Unit #7) from the south property line. Unit #7 does not comply with the required 15-foot Interior Site Boundary setback. The applicant has indicated that they will submit a Variance application for a reduction in the setback requirement. They feel that the reduction is justified as Unit #7 is adjacent to a future City park rather than another dwelling unit on an adjacent lot, mitigating any privacy concerns. If the Variance is not supported by the Design Review Committee, the applicant will need to eliminate Unit #7, which in turn will increase the area between the remaining units. The front entrances of each unit face either a paseo or the public street (Madrone Avenue). The paseos run along the north, south and east project perimeter and through the center of the project (east -west and north -south). The garages face the drive aisles with access gates to the side yards. The units range in size from 2,217 to 2,577 square feet and are all two-story units. They are made up of 22 three bedroom and 10 four bedroom units. Each unit includes a private courtyard facing a paseo along with 5 and 10-foot private yard areas between the units. The project includes three floor plans with three different architectural styles for each floor plan, Spanish, Craftsman and Country. The recreational amenities include a swimming facility with bathrooms, showers and covered BBQ units, a tot lot and open play area, in conformance with the required four recreation amenities. Park benches will DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18976 AND DRC2014-00570 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES November 18, 2014 Page 2 be strategically placed throughout the project to provide sitting and gathering areas. The project is also directly adjacent to a future public park which is in the final planning stages. The paseos are generously landscaped with trees, shrubs and groundcover creating pleasant walkways for pedestrians and the residential units facing the paseos. The project provides for 153 trees, 9 trees in excess of the minimum requirement of 45 trees per acre. The total lot coverage of all of the units is 36,386 square feet, 25,431 square feet less than the maximum permitted 64,817 square feet (50 percent of project site). The total common and 'private open space is 64,103 square feet, 18,731 square feet over the minimum requirement of 45,372 square feet (35 percent of the project site). The common open space areas include the paseos, pool area, tot lot and open play area. The private open space areas include the court yards in front of the units (facing the paseos) as well as the walled areas on either side of the units. The Development Code requires 2 parking spaces for each 3 bedroom unit and 2.5 parking spaces for each 4 bedroom unit, along with 1 visitor parking space for every three units. This translates into a parking requirement of 80 parking spaces. The project provides 2 enclosed parking spaces per unit (64 total enclosed parking spaces) along with 5 open parking spaces in compliance with the minimum parking requirement. Additionally, there are 15 open parking spaces designated for guest parking, 4 over the minimum requirement. .There is a eucalyptus windrow on the City park site running along the south property line. The Arborist Report (Steve Andresen, September 28, 2014) for the project recommends that open fencing be used along the south property line in order to minimize disturbance of the eucalyptus trees. The units facing the south property line will have open view into the park. The current park sitewplan does not include any play area directly adjacent to the project site. Staff Comments: The applicant has done a good job creating a functional layout that provides each unit with ample private and common open space areas. The units adjacent to Madrone Avenue are designed with their front entrances facing the public street, providing an appealing street scene. The architectural theme of each unit is carried around to all elevations and each elevation includes roof and wall plane articulation. The paseos are attractively landscaped and the adjacent perimeter walls will include vine planting. A variety of common open space amenities are provided and are centrally located to all of the units. Staff's only concern is the necessity for a Variance to reduce the required Interior Site Boundary setback requirement from 15 feet to 7 feet. Staff would have a difficult time developing the 5 required Variance findings, as there is nothing unusual about the project site, which is relativity flat and rectangular in shape. Placing Unit #7 so close the project boundary will increase the potential for noise and privacy conflicts between the home owner of Unit #7 and future park users, which will be only separated by a wrought iron fence. It will also reduce the visual buffer between the park and project's two-story units. The elimination of Unit #7 will provide the opportunity to increase in the width of the paseo between Units 10 and 11, which are currently plotted 15 feet apart. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18976 AND DRC2014-00570 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES November 18, 2014 Page 3 Major Issues: Whether there are site constraints that justify the applicant's request to reduce the required 15-foot Interior Site Boundary setback by 7 feet. Secondary Issues: The applicant has proposed to use depressed ribbon drains down the center of the main drive aisle. Staff recommends that the drainage facility be entirely underground. The applicant has responded that they will use decorative paving in the ribbon gutters. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project and determine whether the Variance request is justified. If the Committee does not support the Variance, it is recommended that the applicant redesign the project layout with the extra area created by the removal of Unit #7 to be distributed between Units 10 and 11. The Committee will then have to determine whether the project needs to be scheduled for a second DRC review or whether it may move to Planning Commission once Staff has determined that the project is in conformance with the Development Code If the Committee determines that the Variance is justified it is recommended that the project move to the Planning Commission for final approval with direction regarding the ribbon drains. Design Review Committee Action: The Design Review Committee recommended that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for final review with the applicant adding additional gable supports to the Craftsman and Country plans and decorative paving to the drive aisle ribbon drains. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith November 18, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS -A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 116,480 square feet on a parcel of about 249,000 square feet (5.72 acres) within the Industrial Park (IP) District, located at 10220 4th Street about 1,600 feet west of Haven Avenue - APN: 0210-0371-02. Related case: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00567 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00845. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Design Parameters: The project site is a parcel with an area of about 249,000 square feet (5.72 acres). The parcel is approximately 415 feet (east to west) by approximately 601 feet (north - south). The western two-thirds of the parcel was previously developed with two (2) buildings with a combined floor area of approximately 22,500 square feet, along with associated surface improvements such as asphalt storage/parking areas and landscaping comprised of ground cover and numerous mature trees along 4th Street and along the perimeter. A records search yielded incomplete information but based on the information that is available, these buildings were most likely constructed in the late 1970's or early 1980's. Within the last few years there has been ongoing deconstruction/demolition activity on the property; therefore, only the smaller of the two buildings, the paving, and the landscaping remain. The eastern one-third of the parcel is vacant and is dominated by short grasses. Development of the site for the subject project will result in the removal of all the identified improvements. The project site is bound on the north by industrial office buildings. To the east is a property that is partially developed with a building of approximately 13,000 square feet. To the west is a vacant property, while to the south, on the opposite side of 4th Street, is an apartment complex (Centre Club Apartments) in the City of Ontario. The zoning of the property and all properties to the north, east, and west is Industrial Park (IP) District. The zoning of the property to the south in the City of Ontario is Urban Residential — Ontario Center Specific Plan. With the exception of a sloped area along the north property line, the subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of approximately 1,041 feet and 1,030 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to construct a warehouse distribution building of approximately 116,480 square feet. As the building is in excess of 50,000 square feet, activities within this building would be classified as "Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution — Medium." However, as this level of wholesale, storage, and distribution is not currently permitted in the Industrial Park (IP) District at this time, the applicant has submitted an application to amend the Development Code (Related case: DRC2014-00567) to permit this land use. Typical for this type of building, there will be an office area located at the southeast corner of the building. The dock loading/storage area with 18 dock doors will be located on the east side of the building. There will be two points of access — one via an existing driveway and another via a new driveway at the southwest and southeast corners, respectively, of the project site. The existing driveway at the midpoint of the street frontage of the site will be removed. The building is required to have 76 passenger vehicle parking stalls, 78 parking stalls are provided. The distribution of landscaping will be generally equal throughout the project site. Generous ground cover and trees will be provided along the street frontage at 4th Street at the' office area and along the north and west property lines. Additional landscaping will be provided along the north and west sides of the building. Landscape coverage is 12.6 percent; the minimum requirement is 15 percent for this Development District. Staff notes to the Committee that the applicant will have to provide additional landscaping to satisfy the minimum landscaping requirement. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS November 18, 2014 Page 2 The proposed building will be of concrete tilt -up construction painted with a palette of two colors (blue and shades of grey). The building will have sandblasted concrete accents. An additional primary material will be metal accents while a secondary material will be glass panels. Generous amounts of blue -tinted glass have been provided at the office area and at various locations along the wall planes of the building. A key feature is glass that is applied almost to the full height of the officer corner that gives it the appearance of a glass "cube." As the uses expected within the building are to be logistics -oriented, to maximize the efficiency of the interior space there is limited articulation of the wall planes along the east and west elevations of the building. Nevertheless, there will be horizontally articulated vertical elements located at intermediate points along that will interrupt the wall planes of the building. These vertical elements include glass panels. At the office corner, there are also horizontal metal accents that project from the wall plane. These accents punctuate the application of glass and provide shaded relief. On the east elevation, there are a couple of vertical design elements that minimize the expanse of plain, bare walls in the dock area. Lastly, all corners, with the exception of the northeast corner, are enhanced by utilizing different shades of grey, metal canopies, score lines, and relief in the wall plane that altogether reflect the general appearance of the office corner. A wrought iron fence/gate is proposed to be erected between the dock loading/yard area and the standards passenger vehicle parking area. Perimeter fencing will be comprised of a chain link fence along the east and west property lines. Along the north property line there is a concrete tilt -up wall of approximately 6 feet in height that will remain in -place. The majority of the buildings in the vicinity range in size from small industrial office buildings (primarily located to the north) of approximately 8,000 to 24,000 square feet in floor area to logistics buildings (generally located to the north and west) of approximately 550,000 to 850,000 square feet. The massing and scale of the building will be similar to a logistics building located approximately 280 feet to the northwest of the project site. 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. Per Table 17.36.040-1 of the Development Code, the minimum open space requirement in the Industrial Park (IP) District is 15 percent. According to the "Project Data" table on Sheet A1.1, the landscape provided is 15.7 percent when including pavement, but 12.6 percent when the pavement is not included; the difference is approximately 6,000 square feet. Unless the pavement is for the purpose of pedestrian use, plaza areas, the outdoor eating area, etc., then pavement cannot be counted toward the open space requirement; vehicle parking areas cannot be included. Solutions include reducing the floor area of the building, providing additional landscaping at the northeast corner of the building, and providing landscaping in the area where the trailers are proposed to be stored. Note: Staff discussed the issue with the applicant and, at the time of the preparation of this report, he was in the process of addressing this deficiency and will provide updated Site and Landscape plans at the Committee meeting. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS November 18, 2014 Page 3 1. At the northwest and southwest corners of the building and at the vertical elements along the wall plane on all elevations, incorporate a sandblasted concrete finish instead of relying only on paint color (in this case, Sherwin Williams SW 7072 and 7073) to differentiate the feature from the adjacent wall panels. 2. Per Section 17.48.050(E)(1)(e) of the Development Code, "within all land use categories except Heavy Industrial, all storage area screening shall be architecturally integrated with surrounding buildings by the use of concrete, masonry, or other similar materials not to exceed a height of eight feet (8 feet) from the highest finished grade." To comply with this requirement, a concrete tilt -up wall with a height of 8 feet that incorporates some of the design elements that are on the building, such as sandblasted finish, score lines, and matching painted scheme, shall be constructed between the standard passenger parking area and the dock loading/yard area instead of the wrought iron fence. The wrought iron gate shall have a metal mesh screen attached to it to minimize visibility through it. 3. Per Section 17.48.050(E)(2)(c) of the Development Code, within all land use categories except Heavy Industrial, all fencing or walls shall be wrought iron, concrete, masonry, or other similar materials not to exceed a height of eight feet (8 feet) from the highest finished grade. The use of barbed wire or similar materials is prohibited from these land use categories. Chain -link fencing may be used in areas not visible in front setback area." The chain link fencing along the west and east property lines shall not encroach into the 45-foot setback area. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line -of -sight of the office corner of the building. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) screened behind a 4- foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of decorative masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone or poured in -place concrete with design elements incorporated to match the building. 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back -flow devices, 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. 3. The employee lunch area shall have an overhead trellis with cross members spaced no more than 18 inches on center with minimum dimensions of 4 inches by 12 inches. Each support column shall have a decorative base that incorporates the architectural design and finishes/trim used on the building. The trellis shall be painted to match the building, and tables, chairs/benches, and waste receptacles shall be provided. 4. 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. 5. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 6. All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public view shall be constructed of decorative masonry blocks, i.e. slump stone, split -face, or have a decorative finish such as stucco. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS November 18, 2014 Page 4 7. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public right-of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the 45-foot setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway. 8. 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 project to the Planning Commission, subject to revisions that are necessary to ensure the project complies with the landscape coverage requirement described in the Development Code, and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the proposal and discussed the required revisions with the applicant. Staff noted to the Committee that prior to the meeting (but after this report was prepared) the applicant revised the landscaping of the project site in order to comply the landscape coverage requirement. A revised set of plans with the added landscaping was included in the presentation to the Committee. The applicant agreed to add sandblasted finish to the building and will comply with the other conditions that are described in this report. The Committee accepted the proposal subject to the revisions as noted and recommend approval to the Planning Commission. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger, Staff Planner: Mike Smith DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith November 18, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. - A proposal to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet with 105 rooms on a vacant parcel of about 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres) within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District ([COD) located on the west side of Pittsburgh Drive, near the intersection with Mission Vista Drive, about 700 feet north of 4th Street; APN: 0229-341-11. Related file: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00877 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00879. Desiqn Parameters: The project site is a parcel with an approximate area 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres). The parcel is approximately 289 feet (east -west) by approximately 308 feet (north to south). The parcel is vacant and is dominated by short grasses/shrubs. The project site is bound on the north by a California Highway Patrol (CHP) station. To south and west are hotels (Towne Place Suites by Marriot and Holiday Inn Express). To the east, on the opposite side of Pittsburgh Avenue, is an industrial office building and another hotel (Homewood Suites by Hilton). The zoning of the property and all properties surrounding it is Industrial Park (IP) District. The property and the properties to the east, west, and south are also within the Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD). The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of approximately 1,050 feet and 1,046 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet and 105 rooms. The hotel will operate as a Fairfield Inn and Suites by Marriot. The building will have a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 67 percent. As the FAR of the proposed hotel exceeds the maximum FAR of 60 percent that is permitted in the Industrial Park (IP) District per Figure LU-2 of the General Plan and Table 17.36.040-1 of the Development Code, the applicant has submitted applications to amend both the General Plan and Development Code (Related files: DRC2014-00877 and DRC2014-00879, respectively) in order to establish a maximum FAR that will be higher than 50 percent and is specific to hotels and motels. The actual FAR that will apply to hotels and motels has not been established as the analysis is ongoing. The entrance and main lobby area will be located at the east side of the building. There will be two points of access — one via an existing driveway that is shared with the property to the north and another driveway that will be constructed at the southeast corner of the property. The parking field will be located on the east and west sides of the project site. The required parking for hotel uses is 107 parking stalls; 108 parking stalls will be provided. The distribution of landscaping will be generally 'equal' throughout the project site. Generous ground cover and trees will be provided along the street frontage at Pittsburgh Avenue, in the area in front of the main entrance, and along all sides of the building. Additional landscaping will be provided along the north, east, and west property lines. Landscape coverage is 16.6 percent; the minimum requirement is 15 percent for this development district. Consistent with other hotels, there will be a recreational area including a pool at the west side of the building. Although there is a wall along the north property line, no new walls are proposed along the south or west property lines. The basic footprint of the hotel will be approximately 15,000 square feet in area. The hotels to the south and west have footprints of approximately 18,000 square feet in area while the hotel to the east has a footprint of approximately 25,000 square feet in area. As noted previously, the proposed hotel will have four (4) floors. The hotel to the west has three (3) floors while the hotels to the south and east have four (4) floors. Thus, the size and massing of the proposed hotel will be similar to that of the existing hotels. The architecture will be relatively unique for this location and the City overall. Unlike the surrounding hotels that were approved and constructed within the last 10 years that have elements incorporated into their design that were derived from classic architectural themes, the architecture of the DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. November 18, 2014 Page 2 proposed hotel will be more contemporary. As part of an ongoing process of providing high quality design that is interesting, and in order to be current with evolving market requirements and aesthetic tastes, within the last few years the City has approved different commercial and institutional projects that incorporate architectural themes that depart from the dominant themes (inspired by Spanish, Italian, and Craftsman architecture) of existing development in the City. Similarly, it has become common practice to allow tenants/occupants of a building to have signature architecture that reflects their `brand'. The architecture of the proposed hotel is consistent with these goals. The footprint of the hotel has significant horizontal movement and, as a result, the planes of the exterior walls are significantly articulated. This gives the impression that the hotel is constructed of multiple "blocks" in contrast to a single block and reduces the horizontal and vertical visual mass of the building. Reinforcing this impression will be various finishes including stucco, stackstone veneer, cement board siding. Furthermore, the colors - beige, white, and dark gray - will be varied for each block. Glazing will be the principal element at the main entrance. Although the roofline is flat, vertical articulation will be incorporated by undulating the parapet. At the main entrance there will be a curved, metal canopy that, in addition to establishing the location of the entrance, will provide weather protection and shade. The canopy will be supported by a single, over -sized pillar finished with a stackstone veneer. At the top of the parapet at the same general location as the main entrance there will be another metal (decorative) canopy. Each block will have prominent score lines accented with a contrasting color. Distinguishing details include the alternating color scheme at the blocks located at the northeast and southwest corners of the building and the dark gray stucco finish at the horizontal midpoint of the hotel's east and west elevations and along the first floor. 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. Staff supports the contemporary design. There are no Major Issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 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. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line -of -sight of the main entrance. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) screened behind a 4-foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of decorative masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone to match the building. 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back -flow devices, 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. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. November 18, 2014 Page 3 3. 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. 4. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 5. All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public view shall be constructed of decorative masonry blocks, i.e. slump stone, split -face, or have a decorative finish such as stucco. 6. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public right- of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway. 7. All doors (roll -up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall or glass panel. 8. Consistent with the other hotels in the vicinity, the trash enclosure shall be constructed according to the design standard that applies to commercial projects which requires, at a minimum, a roll -up door and an overhead structure, and a decorative finish such as stucco or decorative veneer such as stackstone to match the building. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Staff notes to the Committee that the project will be forwarded to the Planning Commission with the General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the proposed project and generally accepted the proposal as submitted. However, they had two (2) items that needed to be addressed before they would make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The first item that the Committee wanted addressed was the proposed color (white) of the stucco -finished wall plane around and above the main entrance of the hotel (on the east elevation). They requested that the applicant change the color of this wall plane to a shade of gray. The second item was the porcelain tile proposed at the wall plane immediately adjacent and to the north of the wall plane at the main entrance. The size, texture, and general appearance of the tile was not clear based on the plans that were submitted. The Committee requested a physical sample of this tile. The applicant was directed to provide a set of color elevations/renderings showing the revised stucco color and to provide a sample of the tile for review by the Committee at the next available Design Review Committee meeting. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith November 18, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18966 — MARC HOMES, LLC: A proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of 1.89 acres into 8 lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, at the south side of Base Line Road between Shelby Place and Emmett Way located at 13025 Base Line Road; APN: 1100-011-02. Related files: Development Review DRC2014-00645 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00581. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00645 — MARC HOMES, LLC: A proposal to construct eight (8) single-family residences in conjunction with a subdivision of a vacant parcel of 1.89 acres into 8 lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, at the south side of Base Line Road between Shelby Place and Emmett Way located at 13025 Base Line Road; APN: 1100-011-02. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18966 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00581. Site Characteristics: The project site is a vacant property with an area of about 82,000 square feet (1.89 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 270 feet (east -to -west) by about 300 feet (north -to -south). To the south and west of the project site are single-family residences. To the north, on the opposite side of Base Line Road, is a largely undeveloped set of parcels; on one of these parcels is a small single-family residence. To the east is a condominium complex. The zoning of the property and all the surrounding properties is Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into eight (8) lots for a single-family residential development. All lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas range between 9,311 square feet and 11,814 square feet while the average lot area is 10,206 square feet. The required minimum lot area and minimum average lot area for lots in the zoning district of the project site are 7,200 square feet and 10,000 square feet, respectively. The depth of each lot will be between 123 feet and 147 feet while the width of each lot at the required front setback will be between 65 feet and 86 feet. The required minimum lot depth and minimum lot width for lots in the zoning district of the project site are 100 feet and 60 feet, respectively. All lots will be conventional, i.e., rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. In conjunction with the proposed subdivision, the applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot for a total of eight (8) single-family residences. The floor areas of the houses (including the garages and covered patios) will range between 3,440 square feet (Plan 1) to 4,616 square feet (Plan 3). Two (2) of the houses will be one-story while the houses on the remainder of the lots will be two-story. This equates to 25% of the lots having single -story houses. This mix of one- and two-story homes is consistent with the policy adopted by the Planning Commission requiring that 25 percent (minimum) of the proposed houses be single -story. All of the houses will have two garages — one 2-car garage and one 1-car garage. The 2-car garages will be setback from the front part of the house while the 1-car garages will face the side yard, i.e., they are side -entry garages. This will comply with Section 5.42.606 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan which requires that 50 percent of the garages be oriented or situated in a manner that minimizes its visual presence (as seen from the street). The houses on the corner lots (Lots 1 and 5) will be two-story. Although Section 5.42.608 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan requires single -story houses on corner lots, it does allow for two- DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18966 AND DRC2014-00645 — MARC HOMES, LLC November 18, 2014 Page 2 story houses provided that "extra deep setbacks are provided." The proposed setback of the houses from Base Line Road is 45 feet (the required street side setback is 25 feet). The architecture of each house will be generally consistent with the design requirements outlined in Section 5.42.600 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant proposes two (2) types of architectural themes (elevations) — Country French and Bungalow, and six (6) footprints — Plans 1, 2, and 3 (and reverse footprints of each). Plan 1 will be one-story while the others will be two-story. The number of available footprints will comply with Figure 5-45 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. There will be a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. Each house will have a front entrance that includes either a partially enclosed .courtyard or a covered porch. Depending on the theme, a variety of materials will be incorporated into the architecture including stone veneer, wood siding, and stucco finish. There will also be details such as wood brackets/rafters tails at the roof eaves, decorative trim and shutters around some of the windows, corbels, molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots, and decorative garage doors. Chimneys are not proposed. The roofing on all of the houses will be concrete tile. 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. All themes (all Plans) - Add more stone veneer to the rear elevations of each architectural theme to match the quantity of stone veneer applied to the front elevations. 2. All themes (all Plans) - Add shutters, pot shelves, or other similar trim details to all elevations of each architectural theme. With the exception of the north side elevation of the houses on Lots 1 and 5, it is not necessary to do this on the SIDE elevations at the FIRST floor of the houses as these details will have limited aesthetic value due to the relatively short side yard setbacks. 3. On the architectural themes that utilize wood siding, add wood siding to the side and rear elevations of each such as beneath the gable roofs and on where part of a wall plane projects beyond the primary wall plane. 4. Bungalow (Plan 1) — At the rear elevation, change the design of the roof at the Master Bedroom from a hip roof to a gable roof (that includes the "wood outlookers") so that its appearance is consistent with the gable roofs at the front elevation. 5. Country French (Plan 1) - At the rear elevation, change the design of the roof at the Master Bedroom from a hip roof to a gable roof (that includes the decorative vent) so that its appearance is consistent with the gable roofs at the front elevation. 6. Country French (Plan 2) - At the rear elevation, change the design of the roof at Bedroom 2 from a hip roof to a gable roof (that includes the decorative vent) so that its appearance is consistent with the gable roofs at the front elevation. 7. Country French (Plans 2 and 3) — At the gable roofs, add decorative vents similar to those beneath the gable roofs on the same theme for Plan 1. DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18966 AND DRC2014-00645 —MARC HOMES, LLC November 18, 2014 Page 3 8. Country French (Plan 3) — At some of the windows, add decorative corbels similar to those beneath the windows on the same theme for Plan 2. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. The molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots shall also be stone and not foam. Staff Recommendation: With the above -noted design issues revised to the satisfaction of the Committee, staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission, and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The applicant revised the proposal incorporating the above -noted recommendations listed under "Major Issues". The Committee reviewed the revised proposal and determined that it had addressed the issues and is now acceptable for review by the Planning Commission. The Committee recommends approval to the Planning Commission. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA NOVEMBER 18, 2014 - 7:00 RM. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00570 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES — Site plan and architectural review of a 32-unit multi -family project on 3.2 acres of land on the east side of Madrone Avenue between Arrow Route and 9th Street within the Medium (M) Development District - APN: 0207-262-01, 02, and 03. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18976. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18976 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES —A request to subdivide 3.2 acres of land in order to develop 32 detached residential 1 of 3 ADESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ONC4NOVEMBER 18, 2014 condominiums for a.site located on the east side of Madrone Avenue between Arrow Route and 9th Street in the Medium (M) Development District - APN: 0207-262-01, 02 and 03. Related case: DRC2014-00570. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS - A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 116,480 square feet on a parcel of about 249,000 square feet (5.72 acres) within the Industrial Park (IP) District, located at 10220 4th Street about 1,600 feet west of Haven Avenue - APN: 0210-371-02. Related cases: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00567 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00845. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC - A proposal to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet with 105 rooms within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD), located on the west side of Pittsburgh Drive, near the intersection with Mission Vista Drive, about 700 feet north of 4th Street - APN: 0229-341-11. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00877 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00879. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18966 — MARC HOMES, LLC - A proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of 1.89 acre into 8 lots within the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, at the south side of Base Line Road between Shelby Place and Emmett Way located at 13025 Base Line Road -APN: 1100-011-02. Related files: Development Review DRC2014-00645 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00581. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00645 - MARC HOMES, LLC - A proposal to construct eight (8) single-family residences in conjunction with a subdivision of a vacant parcel of 1.89 acre into 8 lots within the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, at the south side of Base Line Road between Shelby Place and Emmett Way located at 13025 Base Line Road -APN: 1100-011-02. Related cases: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18966 2 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA NOVEMBER 18, 2014 CHO UCAMON(M and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00581. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Gail 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 6, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag November 18, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00570 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES — Site plan and architectural review of a 32-unit multi- family project on 3.2 acres of land located on the east side of Madrone Avenue between Arrow Route and 9th Street in the Medium (M) Development District - APN: 0207-262- 01, 02 and 03. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18976. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18976 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES — A request to subdivide 3.2 acres of land in order to develop 32 detached residential condominiums for a site located on the east side of Madrone Avenue between Arrow Route and 9th Street in the Medium (M) Development District - APN: 0207-262-01, 02 and 03. Related case: DRC2014-00570. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to subdivide approximately 3.2 acres of land in order to develop a 32-unit detached residential condominium project located on the east side of Madrone Avenue, between Arrow Route and 9th Street. The project site is approximately 350 feet from north to south and 369 feet from east to west and is comprised of three parcels that are developed with two homes (8551 and 8583 Madrone Avenue). The homes have been determined to not be an historic resource and will be demolished to make way for the project. The site is relatively flat and contains,multiple mature trees, which will be removed to make way for the development. To the north are two lots developed with single-family residences; to the south is a future City park site that is currently developed with multiple unoccupied buildings; and, to the east and west, are multi -family developments. The project is designed to comply with all related development criteria for the Medium (M) Development District, except for the setback of one unit (Unit #7) from the south property line. Unit #7 does not comply with the required 15-foot Interior Site Boundary setback. The applicant has indicated that they will submit a Variance application for a reduction in the setback requirement. They feel that the reduction is justified as Unit #7 is adjacent to a future City park rather than another dwelling unit on an adjacent lot, mitigating any privacy concerns. If the Variance is not supported by the Design Review Committee, the applicant will need to eliminate Unit #7, which in turn will increase the area between the remaining units. The front entrances of each unit face either a paseo or the public street (Madrone Avenue). The paseos run along the north, south and east project perimeter and through the center of the project (east -west and north -south). The garages face the drive aisles with access gates to the side yards. The units range in size from 2,217 to 2,577 square feet and are all two-story units. They are made up of 22 three bedroom and .10 four bedroom units. Each unit includes a private courtyard facing a paseo along with 5 and 10-foot private yard areas between the units. The project includes three floor plans with three different architectural styles for each floor plan, Spanish, Craftsman and Country. The recreational amenities include a swimming facility with bathrooms, showers and covered BBQ units, a tot lot and open play area, in conformance with the.required four recreation amenities. Park benches will DRC AGENDA SUBTT18976 AND DRC2014-00570 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES November 18, 2014 Page 2 be strategically placed throughout the project to provide sitting and gathering areas. The project is also directly adjacent to a future public park which is in the final planning stages. The paseos are generously landscaped with trees, shrubs and groundcover creating pleasant walkways for pedestrians and the residential units facing the paseos. The project provides for 153 trees, 9 trees in excess of the minimum requirement of 45 trees per acre. The total lot coverage of all of the units is 36,386 square feet, 25,431 square feet less than the maximum permitted 64,817 square feet (50 percent of project site). The total common and private open space is 64,103 square feet, 18,731 square feet over the minimum requirement of 45,372 square feet (35 percent of the project site). The common open space areas include the paseos, pool area, tot lot and open play area. The private open space areas include the court yards in front of the units (facing the paseos) as well as the walled areas on either side of the units. The Development Code requires 2 parking spaces for each 3 bedroom unit and 2.5 parking spaces for each 4 bedroom unit, along with 1 visitor parking space for every three units. This translates into a parking requirement of 80 parking spaces. The project provides 2 enclosed parking spaces per unit (64 total enclosed parking spaces) along with 5 open parking spaces in compliance with the minimum parking requirement. Additionally, there are 15 open parking spaces designated for guest parking, 4 over the minimum requirement. There is a eucalyptus windrow on the City park site running along the south property line. The Arborist Report (Steve Andresen, September 28, 2014) for the project recommends that open fencing be used along the south property line in order to minimize disturbance of the eucalyptus trees. The units facing the south property line will have open view into the park. The current park site plan does not include any play area directly adjacent to the project site. Staff Comments: The applicant has done a good job creating a functional layout that provides each unit with ample private and common open space areas. The units adjacent to Madrone Avenue are designed with their front entrances facing the public street, providing an appealing street scene. The architectural theme of each unit is carried around to all elevations and each elevation includes roof and wall plane articulation. The paseos are attractively landscaped and the adjacent perimeter walls will include vine planting. A variety of common open space amenities are provided and are centrally located to all of the units. Staff's only concern is the necessity for a Variance to reduce the required Interior Site Boundary setback requirement from 15 feet to 7 feet. Staff would have a difficult time developing the 5 required Variance findings, as there is nothing unusual about the project site, which is relativity flat and rectangular in shape. Placing Unit #7 so close the project boundary will increase the potential for noise and privacy conflicts between the home owner of Unit #7 and future park users, which will be only separated by a wrought iron fence. It will also reduce the visual buffer between the park and project's two-story units. The elimination of Unit #7 will provide the opportunity to increase in the width of the paseo between Units 10 and 11, which are currently plotted 15 feet apart. DRC AGENDA SUBTT18976 AND DRC2014-00570 — CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES November 18, 2014 Page 3 Major Issues: Whether there are site constraints that justify the applicant's request to reduce the required 15-foot Interior Site Boundary setback by 7 feet. Secondary Issues: The applicant has proposed to use depressed ribbon drains down the center of the main drive aisle. Staff recommends that the drainage facility be entirely underground. The applicant has responded that they will use decorative paving in the ribbon gutters. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project and determine whether the Variance request is justified. If the Committee does not support the Variance, it is recommended that the applicant redesign the project layout with the extra area created by the removal of Unit #7 to be distributed between Units 10 and 11. The Committee will then have to determine whether the project needs to be scheduled for a second DRC review or whether it may move to Planning Commission once Staff has determined that the project is in conformance with the Development Code If the Committee determines that the Variance is justified it is recommended that the project move to the Planning Commission for final approval with direction regarding the ribbon drains. Desian Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith November 18, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS -A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 116,480 square feet on a parcel of about 249,000 square feet (5.72 acres) within the Industrial Park (IP) District, located at 10220 4th Street about 1,600 feet west of Haven Avenue - APN: 0210-0371-02. Related case: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00567 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00845. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Design Parameters: The project site is a parcel with an area of about 249,000 square feet (5.72 acres). The parcel is approximately 415 feet (east to west) by approximately 601 feet (north - south). The western two-thirds of the parcel was previously developed with two (2) buildings with a combined floor area of approximately 22,500 square feet, along with associated surface improvements such as asphalt storage/parking areas and landscaping comprised of ground cover and numerous mature trees along 4th Street and along the perimeter. A records search yielded incomplete information but based on the information that is available, these buildings were most likely constructed in the late 1970's or early 1980's. Within the last few years there has been ongoing deconstruction/demolition activity on the property; therefore, only the smaller of the two buildings, the paving, and the landscaping remain. The eastern one-third of the parcel is vacant and is dominated by short grasses. Development of the site for the subject project will result in the removal of all the identified improvements. The project site is bound on the north by industrial office buildings. To the east is a property that is partially developed with a building of approximately 13,000 square feet. To the west is a vacant property, while to the south, on the opposite side of 4th Street, is an apartment complex (Centre Club Apartments) in the City of Ontario. The zoning of the property and all properties to the north, east, and west is Industrial Park (IP) District. The zoning of the property to the south in the City of Ontario is Urban Residential — Ontario Center Specific Plan. With the exception of a sloped area along the north property line, the subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of approximately 1,041 feet and 1,030 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to construct a warehouse distribution building of approximately 116,480 square feet. As the building is in excess of 50,000 square feet, activities within this building would be classified as "Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution — Medium." However, as this level of wholesale, storage, and distribution is not currently permitted in the Industrial Park (IP) District at this time, the applicant has submitted an application to amend the Development Code (Related case: DRC2014-00567) to permit this land use. Typical for this type of building, there will be an office area located at the southeast corner of the building. The dock loading/storage area with 18 dock doors will be located on the east side of the building. There will be two points of access — one via an existing driveway and another via a new driveway at the southwest and southeast corners, respectively, of the project site. The existing driveway at the midpoint of the street frontage of the site will be removed. The building is required to have 76 passenger vehicle parking stalls, 78 parking stalls are provided. The distribution of landscaping will be generally equal throughout the project site. Generous ground cover and trees will be provided along the street frontage at 4th Street at the office area and along the north and west property lines. Additional landscaping will be provided along the north and west sides of the building. Landscape coverage is 12.6 percent; the minimum requirement is 15 percent for this Development District. Staff notes to the Committee that the applicant will have to provide additional landscaping to satisfy the minimum landscaping requirement. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS November 18, 2014 Page 2 The proposed building will be of concrete tilt -up construction painted with a palette of two colors (blue and shades of grey). The building will have sandblasted concrete accents. An additional primary material will be metal accents while a secondary material will be glass panels. Generous amounts of blue -tinted glass have been provided at the office area and at various locations along the wall planes of the building. A key feature is glass that is applied almost to the full height of the officer corner that gives it the appearance of a glass "cube." As the uses expected within the building are to be logistics -oriented, to maximize the efficiency of the interior space there is limited articulation of the wall planes along the east and west elevations of the building. Nevertheless, there will be horizontally articulated vertical elements located at intermediate points along that will interrupt the wall planes of the building. These vertical elements include glass panels. At the office corner, there are also horizontal metal accents that project from the wall plane. These accents punctuate the application of glass and provide shaded relief. On the east elevation, there are a couple of vertical design elements that minimize the expanse of plain, bare walls in the dock area. Lastly, all corners, with the exception of the northeast corner, are enhanced by utilizing different shades of grey, metal canopies, score lines, and relief in the wall plane that altogether reflect the general appearance of the office corner. A wrought iron fence/gate is proposed to be erected between the dock loading/yard area and the standards passenger vehicle parking area. Perimeter fencing will be comprised of a chain link fence along the east and west property lines. Along the north property line there is a concrete tilt -up wall of approximately 6 feet in height that will remain in -place. The majority of the buildings in the vicinity range in size from small industrial office buildings (primarily located to the north) of approximately 8,000 to 24,000 square feet in floor area to logistics buildings (generally located to the north and west) of approximately 550,000 to 850,000 square feet. The massing and scale of the building will be similar to a logistics building located approximately 280 feet to the northwest of the project site. 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. Per Table 17.36.040-1 of the Development Code, the minimum open space requirement in the Industrial Park (IP) District is 15 percent. According to the "Project Data" table on Sheet A1.1, the landscape provided is 15.7 percent when including pavement, but 12.6 percent when the pavement is not included; the difference is approximately 6,000 square feet. Unless the pavement is for the purpose of pedestrian use, plaza areas, the outdoor eating area, etc., then pavement cannot be counted toward the open space requirement; vehicle parking areas cannot be included. Solutions include reducing the floor area of the building, providing additional landscaping at the northeast corner of the building, and providing landscaping in the area where the trailers are proposed to be stored. Note: Staff discussed the issue with the applicant and, at the time of the preparation of this report, he was in the process of addressing this deficiency and will provide updated Site and Landscape plans at the Committee meeting. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS November 18, 2014 Page 3 1. At the northwest and southwest corners of the building and at the vertical elements along the wall plane on all elevations, incorporate a sandblasted concrete finish instead of relying only on paint color (in this case, Sherwin Williams SW 7072 and 7073) to differentiate the feature from the adjacent wall panels. 2. Per Section 17.48.050(E)(1)(e) of the Development Code; "within all land use categories except Heavy Industrial, all storage area screening shall be architecturally integrated with surrounding buildings by the use of concrete, masonry, or other similar materials not to exceed a height of eight feet (8 feet) from the highest finished grade." To comply with this requirement, a concrete tilt -up wall with a height of 8 feet that incorporates some of the design elements that are on the building, such as sandblasted finish, score lines, and matching painted scheme, shall be constructed between the standard passenger parking area and the dock loading/yard area instead of the wrought iron fence. The wrought iron gate shall have a metal mesh screen attached to it to minimize visibility through it. 3. Per Section 17.48.050(E)(2)(c) of the Development Code, within all land use categories except Heavy Industrial, all fencing or walls shall be wrought iron, concrete, masonry, or other similar materials not to exceed a height of eight feet (8 feet) from the highest finished grade. The use of barbed wire or similar materials is prohibited from these land use categories. Chain -link fencing may be used in areas not visible in front setback area." The chain link fencing along the west and east property lines shall not encroach into the 45-foot setback area. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line -of -sight of the office corner of the building. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) screened behind a 4- foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of decorative masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone or poured in -place concrete with design elements incorporated to match the building. 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back -flow devices, 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. 3. The employee lunch area shall have an overhead trellis with cross members spaced no more than 18 inches on center with minimum dimensions of 4 inches by 12 inches. Each support column shall have a decorative base that incorporates the architectural design and finishes/trim used on the building. The trellis shall be painted to match the building, and tables, chairs/benches, and waste receptacles shall be provided. 4. 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` 5. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 6. All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public view shall be constructed of decorative masonry blocks, i.e. slump stone, split -face, or have a decorative finish such as stucco. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2014-00566 — TURNER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS November 18, 2014 Page 4 7. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public right-of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the 45-foot setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway. 8. 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 project to the Planning Commission, subject to revisions that are necessary to ensure the project complies with the landscape coverage requirement described in the Development Code, and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Desian Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith November 18, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. - A proposal to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet with 105 rooms on a vacant parcel of about 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres) within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD) located on the west side of Pittsburgh Drive, near the intersection with Mission Vista Drive, about 700 feet north of 4th Street; APN: 0229-341-11. Related file: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00877 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00879. Design Parameters: The project site is a parcel with an approximate area 91,000 square feet (2.08 acres). The parcel is approximately 289 feet (east -west) by approximately 308 feet (north to south). The parcel is vacant and is dominated by short grasses/shrubs. The project site is bound on the north by a California Highway Patrol (CHP) station. To south and west are hotels (Towne Place Suites by Marriot and Holiday Inn Express). To the east, on the opposite side of Pittsburgh Avenue, is an industrial office building and another hotel (Homewood Suites by Hilton). The zoning of the property and all properties surrounding it is Industrial Park (IP) District. The property and the properties to the east, west, and south are also within the Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD). The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of approximately 1,050 feet and 1,046 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to construct a 4-story hotel with a floor area of 60,989 square feet and 105 rooms. The hotel will operate as a Fairfield Inn and Suites by Marriot. The building will have a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 67 percent. As the FAR of the proposed hotel exceeds the maximum FAR of 60 percent that is permitted in the Industrial Park (IP) District per Figure LU-2 of the General Plan and Table 17.36.040-1 of the Development Code, the applicant has submitted applications to amend both the General Plan and Development Code (Related files: DRC2014-00877 and DRC2014-00879, respectively) in order to establish a maximum FAR that will be higher than 50 percent and is specific to hotels and motels. The actual FAR that will apply to hotels and motels has not been established as the analysis is ongoing. The entrance and main lobby area will be located at the east side of the building. There will be two points of access — one via an existing driveway that is shared with the property to the north and another driveway that will be constructed at the southeast corner of the property. The parking field will be located on the east and west sides of the project site. The required parking for hotel uses is 107 parking stalls; 108 parking stalls will be provided. The distribution of landscaping will be generally 'equal' throughout the project site. Generous ground cover and trees will be provided along the street frontage at Pittsburgh Avenue, in the area in front of the main entrance, and along all sides of the building. Additional landscaping will be provided along the north, east, and west property lines. Landscape coverage is 16.6 percent; the minimum requirement is 15 percent for this development district. Consistent with other hotels, there will be a recreational area including a pool at the west side of the building. Although there is a wall along the north property line, no new walls are proposed along the south or west property lines. The basic footprint of the hotel will be approximately 15,000 square feet in area. The hotels to the south and west have footprints of approximately 18,000 square feet in area while the hotel to the east has a footprint of approximately 25,000 square feet in area. As noted previously, the proposed hotel will have four (4) floors. The hotel to the west has three (3) floors while the hotels to the south and east have four (4) floors. Thus, the size and massing of the proposed hotel will be similar to that of the existing hotels. The architecture will be relatively unique for this location and the City overall. Unlike the surrounding hotels that were approved and constructed within the last 10 years that have elements incorporated into their design that were derived from classic architectural themes, the architecture -of the DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. November 18, 2014 Page 2 proposed hotel will be more contemporary. As part of an ongoing process of providing high quality design that is interesting, and in order to be current with evolving market requirements and aesthetic tastes, within the last few years the City has approved different commercial and institutional projects that incorporate architectural themes that depart from the dominant themes (inspired by Spanish, Italian, and Craftsman architecture) of existing development in the City. Similarly, it has become common practice to allow tenants/occupants of a building to have signature architecture that reflects their'brand'. The architecture of the proposed hotel is consistent with these goals. The footprint of the hotel has significant horizontal movement and, as a result, the planes of the exterior walls are significantly articulated. This gives the impression that the hotel is constructed of multiple "blocks" in contrast to a single block and reduces the horizontal and vertical visual mass of the building. Reinforcing this impression will be various finishes including stucco, stackstone veneer, cement board siding. Furthermore, the colors - beige, white, and dark gray - will be varied for each block. Glazing will be the principal element at the main entrance. Although the roofline is flat, vertical articulation will be incorporated by undulating the parapet. At the main entrance there will be a curved, metal canopy that, in addition to establishing the location of the entrance, will provide weather protection and shade. The canopy will be supported by a single, over -sized pillar finished with a stackstone veneer. At the top of the parapet at the same general location as the main entrance there will be another metal (decorative) canopy. Each block will have prominent score lines accented with a contrasting color. Distinguishing details include the alternating color scheme at the blocks located at the northeast and southwest corners of the building and the dark gray stucco finish at the horizontal midpoint of the hotel's east and west elevations and along the first floor. 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. Staff supports the contemporary design. There are no Major Issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 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. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line -of -sight of the main entrance. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) screened behind a 4-foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of decorative masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone to match the building. 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back -flow devices, 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. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2014-00232 — WOODBRIDGE HOSPITALITY, INC. November 18, 2014 Page 3 3. 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. 4. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 5. All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public view shall be constructed of decorative masonry blocks, i.e. slump stone, split -face, or have a decorative finish such as stucco. 6. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public right- of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway. 7. All doors (roll -up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall or glass panel. 8. Consistent with the other hotels in the vicinity, the trash enclosure shall be constructed according to the design standard that applies to commercial projects which requires, at a minimum, a roll -up door and an overhead structure, and a decorative finish such as stucco or decorative veneer such as stackstone to match the building. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Staff notes to the Committee that the project will be forwarded to the Planning Commission with the General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith November 18, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18966 — MARC HOMES, LLC: A proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of 1.89 acres into 8 lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, at the south side of Base Line Road between Shelby Place and Emmett Way located at 13025 Base Line Road; APN: 1100-011-02. Related files: Development Review DRC2014-00645 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00581. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00645 — MARC HOMES, LLC: A proposal to construct eight (8) single-family residences in conjunction with a subdivision of a vacant parcel of 1.89 acres into 8 lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, at the south side of Base Line Road between Shelby Place and Emmett Way located at 13025 Base Line Road; APN: 1100-011-02. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18966 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00581. Site Characteristics: The project site is a vacant property with an area of about 82,000 square feet (1.89 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 270 feet (east -to -west) by about 300 feet (north -to -south). To the south and west of the project site are single-family residences. To the north, on the opposite side of Base Line Road, is a largely undeveloped set of parcels; on one of these parcels is a small single-family residence. To the east is a condominium complex. The zoning of the property and all the surrounding properties is Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into eight (8) lots for a single-family residential development. All lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas range between 9,311 square feet and 11,814 square feet while the average lot area is 10,206 square feet. The required minimum lot area and minimum average lot area for lots in the zoning district of the project site are 7,200 square feet and 10,000 square feet, respectively. The depth of each lot will be between 123 feet and 147 feet while the width of each lot at the required front setback will be between 65 feet and 86 feet. The required minimum lot depth and minimum lot width for lots in the zoning district of the project site are 100 feet and 60 feet, respectively. All lots will be conventional, i.e., rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. In conjunction with the proposed subdivision, the applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot for a total of eight (8) single-family residences. The floor areas of the houses (including the garages and covered patios) will range between 3,440 square feet (Plan 1) to 4,616 square feet (Plan 3). Two (2) of the houses will be one-story while the houses on the remainder of the lots will be two-story. This equates to 25% of the lots having single -story houses. This mix of one- and two-story homes is consistent with the policy adopted by the Planning Commission requiring that 25 percent (minimum) of the proposed houses be single -story. All of the houses will have two garages — one 2-car garage and one 1-car garage. The 2-car garages will be setback from the front part of the house while the 1-car garages will face the side yard, i.e., they are side -entry garages. This will comply with Section 5.42.606 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan which requires that 50 percent of the garages be oriented or situated in a manner that minimizes its visual presence (as seen from the street). The houses on the corner lots (Lots 1 and 5) will be two-story. Although Section 5.42.608 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan requires single -story houses on corner lots, it does allow for two- DRC AGENDA SUBTT18966 AND DRC2014-00645 — MARC HOMES, LLC November 18, 2014 Page 2 story houses provided that "extra deep setbacks are provided." The proposed setback of the houses from Base Line Road is 45 feet (the required street side setback is 25 feet). The architecture of each house will be generally consistent with the design requirements outlined in Section 5.42.600 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant proposes two (2) types of architectural themes (elevations) — Country French and Bungalow, and six (6) footprints — Plans 1, 2, and 3 (and reverse footprints of each). Plan 1 will be one-story while the others will be two-story. The number of available footprints will comply with Figure 5-45 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. There will be a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. Each house will have a front entrance that includes either a partially enclosed courtyard or a covered porch. Depending on the theme, a variety of materials will be incorporated into the architecture including stone veneer, wood siding, and stucco finish. There will also be details such as wood brackets/rafters tails at the roof eaves, decorative trim and shutters around some of the windows, corbels, molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots, and decorative garage doors. Chimneys are not proposed. The roofing on all of the houses will be concrete tile. 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. All themes (all Plans) - Add more stone veneer to the rear elevations of each architectural theme to match the quantity of stone veneer applied to the front elevations. 2. All themes (all Plans) - Add shutters, pot shelves, or other similar trim details to all elevations of each architectural theme. With the exception of the north side elevation of the houses on Lots 1 and 5, it is not necessary to do this on the SIDE elevations at the FIRST floor of the houses as these details will have limited aesthetic value due to the relatively short side yard setbacks. 3. On the architectural themes that utilize wood siding, add wood siding to the side and rear elevations of each such as beneath the gable roofs and on where part of a wall plane projects beyond the primary wall plane. 4. Bungalow (Plan 1) — At the rear elevation, change the design of the roof at the Master Bedroom from a hip roof to a gable roof (that includes the "wood outlookers") so that its appearance is consistent with the gable roofs at the front elevation. 5. Country French (Plan 1) - At the rear elevation, change the design of the roof at the Master Bedroom from a hip roof to a gable roof (that includes the decorative vent) so that its appearance is consistent with the gable roofs at the front elevation. 6. Country French (Plan 2) - At the rear elevation, change the design of the roof at Bedroom 2 from a hip roof to a gable roof (that includes the decorative vent) so that its appearance is consistent with the gable roofs at the front elevation. 7. Country French (Plans 2 and 3) — At the gable roofs, add decorative vents similar to those beneath the gable roofs on the same theme for Plan 1. DRC AGENDA SUBTT18966 AND DRC2014-00645 — MARC HOMES, LLC November 18, 2014 Page 3 8. Country French (Plan 3) — At some of the windows, add decorative corbels similar to those beneath the windows on the same theme for Plan 2. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. The molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots shall also be stone and not foam. Staff Recommendation: With the above -noted design issues revised to the satisfaction of the Committee, staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission, and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Mike Smith THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA O C CONGA NOVEMBER 4, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00207 - PLAZA DEVELOPMENTS EAST AVE LLC - A design review of six single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 6-lot subdivision on 2.99 acres within the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of East Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of the Victoria Avenue - APN: 0227-121-33. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16578. ACTION TOO P.M. A. Some modifications were recommended. The application will return to the DRC before being forwarded to the Commission for review. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2013-00992 - MIG B. The DRC HOGLE-IRELAND - A request to modify CUP DRC2008-00512 to demolish recommended and replace two industrial buildings: 1) demolish a 6,500 square foot bag approval- 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA NOVEMBER 4, 2014 RANCHO CUCAMONGA house air filtering system and develop a 11,853 square foot bag house air filtering system, 2) demolish a 11,778 square foot electrical substation building and develop a 4,000 square foot electrical substation building, and 3) construct a 6,500 square foot addition to the melt shop building on 80 acres at the existing Gerdau Steel Plant within the Heavy Industrial (HI) District, located at 12459-B Arrow Route - APN: 0229-131-19. Related case: CEQA Review CEQA2014-00020. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS 111 None 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. IV. ADJOURNMENT 1[ 7:43 PM 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. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. TOM GRAHN November 4, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00207 — PLAZA DEVELOPMENTS EAST AVE LLC — A design review of six single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 6-lot subdivision on 2.99 acres within the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of East Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of the Victoria Avenue - APN: 0227-121-33. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16578. Desian Parameters: On July 12, 2006, the Planning Commission approved SUBTT16578 for the subdivision of 2.99 acres into 6 lots and Development Review DRC2004-01198 for the design of six single-family homes. SUBTT16578 has since recorded, while DRC2004-01198 has expired. Subsequent to that approval, the property was acquired by the current applicant who submitted new architecture for the project site. The project proposes the development of six single-family residences on a cul-de-sac with single -story and two-story floor plans. The single -story floor plans range in size from 4,067 to 4,110 square feet, and the two-story floor plans range in size from 4,035 to 4,146 square feet. The four most easterly lots, mid subdivision and adjacent to the eastern project boundary (Lots 1, 2, 5, and 6) will be two-story, while the two lots on the western project boundary (Lots 3 and 4) will be single -story. The design and placement of the proposed homes meets all Basic Development Standards (Table 5-2) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. There are two distinct floor plans, plus a reverse of each building foot print, and four architectural styles (American Farmhouse, Craftsman, Bungalow, and Spanish) to provide substantial variety in project design. Overall, the applicant has provide variety in architectural style, building design, unit placement, building massing, proportion and scale; however, various architectural features should be included to further distinguish each of the proposed styles from one another. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Revise the project architecture to provide additional architectural features to distinguish the proposed styles from one another. Suggestions include the expanded use of accent materials (i.e., siding, shutters, fire place/chimney, size of wainscot, etc.) to provide the variety of project design. 2. As an example, the Lot 5 — American Farmhouse design should be further distinguished from the Lot 6 — Spanish Villa design. These lots are adjacent and a reverse footprint of each other, but because of their proximity to each other, the use and placement of various architectural features makes them look too similar. Modifications could include variety in the placement of brick/stone wainscots, variety in the size of porch and porch columns, additional variety in the size of window trim, and variety in the size and placement of corbels. DRC AGENDA DRC 2014-00207 — PLAZA DEVELOPMENTS EAST AVENUE, LLC November 4, 2014 Page 2 3. Similar architectural revisions should be done between the side by side placement of the proposed houses on Lot 1 — American Farmhouse and Lot 2 — California Bungalow, and between Lot 3 — California Bungalow and Lot 4 — Craftsman. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: There are no secondary design issues. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant revise the project architecture and return to the Design Review Committee for review and approval of Development Review DRC2014-00207. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the proposed architecture and recommended the following modifications: 1. Lot 4 — Craftsman elevation. Add river rock to the two front columns and increase the size of the wood column at the top, and add additional corbels along the roof line. 2. Lot 6 — Spanish Villa elevation. Add additional decorative elements at the top of the front window and add an arch over the top of the window on the north elevation. Staff Planner: Tom Grahn Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. TOM GRAHN November 4, 2014 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2013-00992 — MIG HOGLE-IRELAND — A request to modify CUP DRC2008-00512 to demolish and replace two industrial buildings: 1) demolish a 6,500 square foot baghouse air filtering system and develop a 11,853 square foot baghouse air filtering system, 2) demolish a 11,778 square foot electrical substation building, and develop a 4,000 square foot electrical substation building, and 3) construct a 6,500 square foot addition to the melt shop building on 80 acres at the existing Gerdau Steel Plant within the Heavy Industrial (HI) District, located at 12459-B Arrow Route - APN: 022913119. Related case: CEQA Review CEQA2014-00020. Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to revise a previously approved CUP (DRC2008-00512), which proposed the replacement and relocation of an air pollution control system and electrical substation, and a related MDR (DRC2007-00600), which proposed the demolition of 14,314 square feet of industrial floor area and the construction of 21,840 square feet of industrial floor area at what is now the Gerdau Steel Plant. This project site is located on the south side of Arrow Route, east of the 1-15 Freeway and west of Etiwanda Avenue within the Heavy Industrial (HI) District. The current proposal is to demolish the existing 6,500 square foot baghouse and replace it with an 11,853 square foot baghouse, which has a building footprint of 73 feet by 104 feet and is 76 feet tall, but also includes a new 100-foot tall air quality stack and 80-foot tall load out building. Additionally, the application proposes the addition of 6,500 square feet to the melt shop building, the addition of a melt shop canopy to replace the melt shop cupola, and the replacement of the existing electrical substation. All buildings are proposed to be constructed of rolled structural steel sections, the siding and roofing is sheet metal, which are similar materials to the existing building. The electrical substation will be constructed of fabricated steel frames and cold formed steel sections with metal siding and roofing. The melt shop, baghouse, and substation buildings are proposed to be painted "Signal White" on the siding and "Ultramarine Blue" on the upper siding and trim. The canopy and ducting will be painted "Shale Gray" (which is high temperature resistant). These proposed improvements to the baghouse, melt shop, and electrical substation, along with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) permit, will allow Gerdau to increase production, while substantially reducing air quality impacts. The applicant's production facilities are located towards the southern portion of the project site. Outside storage of scrap materials occurs in the middle and mid -westerly portions of the site, the outside storage of production materials occurs in the southwesterly portion of the site, and the outside storage of finished products occurs in the easterly portion of the site. Employee parking and administrative offices are situated off the central driveway, which runs from Arrow Route, then southerly between the Ameron and Fontana Steel facilities. The applicant is proposing to complete street improvements along the south side of Arrow Route; however, no other improvements (i.e., grading, landscaping, parking or screening) are proposed as part of project improvements. Signage shown on the building elevations is representative of the type signage requested, but no signage improvements are part of the submitted application and will be subject to separate permitting requirements. DRC AGENDA DRC2013-00992 — MIG HOGLE-IRELAND November 11, 2014 Page 2 Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: There are no major design issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: The previous CUP required dense tree plantings along the west and part of the south property lines to aid in screening the melt shop and yard area. Conditions further required specimen size trees (24-inch box or larger) along the west and south property lines to promote the early establishment of mature plantings. All trees were required to be staked or secured with guy wires because of severe wind conditions. These plantings were not installed under the previous CUP and should be provided as part of these proposed improvements. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2013-00992. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee recommended approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2013-00992. Staff Planner: Tom Grahn Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA NOVEMBER 4, 2014 - 7:00 RM. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II. 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00207 - PLAZA DEVELOPMENTS EAST AVE LLC - A design review of six single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 6-lot subdivision on 2.99 acres within the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of East Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of the Victoria Avenue - APN: 0227-121-33. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16578. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2013-00992 - MIG HOGLE-IRELAND - A request to modify CUP DRC2008-00512 to demolish and replace two industrial buildings: 1) demolish a 6,500 square foot bag 1 of 2 _ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA NOVEMBER 4, 2014 NCHo CUCAMONGA house air filtering system and develop a 11,853 square foot bag house air filtering system, 2) demolish a 11,778 square foot electrical substation building and develop a 4,000 square foot electrical substation building, and 3) construct a 6,500 square foot addition to the melt shop building on 80 acres at the existing Gerdau Steel Plant within the Heavy Industrial (HI) District, located at 12459-B Arrow Route - APN: 0229-131-19. Related case: CEQA Review CEQA2014-00020. III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on October 23, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. TOM GRAHN November 4, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00207 — PLAZA DEVELOPMENTS EAST AVE LLC — A design review of six single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 6-lot subdivision on 2.99 acres within the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of East Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of the Victoria Avenue - APN: 0227-121-33. Related case: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16578. Design Parameters: On July 12, 2006, the Planning Commission approved SUBTT16578 for the subdivision of 2.99 acres into 6 lots and Development Review DRC2004-01198 for the design of six single-family homes. SUBTT16578 has since recorded, while DRC2004-01198 has expired. Subsequent to that approval, the property was acquired by the current applicant who submitted new architecture for the project site. The project proposes the development of six single-family residences on a cul-de-sac with single -story and two-story floor plans. The single -story floor plans range in size from 4,067 to 4,110 square feet, and the two-story floor plans range in size from 4,035 to 4,146 square feet. The four most easterly lots, mid subdivision and adjacent to the eastern project boundary (Lots 1, 2, 5, and 6) will be two-story, while the two lots on the western project boundary (Lots 3 and 4) will be single -story. The design and placement of the proposed homes meets all Basic Development Standards (Table 5-2) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. There are two distinct floor plans, plus a reverse of each building foot print, and four architectural styles (American Farmhouse, Craftsman, Bungalow, and Spanish) to provide substantial variety in project design. Overall, the applicant has provide variety in architectural style, building design, unit placement, building massing, proportion and scale; however, various architectural features should be included to further distinguish each of the proposed styles from one another. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Revise the project architecture to provide additional architectural features to distinguish the proposed styles from one another. Suggestions include the expanded use of accent materials (i.e., siding, shutters, fire place/chimney, size of wainscot, etc.) to provide the variety of project design. 2. As an example, the Lot 5 — American Farmhouse design should be further distinguished from the Lot 6 — Spanish Villa design. These lots are adjacent and a reverse footprint of each other, but because of their proximity to each other, the use and placement of various architectural features makes them look too similar. Modifications could include variety in the placement of brick/stone wainscots, variety in the size of porch and porch columns, additional variety in the size of window trim, and variety in the size and placement of corbels. DRC AGENDA DRC 2014-00207 — PLAZA DEVELOPMENTS EAST AVENUE, LLC November 4, 2014 Page 2 3. Similar architectural revisions should be done between the side by side placement of the proposed houses on Lot 1 — American Farmhouse and Lot 2 — California Bungalow, and between Lot 3 — California Bungalow and Lot 4 — Craftsman. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: There are no secondary design issues. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant revise the project architecture and return to the Design Review Committee for review and approval of Development Review DRC2014-00207. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tom Grahn Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. TOM GRAHN November 4, 2014 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2013-00992 — MIG HOGLE-IRELAND — A request to modify CUP DRC2008-00512 to demolish and replace two industrial buildings: 1) demolish a 6,500 square foot baghouse air filtering system and develop a 11,853 square foot baghouse air filtering system, 2) demolish a 11,778 square foot electrical substation building, and develop a 4,000 square foot electrical substation building, and 3) construct a 6,500 square foot addition to the melt shop building on 80 acres at the existing Gerdau Steel Plant within the Heavy Industrial (HI) District, located at 12459-B Arrow Route - APN: 022913119. Related case: CEQA Review CEQA2014-00020. Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to revise a previously approved CUP (DRC2008-00512), which proposed the replacement and relocation of an air pollution control system and electrical substation, and a related MDR (DRC2007-00600), which proposed the demolition of 14,314 square feet of industrial floor area and the construction of 21,840 square feet of industrial floor area at what is now the Gerdau Steel Plant. This project site is located on the south side of Arrow Route, east of the 1-15 Freeway and west of Etiwanda Avenue within the Heavy Industrial (HI) District. The current proposal is to demolish the existing 6,500 square foot baghouse and replace it with an 11,853 square foot baghouse, which has a building footprint of 73 feet by 104 feet and is 76 feet tall, but also includes a new 100-foot tall air quality stack and 80-foot tall load out building. Additionally, the application proposes the addition of 6,500 square feet to the melt shop building, the addition of a melt shop canopy to replace the melt shop cupola, and the replacement of the existing electrical substation. All buildings are proposed to be constructed of rolled structural steel sections, the siding and roofing is sheet metal, which are similar materials to the existing building. The electrical substation will be constructed of fabricated steel frames and cold formed steel sections with metal siding and roofing. The melt shop, baghouse, and substation buildings are proposed to be painted "Signal White" on the siding and "Ultramarine Blue" on the upper siding and trim. The canopy and ducting will be painted "Shale Gray" (which is high temperature resistant). These proposed improvements to the baghouse, melt shop, and electrical substation, along with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) permit, will allow Gerdau to increase production, while substantially reducing air quality impacts. The applicant's production facilities are located towards the southern portion of the project site. Outside storage of scrap materials occurs in the middle and mid -westerly portions of the site, the outside storage of production materials occurs in the southwesterly portion of the site, and the outside storage of finished products occurs in the easterly portion of the site. Employee parking and administrative offices are situated off the central driveway, which runs from Arrow Route, then southerly between the Ameron and Fontana Steel facilities. The applicant is proposing to complete street improvements along the south side of Arrow Route; however, no other improvements (i.e., grading, landscaping, parking or screening) are proposed as part of project improvements. Signage shown on the building elevations is representative of the type signage requested, but no signage improvements are part of the submitted application and will be subject to separate permitting requirements. DRC AGENDA DRC2013-00992 — MIG HOGLE-IRELAND November 11, 2014 Page 2 Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: There are no major design issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: The previous CUP required dense tree plantings along the west and part of the south property lines to aid in screening the melt shop and yard area. Conditions further required specimen size trees (24-inch box or larger) along the west and south property lines to promote the early establishment of mature plantings. All trees were required to be staked or secured with guy wires because of severe wind conditions. These plantings were not installed under the previous CUP and should be provided as part of these proposed improvements. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2013-00992. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tom Grahn Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO ,C'a"WONGA OCTOBER 14, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on October 1, 2014., at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ANCHO CUCAMONGA SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California il I. CALL TO ORDER 71 Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL - Site plan and architectural review of a 1,659 square foot single-family residence with a 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot on the east side of Center Avenue and south of 24th Street within the Low (L) Residential Development District, located at 8855 Center Avenue - APN: 0209-123-05. Related case: Variance DRC2013-00897. Continued from September 2, 2014, DRC meeting. 1 of 2 ACTION 7:00 p.m. A. Approved, with the recommendation to lower the pad height of the house to the satisfaction of the staff. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA CHG SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 RAN CUCAMONGA 11 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 2 of 2 None. 7:27 p.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag September 30, 2014 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00896 - AC KAUSHAL - Site plan and architectural review of a 1,659 square foot single-family residence with a 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot on the east side of Center Avenue and south of 24th Street within the Low (L) Residential Development District, located at 8855 Center Avenue - APN: 0209-123-05. Related case: Variance DRC2013-00897. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to construct a 1,659 square foot two-story single-family residence with an attached 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot. The lot is 25 feet wide and a Variance is required in order to construct a house on the site. Without the Variance, the house would be limited to being 10 feet wide, too narrow to construct a garage. The proposed Variance will reduce the required 10-foot setback to 5 feet on both sides of the house. Because of the narrowness of the lot, the applicant is proposing a tandem two -car garage. A Minor Exception is also required for property line walls up to 9 feet high in order to get the site to drain to the public street. The project conforms to all other requirements including height (21 feet), front yard setback (42 feet), rear yard setback (29 feet) and lot coverage (39 percent). The future homeowner, though, will not be able to construct any additional solid roof structures on the site over 13 square feet because of the proposed house being just under the 40 percent maximum lot coverage. The applicant has chosen a Spanish architectural motif with multiple pop -outs to articulate the side elevations and the roof line. The second story is carried over a portion of the garage and includes a second story deck with an overhead trellis to provide visual interest. The front door is on the side of the house because of the narrowness of the lot. Staff Comments: Staff is overall pleased with the design of the house given the obvious constraints due to the width of the lot. However, staff is concerned that placing a 1,659 square foot two-story house with 5-foot setbacks directly adjacent to single -story residences is out of character with the neighborhood (it should be noted that one of neighboring houses has a non -conforming side yard setback that is less than 5 feet from property line). Staff's opinion is that it would be more appropriate to construct a single -story house on the lot. The required 9-foot high property line walls are also a problem as the neighboring lots will not only face a two-story house, but also an up to 9-foot high wall. Maior Issues: 1. Whether it is appropriate to place a two-story house adjacent to single -story neighboring residences on such a narrow lot with 5-foot side yard setbacks. 2. Whether the size of the house is appropriate for such a small lot. 3. Whether it is acceptable to place up to a 9-foot high wall along the property line to drain the site. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL September 30, 2014 Page 2 Secondary Issues: Whether a tandem garage is acceptable. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the issues raised by staff and decide whether or not the project may move forward to Planning Commission for final review. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved but with the recommendation that the applicant lower the pad height of the house to the satisfaction of the staff. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II. 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 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. A. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00896 — AC KALISHAL - Site plan and architectural review of a 1,659 square foot single-family residence with a 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot on the east side of Center Avenue and south of 24th Street within the Low (L) Residential Development District, located at 8855 Center Avenue - APN: 0209-123-05. Related case: Variance DRC2013-00897. Continued from September 2, 2014, DRC meeting. 1 of 2 PDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA 30, 2014 NCHORHOSEPTEMBER CUCAMONGA III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 17, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag September 30, 2014 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL - Site plan and architectural review of a 1,659 square foot single-family residence with a 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot on the east side of Center Avenue and south of 24th Street within the Low (L) Residential Development District, located at 8855 Center Avenue - APN: 0209-123-05. Related case: Variance DRC2013-00897. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to construct a 1,659 square foot two-story single-family residence with an attached 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot. The lot is 25 feet wide and a Variance is required in order to construct a house on the site. Without the Variance, the house would be limited to being 10 feet wide, too narrow to construct a garage. The proposed Variance will reduce the required 10-foot setback to 5 feet on both sides of the house. Because of the narrowness of the lot, the applicant is proposing a tandem two -car garage. A Minor Exception is also required for property line walls up to 9 feet high in order to get the site to drain to the public street. The project conforms to all other requirements including height (21 feet), front yard setback (42 feet), rear yard setback (29 feet) and lot coverage (39 percent). The future homeowner, though, will not be able to construct any additional solid roof structures on the site over 13 square feet because of the proposed house being just under the 40 percent maximum lot coverage. The applicant has chosen a Spanish architectural motif with multiple pop -outs to articulate the side elevations and the roof line. The second story is carried over a portion of the garage and includes a second story deck with an overhead trellis to provide visual interest. The front door is on the side of the house because of the narrowness of the lot. Staff Comments: Staff is overall pleased with the design of the house given the obvious constraints due to the width of the lot. However, staff is concerned that placing a 1,659 square foot two-story house with 5-foot setbacks directly adjacent to single -story residences is out of character with the neighborhood (it should be noted that one of neighboring houses has a non -conforming side yard setback that is less than 5 feet from property line). Staff's opinion is that it would be more appropriate to construct a single -story house on the lot. The required 9-foot high property line walls are also a problem as the neighboring lots will not only face a two-story house, but also an up to 9-foot high wall. Major Issues: 1. Whether it is appropriate to place a two-story house adjacent to single -story neighboring residences on such a narrow.lot with 5-foot side yard setbacks. 2. Whether the size of the house is appropriate for such a small lot. 3. Whether it is acceptable to place up to a 9-foot high wall along the property line to drain the site. DRC AGENDA DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL September 30, 2014 Page 2 Secondary Issues: Whether a tandem garage is acceptable. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the issues raised by staff and decide whether or not the project may move forward to Planning Commission for final review. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA CUNGA SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 - 7:00 RK Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER I' ACTION Roll Call 7:00 PM Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca A Candyce Burnett A Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00521 — MGC A & e The DRC ARCHITECTS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY - A review of directed the proposed exterior modifications to an existing building within a commercial applicant work with center of about 504,000 square feet within the Industrial Park (IP) District, staff to address located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of concerns related to 4th Street — APN: 0229-411-01. Related files: Development Review their signage, window graphics DRC2004-01013, Minor Exception DRC2014-00661, and Uniform Sign and stone. Program Amendment DRC2014-00330. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA aT SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 �NCHO CUCAMONGA B. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2014-00330 — QUIEL BROS. SIGNS FOR SIGNATURE CENTER - A request to amend Uniform Sign Program #188 in conjunction with proposed exterior modifications to an existing building within a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229-411-01. Related files: Development Review DRC2004-01013 and Minor Development Review DRC2014-00521. C. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19528 - SHAREEF AWAD - A C. Approved. request to subdivide a 58,745 square foot parcel into two lots within the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at 13351 Banyan Street - APN: 0225-191-17. Related case: Variance DRC2014-00530. D. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00493 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING - A D. Approved. request to develop a 16,260 square foot warehouse and a 12,600 square foot canopy at an existing 252,193 square foot fabricated steel manufacturing facility within the General Industrial (GI) Development District, located at 11200 Arrow Route - APN: 0208-961-26. None. III. 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. 8:02 p.m. IV. 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. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 PM* Mike Smith September 16, 2014 MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00521 — MCG ARCHITECTS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY - A review of proposed exterior modifications to an existing building within a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229-411-01. Related files: Development Review DRC2004-01013, Minor Exception DRC2014-00661, and Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2014-00330. Design Parameters: The project site is a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet (11.6 acres) that is about 760 feet (east to west) by about 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 center is comprised of five (5) buildings with a combined floor area of about 120,000 square feet. The subject building of the current application is the largest building within the center (referred to as Building 1 in the original application) and has a floor area of 93,450 square feet. Until recently, most of the building was occupied by Tai Pan Trading; the remainder was occupied by The Alley. Tai Pan Trading has since 'downsized' while The Alley has vacated the building. The part of the building that was previously occupied by Tai Pan Trading will be occupied by Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby. The tenant space occupied by The Alley is currently occupied by TJ Maxx. 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. The properties to the south are part of the Ontario Mills shopping center in the City of Ontario. The applicant, on behalf of Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby, proposes modifications to the south (front) elevation of the subject building. The primary modifications include the construction of new primary and secondary entrances for both tenants; construction of a raised 'tower' element with a curved parapet at each primary entrance; replacement of existing aluminum storefront and glazing with exterior insulation and finishing system (EIFS) panels; and removal of freestanding, decorative tilt -up screen wall panels. Additional modifications include installing graphic and opaque film on the windows located on the main tower element located at the midpoint of the building; removal/relocation of stone veneer at various locations; and minor changes to the parking, landscape, and hardscape areas to accommodate the new building entrances. The basic 'footprint' of the building will remain unchanged. The proposed modifications are generally consistent with the character of the subject building. The modifications will not significantly alter the architecture in a manner that will result in an outcome that is inconsistent with the original project as approved by the Planning Commission. The construction of new entrances for each tenant is standard practice. Similarly, the replacement of storefront glazing is common to address a tenant's specific aesthetic, operational, and/or security requirements. The addition of tower elements will comply with the City's guidelines and standards requiring well-defined building entrances. Although the proposed tower parapets will be curved and the parapets of the remainder of the building are straight/horizontal; this is not an issue as the difference further identifies each entrance. The only aspect of the project that cannot be recommended for approval (as proposed) is the installation of graphic film on the windows of the main tower element. The intent of the graphic film is to minimize visibility through the windows while simultaneously providing advertisement in an image format (it is unclear from the plans if they are applied to the exterior or interior side of the windows). Completely covering each window with this graphic film is not permitted per Section 17.74.070(B)(6) of the Development Code which states, "window signs (permanent or temporary) shall not cover more than DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00521 — MGC ARCHITECTS FOR BED BATH AND BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY September 16, 2014 Page 2 thirty percent (30 percent) of the window area for each window of the establishment." The area of the windows covered by this film would have to be reduced to comply. However, this most likely will not achieve the applicant's objective of blocking visibility through each window. Furthermore, the appearance of the partially covered windows would be unusual and aesthetically awkward. 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. Revise the window graphics proposed on the center tower element so that they are opaque and uniform in color, and installed on the interior side of each window. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. Existing stone veneer on the remainder of the building, specifically on the center tower element and the lighthouse tower elements on either side of the area of work shall be protected in -place. 2. All existing amenities such as bike racks shall be protected in -place or relocated as close as possible to their original location. 3. New trash enclosures shall match the existing trash enclosures on -site and shall be designed and constructed per City standard. 4. New cart corral areas near the building shall be enclosed. The enclosure shall incorporate the stone veneer that is used on the building. The applicant should review the cart corrals at BevMo!, located at 12204 Foothill Boulevard for reference. 5. All signs shall comply with the applicable provisions of the City's Sign Ordinance, Uniform Sign Program #188, and any amendments to the sign program associated with Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2014-00330 that are approved by the Design Review Committee. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved, with the above -noted revisions incorporated, and forwarded to the Planning Manager for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the Minor Development Review (MDR) and Uniform Sign Program Amendment (USP) concurrently since both entitlements are tied to one project. The Committee concurred with staff's recommendation that the window graphics be opaque, uniform in color and installed on the interior of the window. The Committee indicated that the final design of the opaque film could be resolved between the DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00521 — MGC ARCHITECTS FOR BED BATH AND BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY September 16, 2014 Page 3 applicant and staff. The Committee also directed the applicant to explore alternative designs that require a lesser amount of stone be removed around the wall signage area for Buy Buy Baby and Bed Bath & Beyond. The Committee indicated that the modifications proposed by the applicant create a "quasi billboard" for the wall signage area around the curvilinear parapets and expressed a desire to see more stone retained. Regarding signs, the Committee concurred with all 3 Major Issues identified by staff, and directed the applicant to modify the signs to meet the Code, and redesign the signage to meet the Code's requirements regarding sign area and height. The Committee concluded their review by indicating that returning to the Design Review Committee would be at the discretion of staff after the applicant had submitted revisions for staff review. Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: Fletcher, Granger DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith September 16, 2014 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2014-00330 — QUIEL SIGNS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY - A request to amend Uniform Sign Program #188 in conjunction with proposed exterior modifications to an existing building within a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet within the Industrial Park (IP) District, located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street; APN: 0229-411-01. Related cases: Development Review DRC2004-01013 and Minor Development Review DRC2014-00521. Background: The proposed Sign Program Amendment is for three (3) revisions to the existing uniform sign program that regulates the signs within the "Signature Center," a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet that is comprised of five (5) buildings. The amendment is to accommodate three (3) new primary tenants - Bed Bath & Beyond, Buy Buy Baby, and TJ Maxx. These tenants will occupy most of the floor area of the largest building in the center (Building 1) that was previously occupied by Tai Pan Trading and The Alley. Until recently, most of the building was occupied by Tai Pan Trading; the remainder was occupied by The Alley. Tai Pan Trading has since downsized, while The Alley has vacated the building. The part of the building that was previously occupied by Tai Pan Trading will be occupied by Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby. The tenant space that was occupied by The Alley is now occupied by TJ Maxx. Design Parameters: Revision No. 1: In the Uniform Sign Program there is currently a mix of potential (or allowed) sign areas for three (3) "Primary Tenants" and four (4) "Secondary Tenants" on the south elevation of Building 1. The first revision is to change the quantity and location of the potential wall sign areas for "Primary Tenants" and delete the potential sign areas for "Secondary Tenants" altogether. The proposed sign areas will be on the tower elements that will be constructed at the respective primary entrances of pending tenants Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby. These proposed sign areas will be in addition to the existing sign areas in use by Tai Pan Trading and TJ Maxx. The proposed height for each sign area are about 10 feet and 8 feet for Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby, respectively. The proposed length for each sign area are approximately 30 feet and 20 feet for Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby, respectively. The overall area of each sign will be 300 square feet and 160 square feet, respectively. Staff notes to the Committee that the individual area of both signs exceeds the maximum of 150 square feet (per sign) applicable to retail establishments in multi -tenant centers per Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code and will need to be reduced in area accordingly. Consistent with the other signs within the commercial center, the text of the signs will be fabricated channel letters. The colors and fonts will be the trademark colors of the tenants. No wall signs are proposed on the other elevations. Revision No. 2: There are six (6) monument signs on the property — one (1) each at the driveways at Buffalo Avenue and Richmond Place on the east and west sides, respectively, of the commercial center (identified as MT1 and MT4); two (2) at the driveway at 4th Street (MT2 and MT3); and one (1) each at the southwest and southeast corners (the "corners") of the commercial center (CM1 and CM2). Signs MT1 — 4 are for the purposes of tenant identification while signs CM2 and CM3 are limited to identification of the commercial center ("Signature Center"). The second revision is to convert signs CM2 and CM3 to tenant identification signs. The proposed change on both signs eliminates the commercial center identification and replaces it with individual sign panels to allow tenant -specific identification, i.e. signs for Bed Bath & Beyond, Buy Buy Baby, and TJ Maxx. Signs MT1 - 4 will remain as -is. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00330 — QUIEL SIGNS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY September 16, 2014 Page 2 Revision No. 3: The existing potential tenant sign area on the tower element located at the midpoint Building 1 is reserved for a primary tenant. The third revision is to allow this sign area to be used to identify the commercial center, i.e. "Signature Center." Text and graphics that are necessary to describe the technical and design details of the proposed amendment will be incorporated on pages 1, 10, 11, and 17. The remainder of the sign program, including the construction and design requirements for wall signs; category definitions, i.e. "Primary Tenant," "Secondary Tenant," etc.; sign restrictions, and tenant responsibilities will remain unchanged. 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. Per Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code, the maximum area of wall -mounted signs is 150 square feet. The wall -mounted signs for Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby have an area (as shown on the architectural drawings) of 300 square feet and 160 square feet, respectively. The area of both signs will need to be reduced accordingly. 2. Per Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code, the maximum height of wall -mounted project identification signs is 6 feet and the maximum area is 24 square feet. The proposed project identification sign area (as shown on the architectural drawings) appears to be larger than this. The area of this sign will need to be reduced accordingly. 3. Per Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code, the maximum height of monument signs is 8 feet. The height of the monument sign (as shown on Page 17 of the sign company's draft) exceeds this height and needs to be reduced accordingly. Note: the maximum area for monument signs is 24 square feet. 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. The applicant shall submit a final draft of the amended Uniform Sign Program that incorporates the text and graphics that are necessary to describe the technical and design details (and corresponding deletions) of the proposed amendment. Page 11 of the final draft shall include a revised south elevation of Building 1 that matches the plans and sign locations prepared by MCG Architecture. The other pages shall include the corrections noted above. 2. The number of signs (wall and monument) that is permitted for each tenant shall comply with Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00330 — QUIEL SIGNS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY September 16, 2014 Page 3 3. 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 Manager and/or the Design Review Committee. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the amendment be approved, with the above -noted revisions incorporated, and forwarded to the Planning Manager for review and action. Desian Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed the Minor Development Review (MDR) and Uniform Sign Program Amendment (USP) concurrently since both entitlements are tied to one project. The Committee concurred with staff's recommendation that the window graphics be opaque, uniform in color and installed on the interior of the window. The Committee indicated that the final design of the opaque film could be resolved between the applicant and staff. The Committee also directed the applicant to explore alternative designs that require a lesser amount of stone be removed around the wall signage area for Buy Buy Baby and Bed Bath & Beyond. The Committee indicated that the modifications proposed by the applicant create a "quasi billboard" for the wall signage area around the curvilinear parapets and expressed a desire to see more stone retained. Regarding signs, the Committee concurred with all 3 Major Issues identified by staff, and directed the applicant to modify the signs to meet the Code, and redesign the signage to meet the Code's requirements regarding sign area and height. The Committee concluded their review by indicating that returning to the Design Review Committee would be at the discretion of staff after the applicant had submitted revisions for staff review. Members Present: Fletcher, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag September 16, 2014 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19528 - SHAREEF AWAD - A request to subdivide a 58,745 square foot parcel into two lots within the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at 13351 Banyan Street - APN: 0225-191-17. Related case: Variance DRC2014-00530 and Site Development Review DRC2014-00514. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 58,745 square foot site into two parcels. The site is currently developed with a single-family residence which will be retained on Parcel 1. The applicant is also requesting a Variance (DRC2014-00530) for a reduction in the 200-foot lot depth requirement for the parcel with the existing residence (Parcel 1). This parcel will have a depth of 166 feet, 34 feet less than the 200-foot lot depth requirement. Both parcels conform to all other Development Code requirements and will be required to install all street improvements including the installation of a community equestrian trail. The final approval will include Site Development Review (DRC2014-00514) for the construction of a new circular driveway for the existing residence. Staff Comments: Staff is supportive of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, Variance and Site Development Review. The Variance is necessary because of the odd shape of the existing parcel. The substandard parcel (Parcel 1) will have a similar parcel depth to the existing parcel to the west. The proposed circular driveway on Parcel 1 will make it easier to access Banyan Street without blocking traffic. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for their review and final decision. Desian Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn September 16, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00493 — CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING — A request to develop a 16,260 square foot warehouse and a 12,600 square foot canopy at an existing 268,524 square foot fabricated steel manufacturing facility within the General Industrial (GI) Development District, located at 11200 Arrow Route - APN: 020896126. Design Parameters: Steelscape currently maintains a 268,524 square foot facility on the north side of Arrow Route, west of Milliken Avenue. This includes 13,525 square feet of office, 252,193 square feet of warehouse, and 2,806 square feet of storage. The majority of the existing building is constructed with pre -fabricated metal siding. A small office area on the street front incorporates a brick facade. The site is bounded on the north and east by rail spur lines, and on the north, east, and west by existing industrial buildings. The applicant is proposing a 12,260 square foot warehouse addition, and a 12,600 canopy attached to the rear of the existing building. The structure is proposed to be constructed out of metal to match the existing building. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issue will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Within the Industrial land use requirements of the Development Code, the construction of new metal buildings is limited to the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (MIHI) and Heavy Industrial (HI) land use designations. The Code does, however, allow the expansion of existing facilities consistent with their present design. The proposed addition is a metal design consistent with the warehouse, production line, and office buildings. Because the application proposes the addition of a metal building and canopy to the rear of an existing industrial building, the architecture is designed to be compatible with the existing architecture, and the proposed addition will not be visible from public right-of-way, staff has no comment on the proposed addition. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Development Review DRC2014-00493. Desiqn Review Committee Action: The item was approved as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Granger Staff Planner: Tom Grahn THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA 6,1oNc, SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00521 — MGC ARCHITECTS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY -A review of proposed exterior modifications to an existing building within a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet within the Industrial Park (IP) District, located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street — APN: 0229-411-01. Related files: Development Review DRC2004-01013, Minor Exception DRC2014-00661, and Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2014-00330. 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 NCHO CUCAMONGA B. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2014-00330 — QUIEL BROS. SIGNS FOR SIGNATURE CENTER -A request to amend Uniform Sign Program #188 in conjunction with proposed exterior modifications to an existing building within a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229-411-01. Related files: Development Review DRC2004-01013 and Minor Development Review DRC2014-00521. C. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19528 - SHAREEF AWAD - A request to subdivide a 58,745 square foot parcel into two lots within the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at 13351 Banyan Street - APN: 0225-191-17. Related case: Variance DRC2014-00530. D. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00493 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING -A request to develop a 16,260 square foot warehouse and a 12,600 square foot canopy at an existing 252,193 square foot fabricated steel manufacturing facility within the General Industrial (GI) Development District, located at 11200 Arrow Route - APN: 0208-961-26. III. 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. IV. 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. 2 of 3 ADESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ANCHORSEPTEMBER 16, 2014 G'UCAMONOA 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 3, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 PM* Mike Smith September 16, 2014 MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00521 — MCG ARCHITECTS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY: A review of proposed exterior modifications to an existing building within a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street; APN: 0229-411-01. Related files: Development Review DRC2004-01013, Minor Exception DRC2014-00661, and Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2014-00330. Desiqn Parameters: The project site is a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet (11.6 acres) that is about 760 feet (east to west) by about 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 center is comprised of five (5) buildings with a combined floor area of about 120,000 square feet. The subject building of the current application is the largest building within the center (referred to as Building 1 in the original application) and has a floor area of 93,450 square feet. Until recently, most of the building was occupied by Tai Pan Trading; the remainder was occupied by The Alley. Tai Pan Trading has since 'downsized' while The Alley has vacated the building. The part of the building that was previously occupied by Tai Pan Trading will be occupied by Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby. The tenant space occupied by The Alley is currently occupied by TJ Maxx. 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. The properties to the south are part of the Ontario Mills shopping center in the City of Ontario. The applicant, on behalf of Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby, proposes modifications to the south (front) elevation of the subject building. The primary modifications include the construction of new primary and secondary entrances for both tenants; construction of a raised 'tower' element with a curved parapet at each primary entrance; replacement of existing aluminum storefront and glazing with exterior insulation and finishing system (EIFS) panels; and removal of freestanding, decorative tilt -up screen wall panels. Additional modifications include installing graphic and opaque film on the windows located on the main tower element located at the midpoint of the building; removal/relocation of stone veneer at various locations; and minor changes to the parking, landscape, and hardscape areas to accommodate the new building entrances. The basic 'footprint' of the building will remain unchanged. The proposed modifications are generally consistent with the character of the subject building. The modifications will not significantly alter the architecture in a manner that will result in an outcome that is inconsistent with the original project as approved by the Planning Commission. The construction of new entrances for each tenant is standard practice. Similarly, the replacement of storefront glazing is common to address a tenant's specific aesthetic, operational, and/or security requirements. The addition of tower elements will comply with the City's guidelines and standards requiring well-defined building entrances. Although the proposed tower parapets will be curved and the parapets of the remainder of the building are straight/horizontal; this is not an issue as the difference further identifies each entrance. The only aspect of the project that cannot be recommended for approval (as proposed) is the installation of graphic film on the windows of the main tower element. The intent of the graphic film is to minimize visibility through the windows while simultaneously providing advertisement in an image format (it is unclear from the plans if they are applied to the exterior or interior side of the windows). Completely covering each window with this graphic film is not permitted per Section 17.74.070(B)(6) of the Development Code which states, "window signs (permanent or temporary) shall not cover more than thirty percent (30%) of the window area for each window of the establishment." The area of the windows covered by this film would have to be reduced to comply. However, this most likely will not achieve the applicant's objective of blocking visibility through each window. Furthermore, the appearance of the partially covered windows would be unusual and aesthetically awkward. 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. Revise the window graphics proposed on the center tower element so that they are opaque and uniform in color, and installed on the interior side of each window. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. 1. Existing stone veneer on the remainder of the building, specifically on the center tower element and the 'lighthouse' tower elements on either side of the area of work shall be protected in -place. 2. All existing amenities such as bike racks shall be protected in -place or relocated as close as possible to their original location. 3. New trash enclosures shall match the existing trash enclosures on -site and shall be designed and constructed per City standard. 4. New cart corral areas near the building shall be enclosed. The enclosure shall incorporate the stone veneer that is used on the building. The applicant should review the cart corrals at BevMo!, located at 12204 Foothill Boulevard for reference. 5. All signs shall comply with the applicable provisions of the City's Sign Ordinance, Uniform Sign Program #188, and any amendments to the sign program associated with Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2014-00330 that are approved by the Design Review Committee. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved, with the above -noted revisions incorporated, and forwarded to the Planning Manager for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Mike Smith DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith September 16, 2014 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2014-00330 — QUIEL SIGNS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY - A request to amend Uniform Sign Program #188 in conjunction with proposed exterior modifications to an existing building within a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet within the Industrial Park (IP) District, located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street; APN: 0229-411-01. Related cases: Development Review DRC2004-01013 and Minor Development Review DRC2014-00521. Background: The proposed Sign Program Amendment is for three (3) revisions to the existing uniform sign program that regulates the signs within the "Signature Center," a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet that is comprised of five (5) buildings. The amendment is to accommodate three (3) new primary tenants - Bed Bath & Beyond, Buy Buy Baby, and TJ Maxx. These tenants will occupy most of the floor area of the largest building in the center (Building 1) that was previously occupied by Tai Pan Trading and The Alley. Until recently, most of the building was occupied . by Tai Pan Trading; the remainder was occupied by The Alley. Tai Pan Trading has since downsized, while The Alley has vacated the building. The part of the building that was previously occupied by Tai Pan Trading will be occupied by Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby. The tenant space that was occupied by The Alley is now occupied by TJ Maxx. Design Parameters: Revision No. 1: In the Uniform Sign Program there is currently a mix of potential (or allowed) sign areas for three (3) "Primary Tenants" and four (4) "Secondary Tenants" on the south elevation of Building 1. The first revision is to change the quantity and location of the potential wall sign areas for "Primary Tenants" and delete the potential sign areas for "Secondary Tenants" altogether. The proposed sign areas will be on the tower elements that will be constructed at the respective primary entrances of pending tenants Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby. These proposed sign areas will be in addition to the existing sign areas in use by Tai Pan Trading and TJ Maxx. The proposed height for each sign area are about 10 feet and 8 feet for Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby, respectively. The proposed length for each sign area are approximately 30 feet and 20 feet for Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby, respectively. The overall area of each sign will be 300 square feet and 160 square feet, respectively. Staff notes to the Committee that the individual area of both signs exceeds the maximum of 150 square feet (per sign) applicable to retail establishments in multi -tenant centers per Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code and will need to be reduced in area accordingly. Consistent with the other signs within the commercial center, the text of the signs will be fabricated channel letters. The colors and fonts will be the trademark colors of the tenants. No wall signs are proposed on the other elevations. Revision No. 2: There are six (6) monument signs on the property — one (1) each at the driveways at Buffalo Avenue and Richmond Place on the east and west sides, respectively, of the commercial center (identified as MT1 and MT4); two (2) at the driveway at 4th Street (MT2 and MT3); and one (1) each at the southwest and southeast corners (the "corners") of the commercial center (CM1 and CM2). Signs MT1 — 4 are for the purposes of tenant identification while signs CM2 and CM3 are limited to identification of the commercial center ("Signature Center"). The second revision is to convert signs CM2 and CM3 to tenant identification signs. The proposed change on both signs eliminates the commercial center identification and replaces it with individual sign panels to allow tenant -specific identification, i.e. signs for Bed Bath & Beyond, Buy Buy Baby, and TJ Maxx. Signs MT1 - 4 will remain as -is. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00330 — QUIEL SIGNS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY September 16, 2014 Page 2 Revision No. 3: The existing potential tenant sign area on the tower element located at the midpoint Building 1 is reserved for a primary tenant. The third revision is to allow this sign .area to be used to identify the commercial center, i.e. "Signature Center." Text and graphics that are necessary to describe the technical and design details of the proposed amendment will be incorporated on pages 1, 10, 11, and 17. The remainder of the sign program, including the construction and design requirements for wall signs; category definitions, i.e. "Primary Tenant," "Secondary Tenant," etc.; sign restrictions, and tenant responsibilities will remain unchanged. 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. Per Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code, the maximum area of wall -mounted signs is 150 square feet. The wall -mounted signs for Bed Bath & Beyond and Buy Buy Baby have an area (as shown on the architectural drawings) of 300 square feet and 160 square feet, respectively. The area of both signs will need to be reduced accordingly. 2. Per Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code, the maximum height of wall -mounted project identification signs is 6 feet and the maximum area is 24 square feet. The proposed project identification sign area (as shown on the architectural drawings) appears to be larger than this. The area of this sign will need to be reduced accordingly. 3. Per Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code, the maximum height of monument signs is 8 feet. The height of the monument sign (as shown on Page 17 of the sign company's draft) exceeds this height and needs to be reduced accordingly. Note: the maximum area for monument signs is 24 square feet. 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. The applicant shall submit a final draft of the amended Uniform Sign Program that incorporates the text and graphics that are necessary to describe the technical and design details (and corresponding deletions) of the proposed amendment. Page 11 of the final draft shall include a revised south elevation of Building 1 that matches the plans and sign locations prepared by MCG Architecture. The other pages shall include the corrections noted above. 2. The number of signs (wall and monument) that is permitted for each tenant shall comply with Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00330 — QUIEL SIGNS FOR BED BATH & BEYOND/BUY BUY BABY September 16, 2014 Page 3 3. 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 Manager and/or the Design Review Committee. . Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the amendment be approved, with the above -noted revisions incorporated, and forwarded to the Planning Manager for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: Attachments: Draft of Amended Uniform Sign Program #188, Excerpts Only (Prepared by Quiel Signs) Colored Elevation of Building (prepared by MCG Architects) DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag September 16, 2014 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19528 - SHAREEF AWAD - A request to subdivide a 58,745 square foot parcel into two lots within the Very Low (VL) Development District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at 13351 Banyan Street - APN: 0225-191-17. Related case: Variance DRC2014-00530 and Site Development Review DRC2014-00514. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 58,745 square foot site into two parcels. The site is currently developed with a single-family residence which will be retained on Parcel 1. The applicant is also requesting a Variance (DRC2014-00530) for a reduction in the 200-foot lot depth requirement for the parcel with the existing residence (Parcel 1). This parcel will have a depth of 166 feet, 34 feet less than the 200-foot lot depth requirement. Both parcels conform to all other Development Code requirements and will be required to install all street improvements including the installation of a community equestrian trail. The final approval will include Site Development Review (DRC2014-00514) for the construction of a new circular driveway for the existing residence. Staff Comments: Staff is supportive of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, Variance and Site Development Review. The Variance is necessary be of the odd shape of the existing parcel. The substandard parcel (Parcel 1) will have a similar parcel depth to the existing parcel to the west. The proposed circular driveway on Parcel 1 will make it easier to access Banyan Street without blocking traffic. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for their review and final decision. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn September 16, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00493 — CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING — A request to develop a 16,260 square foot warehouse and a 12,600 square foot canopy at an existing 268,524 square foot fabricated steel manufacturing facility within the General Industrial (GI) Development District, located at 11200 Arrow Route - APN: 020896126. Design Parameters: Steelscape currently maintains a 268,524 square foot facility on the north side of Arrow Route, west of Milliken Avenue. This includes 13,525 square feet of office, 252,193 square feet of warehouse, and 2,806 square feet of storage. The majority of the existing building is constructed with pre -fabricated metal siding. A small office area on the street front incorporates a brick fagade. The site is bounded on the north and east by rail spur lines, and on the north, east, and west by existing industrial buildings. The applicant is proposing a 12,260 square foot warehouse addition, and a 12,600 canopy attached to the rear of the existing building. The structure is proposed to be constructed out of metal to match the existing building. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issue will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Within the Industrial land use requirements of the Development Code, the construction of new metal buildings is limited to the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (MIHI) and Heavy Industrial (HI) land use designations. The Code does, however, allow the expansion of existing facilities consistent with their present design. The proposed addition is a metal design consistent with the warehouse, production line, and office buildings. Because the application proposes the addition of a metal building and canopy to the rear of an existing industrial building, the architecture is designed to be compatible with the existing architecture, and the proposed addition will not be visible from public right-of-way, staff has no comment on the proposed addition. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Development Review DRC2014-00493. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tom Grahn Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA 6%,,,,NcNCA SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18928 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to create a Tract Map for an 8-unit townhouse development for a 1.02-acre site within the Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations — APN: 020-702-211. Related cases: Design Review DRC2013-00824 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. 1 of 2 ACTION TOO p.m. A. Approved. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA zT SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 RANCHO CUCAMONOA B. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00824 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - Design review B. Approved. for an 8-unit townhouse development on 1.02-acre of land within the Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations - APN: 020702211. Related cases: Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18928. C. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL - Site C. Applicant not plan and architectural review of a 1,659 square foot single-family present — the item residence with a 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot on the was moved to the east side of Center Avenue and south of 24th Street within the Low (L) September DRC meetinng.g. 2014, Residential Development District, located at 8855 Center Avenue - APN: 0209-123-05. Related case: Variance DRC2013-00897. D. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18961 -TRACY RASZEWSKI FOR HOIKE, LLC D. Approved. -'A request to subdivide one existing 4.75-acre parcel into 7 parcels within the Equestrian Overlay of the Very Low (VL) Residential Zoning District, located at the northeast corner of Sapphire Street and Brittany Lane at 5615 Sapphire Street - APN: 1061-691-04. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. None. III. 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. 7:29 p.m. IV. 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. 2of2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima September 2, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18928 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to create a Tract Map for an 8-unit townhouse development for a 1.02 acre site within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207- 022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related Files: Design Review DRC2013- 00824 & Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00824 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - Design review for an 8-unit townhouse development on 1.02 acres within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related Files: SUBTT18928 & Tree Removal Permit DRC2013- 00825. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00825 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to remove 26 trees related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18928 and Design Review DRC2013-00824 for a 1.02 acre site within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. Design Parameters: The project location is a 1.02 acre site zoned Medium Residential (8-14 du/ac), located on the west side of Carnelian Street, south of Base Line Road. There is an existing single-family residence that is proposed for demolition as part of this project. The property is about 100 feet in width and the lot extends approximately 441 feet west along the northern side and 431 feet west along the southern side (to the flood control easement). There is a regional trail along the Flood Control easement, single-family residential and a water tank owned by San Bernardino County Flood Control to the south, and both single-family and multi -family residential to the north. Project Description, Background and Architectural Design: The applicant is proposing to construct an 8-unit townhouse development along the south side of the property. The product proposes a 2nd floor and a garage for each unit. The lot coverage is approximately 20 percent. There is an open private/common space proposed, which includes an open lawn area, tot lot play area and a barbecue/picnic area. Each unit will have a private landscaped front lawn area (298 square feet), with the exception of Unit 8 (198 square feet). This reduced landscaped area was to accommodate the pedestrian walkway that fronts all of the units. This project was initially presented to the Committee on June 17, 2014. The Committee did not recommend approval of the project and asked that the applicant work with staff on the design. The overall comments provided by the Committee were that the units are identical and need variation, and windows and doors are all similar and "cookie cutter." The Committee acknowledged that the site is constrained by its small size and would be difficult to adjust footprints so the applicant would need to be creative. Suggestions from the Committee included: Utilize arched or recessed windows and doors, alternate the scalloped edges, include corbels, create variations in roof line, use more iron work, recess wall planes, and create borders around windows. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00824 AND SUBTT18928 —ALEX MUSTAPHA September 2, 2014 Page 2 Since the meeting, staff met with the applicant to work on the design. The applicant has revised the design twice with staff to meet the design goals expected. They have creatively used the arched windows in various locations, added more ironwork to the second floor, included wooden doors and wooden sectional garage doors, included shutters, corbels, and the scalloped edging is used only on certain units. Some roof planes have been changed so that they are not identical, and windows have been updated to include mullions and bordered by lintels. 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. Do the revisions satisfy the Committee's design goals to move the project forward? 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. None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project and provide input and direction regarding the revised design and if the project is ready to be scheduled for review by the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee wanted to see similar architectural detailing that was added to the north elevation added to the south elevation to achieve 360 degree architecture. With these revisions, the Committee recommended approval and forwarded the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, and Granger Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag September 2, 2014 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL - Site plan and architectural review of a 1,659 square foot single-family residence with a 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot on the east side of Center Avenue and south of 24th Street within the Low (L) Residential Development District, located at 8855 Center Avenue - APN: 0209-123-05. Related case: Variance DRC2013-00897. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to construct a 1,659 square foot two-story single-family residence with an attached 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot. The lot is 25 feet wide and a Variance is required in order to construct a house on the site. Without the Variance, the house would be limited to being 10 feet wide, too narrow to construct a garage. The proposed Variance will reduce the required 10-foot setback to 5 feet on both sides of the house. Because of the narrowness of the lot, the applicant is proposing a tandem two -car garage. A Minor Exception is also required for property line walls up to 9 feet high in order to get the site to drain to the public street. The project conforms to all other requirements including height (21 feet), front yard setback (42 feet), rear yard setback (29 feet) and lot coverage (39 percent). The future homeowner, though, will not be able to construct any additional solid roof structures on the site over 13 square feet because of the proposed house being just under the 40 percent maximum lot coverage. The applicant has chosen a Spanish architectural motif with multiple pop -outs to articulate the side elevations and the roof line. The second story is carried over a portion of the garage and includes a second story deck with an overhead trellis to provide visual interest. The front door is on the side of the house because of the narrowness of the lot. Staff Comments: Staff is overall pleased with the design of the house given the obvious constraints width of the lot. However, staff is concerned that placing a 1,659 square foot two-story house with 5-foot setbacks directly adjacent to single -story residences is out of character with the neighborhood (it should be noted that one of neighboring houses has a non -conforming side yard setback that is less than 5 feet from property line). Staff's opinion is that it would be more appropriate to construct a single -story house on the lot. The required 9-foot high property line walls are also a problem as the neighboring lots will not only face a two-story house, but also an up to 9-foot high wall. Manor Issues: 1. Whether it is appropriate to place a two-story house adjacent to single -story neighboring residences on such a narrow lot with 5-foot side yard setbacks. 2. Whether the size of the house is appropriate for such a small lot. 3. Whether it is acceptable to place up to a 9-foot high wall along the property line to drain the site. Secondary Issues: Whether a tandem garage is acceptable. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL September 2, 2014 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the issues raised by staff and decide whether or not the project may move forward to Planning Commission for final review. Design Review Committee Action: The applicant did not attend the meeting — the item will be moved to September 30, 2014, DRC meeting. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, and Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez September 2, 2014 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18961 - TRACY RASZEWSKI FOR HOIKE, LLC - A request to subdivide one existing 4.75-acre parcel into 7 parcels within the Equestrian Overlay of the Very Low (VL) Residential Zoning District, located at the northeast corner of Sapphire Street and Brittany Lane - APN: 1061-691-04. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Design Parameters: The site, which has an existing single-family residence located in the northwest quadrant of the site, generally slopes from north to south and contains multiple trees that surround the residence as well as light ground vegetation throughout the remainder of the property. The site is surrounded to the north, south, and west by existing single-family residences; and to the east is surrounded by Floyd M. Stork Elementary School. The project involves the subdivision of an existing 4.75-acre parcel into 7 parcels for future residential development. The site is located within the Equestrian Overlay of the Very -Low (VL) Residential Zoning District, which requires the proposed lots to meet certain standards, including a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, an average lot size of 22,500 square feet, as well as minimum lot width and depth requirements specified in Section 17.36 of the Development Code, all of which this project complies with. The subdivision involves the creation of lots ranging in size from 21,780 to 40,000 square feet. The project also includes a 15-foot wide equestrian trail that is adjacent to all lots within the subject tract as well as necessary drainage improvements adjacent to the trails in order to properly divert drainage flows accordingly. Future development of the site will require additional street improvements along Sapphire Street and Brittany Lane as well as the creation of a new cul-de-sac (Brittany Court), which will run off of Brittany Lane and have a length of approximately 200 feet. Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant has scheduled a neighborhood meeting for Wednesday, August 20, 2014, which will be held at Floyd M. Stork Elementary School (following the preparation of this report). Notification of the meeting was sent by the applicant to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the site. As of the date of the preparation of this report, Planning Department staff has been contacted by two neighboring residents; one expressed support and one expressed opposition of this project. The neighbor with concerns had comments regarding the type of future development of the site, increased traffic that the project may bring, drainage flows from the project site to the south, and view obstruction of the existing properties to the south. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project and forward the project on to the Planning Commission for final approval. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee discussed the project as well as concerns brought up at the neighborhood meeting, including adding off -site drainage to the tract located to the south and proposed conceptual pad elevations. The Committee recommended approval of the project. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, and Granger Staff Planner: Dominick Perez THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA 6%,NcHoc� SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18928 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to create a Tract Map for an 8-unit townhouse development for a 1.02-acre site within the Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations — APN: 020-702-211. Related cases: Design Review DRC2013-00824 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA aHo SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 CUGAMONGA B. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00824 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - Design review for an 8-unit townhouse development on 1.02-acre of land within the Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations - APN: 020702211. Related cases: Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18928. C. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL - Site plan and architectural review of a 1,659 square foot single-family residence with a 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot on the east side of Center Avenue and south of 24th Street within the Low (L) Residential Development District, located at 8855 Center Avenue - APN: 0209-123-05. Related case: Variance DRC2013-00897. D. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18961 -TRACY RASZEWSKI FOR HOIKE, LLC - A request to subdivide one existing 4.75-acre parcel into 7 parcels within the Equestrian Overlay of the Very Low (VL) Residential Zoning District, located at the northeast corner of Sapphire Street and Brittany Lane at 5615 Sapphire Street - APN: 1061-691-04. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS 11 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT 11 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. 2 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA �xCHo SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 CUCAMONG& 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 20, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima September 2, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18928 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to create a Tract Map for an 8-unit townhouse development for a 1.02 acre site within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207- 022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related Files: Design Review DRC2013- 00824 & Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00824 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - Design review for an 8-unit townhouse development on 1.02 acres within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related Files: SUBTT18928 & Tree Removal Permit DRC2013- 00825. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00825 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to remove 26 trees related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18928 and Design Review DRC2013-00824 for a 1.02 acre site within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. Design Parameters: The project location is a 1.02 acre site zoned Medium Residential (8-14 du/ac), located on the west side of Carnelian Street, south of Base Line Road. There is an existing single-family residence that is proposed for demolition as part of this project. The property is about 100 feet in width and the lot extends approximately 441 feet west along the northern side and 431 feet west along the southern side (to the flood control easement). There is a regional trail along the Flood Control easement, single-family residential and a water tank owned by San Bernardino County Flood Control to the south, and both single-family and multi -family residential to the north. Protect Description Background and Architectural Design: The applicant is proposing to construct an 8-unit townhouse development along the south side of the property. The product proposes a 2nd floor and a garage for each unit. The lot coverage is approximately 20 percent. There is an open private/common space proposed, which includes an open lawn area, tot lot play area and a barbecue/picnic area. Each unit will have a private landscaped front lawn area (298 square feet), with the exception of Unit 8 (198 square feet). This reduced landscaped area was to accommodate the pedestrian walkway that fronts all of the units. This project was initially presented to the Committee on June 17, 2014. The Committee did not recommend approval of the project and asked that the applicant work with staff on the design. The overall comments provided by the Committee were that the units are identical and need variation, and windows and doors are all similar and "cookie cutter." The Committee acknowledged that the site is constrained by its small size and would be difficult to adjust footprints so the applicant would need to be creative. Suggestions from the. Committee included: Utilize arched or recessed windows and doors, alternate the scalloped edges, include corbels, create variations in roof line, use more iron work, recess wall planes, and create borders around DRC AGENDA DRC2013-00824 & SUBTT18928 —Alex Mustapha September 2, 2014 Page 2 windows. Since the meeting, staff met with the applicant to work on the design. The applicant has revised the design twice with staff to meet the design goals expected. They have creatively used the arched windows in various locations, added more ironwork to the second floor, included wooden doors and wooden sectional garage doors, included shutters, corbels, and the scalloped edging is used only on certain units. Some roof planes have been changed so that they are not identical, and windows have been updated to include mullions and bordered by lintels. 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. Do the revisions satisfy the Committee's design goals to move the project forward? 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. None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project and provide input and direction regarding the revised design and if the project is ready to be scheduled for review by the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag September 2, 2014 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL - Site plan and architectural review of a 1,659 square foot single-family residence with a 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot on the east side of Center Avenue and south of 24th Street within the Low (L) Residential Development District, located at 8855 Center Avenue - APN: 0209-123-05. Related case: Variance DRC2013-00897. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to construct a 1,659 square foot two-story single-family residence with an attached 506 square foot garage on a 3,358 square foot lot. The lot is 25 feet wide and a Variance is required in order to construct a house on the site. Without the Variance, the house would be limited to being 10 feet wide, too narrow to construct a garage. The proposed Variance will reduce the required 10-foot setback to 5 feet on both sides of the house. Because of the narrowness of the lot, the applicant is proposing a tandem two -car garage. A Minor Exception is also required for property line walls up to 9 feet high in order to get the site to drain to the public street. The project conforms to all other requirements including height (21 feet), front yard setback (42 feet), rear yard setback (29 feet) and lot coverage (39 percent). The future homeowner, though, will not be able to construct any additional solid roof structures on the site over 13 square feet because of the proposed house being just under the 40 percent maximum lot coverage. The applicant has chosen a Spanish architectural motif with multiple pop -outs to articulate the side elevations and the roof line. The second story is carried over a portion of the garage and includes a second story deck with an overhead trellis to provide visual interest. The front door is on the side of the house because of the narrowness of the lot. Staff Comments: Staff is overall pleased with the design of the house given the obvious constraints width of the lot. However, staff is concerned that placing a 1,659 square foot two-story house with 5-foot setbacks directly adjacent to single -story residences is out of character with the neighborhood (it should be noted that one of neighboring houses has a non -conforming side yard setback that is less than 5 feet from property line). Staff's opinion is that it would be more appropriate to construct a single -story house on the lot. The required 9-foot high property line walls are also a problem as the neighboring lots will not only face a two-story house, but also an up to 9-foot high wall. Major Issues: Whether it is appropriate to place a two-story house adjacent to single -story neighboring residences on such a narrow lot with 5-foot side yard setbacks. 2. Whether the size of the house is appropriate for such a small lot. 3. Whether it is acceptable to place up to a 9-foot high wall along the property line to drain the site. Secondary Issues: Whether a tandem garage is acceptable. DRC AGENDA DRC2013-00896 — AC KAUSHAL September 2, 2014 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the issues raised by staff and decide whether or not the project may move forward to Planning Commission for final review. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez September 2, 2014 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18961 - TRACY RASZEWSKI FOR HOIKE, LLC - A request to subdivide one existing 4.75-acre parcel into 7 parcels within the Equestrian Overlay of the Very Low (VL) Residential Zoning District, located at the northeast corner of Sapphire Street and Brittany Lane - APN: 1061-691-04. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Design Parameters: The site, which has an existing single-family residence located in the northwest quadrant of the site, generally slopes from north to south and contains multiple trees that surround the residence as well as light ground vegetation throughout the remainder of the property. The site is surrounded to the north, south, and west by existing single-family residences; and to the east is surrounded by Floyd M. Stork Elementary School. The project involves the subdivision of an existing 4.75-acre parcel into 7 parcels for future residential development. The site is located within the Equestrian Overlay of the Very -Low (VL) Residential Zoning District, which requires the proposed lots to meet certain standards, including a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, an average lot size of 22,500 square feet, as well as minimum lot width and depth requirements specified in Section 17.36 of the Development Code, all of which this project complies with. The subdivision involves the creation of lots ranging in size from 21,780 to 40,000 square feet. The project also includes a 15-foot wide equestrian trail that is adjacent to all lots within the subject tract as well as necessary drainage improvements adjacent to the trails in order to properly divert drainage flows accordingly. Future development of the site will require additional street improvements along Sapphire Street and Brittany Lane as well as the creation of a new cul-de-sac (Brittany Court), which will run off of Brittany Lane and have a length of approximately 200 feet. Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant has scheduled a neighborhood meeting for Wednesday, August 20, 2014, which will be held at Floyd M. Stork Elementary School (following the preparation of this report). Notification of the meeting was sent by the applicant to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the site. As of the date of the preparation of this report, Planning Department staff has been contacted by two neighboring residents; one expressed support and one expressed opposition of this project. The neighbor with concerns had comments regarding the type of future development of the site, increased traffic that the project may bring, drainage flows from the project site to the south, and view obstruction of the existing properties to the south. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project and forward the project on to the Planning Commission for final approval. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Dominick Perez Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO C,'UCAMONGA AUGUST 19, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 6, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA rrcxo L;UCAMONGA AUGUST 5, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00127 - COMMERCE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LP FOR CSF, INC. - Site plan and architectural review of a 139,983 square foot office/warehouse on a 6.6-acre project site located south of Mission Park Drive between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue within the Industrial Park (IP) Development District - APNs: 0229-401-06, 07, 08 and 09. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00012 and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00126. 1 of 2 ACTION A. Approved. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA jZaNCHo AUGUST 5, 2014 CUCAMONOA B. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 - ROUTE 66 B. Approved with a IECA - A request to preserve the Historic Cucamonga Service Station request for a rendering including restoring the front building (Phase 1) and to reconstruct the rear of the station prior to the 2,391 square foot service garage (Phase 2) within the Foothill Boulevard Planning Commission Specialty Commercial (SC) District, located at 9670 Foothill Boulevard - Meeting if possible. APN: 0208-153-05. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III None. 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. IV. ADJOURNMENT 111 7:41 p.m. 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. 2of2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag August 5, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00127 - COMMERCE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LP FOR CSF, INC. - Site plan and architectural review of a 139,983 square foot office/warehouse on a 6.6-acre project site located south of Mission Park Drive between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue within the Industrial Park (IP) Development District.- APNs: 0229-401-06, 07, 08 and 09. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00012 and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00126. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to construct a 135,183 square foot industrial building on 6.6 acres for a site that is bounded by Mission Park Drive to the north, Richmond Place to the west and Buffalo Avenue to the east. There is an existing commercial development to the south. The project will take vehicle access from Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue. The project site is currently zoned Industrial Park (IP) which does not permit warehouse uses over 50,000 square feet in size. The applicant is requesting to change the zoning to General Industrial in conformance with the existing development to the north, east, and west. Staff has indicated to the applicant that they were in support of the concept of changing the zoning. The project is in conformance will all other standards of the Development Code including parking, setbacks, landscape coverage, site improvements, and building design. Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the site and building design. Each face of the building is articulated and the roof parapets vary in height to provide visual interest. Large expanses of glass have been used at the corners of the building and on the pop -outs. Clearstory windows are used around the building to add additional visual interest. Staff's main concern with the building design is whether the proposed stone veneer is appropriate for an industrial building or is more appropriate for a commercial building. Staff feels that if stone veneer is used, it should be limited to the building entrance and eliminated from the other locations. Consideration should also be given to adding a single clerestory window to the faux tower element on the south elevation to add visual interest and to break up this wall plane. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: 1. Whether the stone veneer is appropriate for an industrial building; and, if it is, whether it should be limited to the two entrances to the building. 2. Whether a single clerestory window should be added to the faux tower element on the south elevation DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00127 — COMMERCE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LP FOR CSF, INC. August 5, 2014 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the design issues raised by staff and forward the project to the Planning Commission for their review with any recommended design changes incorporated into the final submittal. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima August 5, 2014 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 - ROUTE 66 IECA - A request to preserve the historic Cucamonga Service Station including restoring the front building (Phase 1) and to reconstruct the rear 2,391 square foot service garage (Phase 2) within the Foothill Boulevard Specialty Commercial (SC) District, located at 9670 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0208-153-05. Design Parameters: The lot size is approximately 9,490 square feet and is zoned Specialty Commercial (SC) within the Foothill Boulevard Overlay Zoning District. The goal of the SC districts is intended to accommodate `specialty uses, which promote a special landmark quality or create a special ambience that is unique to a particular subarea.' To the east, are two small stores (key shop, florist); to the north, is single-family residential; to the west, is vacant land which currently is pending a new commercial development; and to the south, are commercial uses. The property originally included two buildings: a front and rear building. The exact construction date is unknown, but is estimated to be around 1915 for both buildings. The rear building suffered deterioration and collapsed in 2011 after a heavy rain. The front building still exists and is a one-story Mission style structure. Architectural features include flat roofing with arched parapet and coping, red tile roof, smooth -stucco wall surface, and a porte-cochere supported by square piers. Proiect Description and Architectural Design: At this time, the applicant is proposing to finish Phase 1 of the project which includes a re -roof, new AC unit, restoring the interior, new foundation, sandblasting and re -painting of the structure. An interesting discovery was made while sandblasting the structure. They found the original paint scheme underneath the white stucco to be yellow, blue, and red. The property owners conducted research of other Richfield stations and found that this color scheme was quite common for these types of stations during this era. Phase 2 of this project proposes to reconstruct the rear 2,391 square foot service garage. At this time, this portion of the project is still pending and will be completed at a later date. 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. The color scheme is quite different from what the community is used to seeing at this historic station, which is on a major intersection. However, this recent discovery and research proves this color scheme of yellow, blue and red is an accurate representation of the gas station's period of significance. Does the committee support the bold change in color for this historic station? 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. DRC ACTION AGENDA CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 — ROUTE 66 IECA August 5, 2014 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. None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval and forward the project to the Historic Preservation Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Design Review Committee Action: 1. The Design Review Committee (DRC) commented that the colors are appropriate corporate colors of the Richfield Gas Station and is a true representation of the period of significance of the structure. The colors, although bold and different, will stand out and solicit good attention for the historic landmark building. 2. The DRC commented about the possibility of a rendering of the station with the proposed colors, but did not want to hold up the process. Staff will work with the applicant to see if a rendering can be made available before Planning Commission. The Committee recommended approval to be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA AUGUST 5, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00127 - COMMERCE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LP FOR CSF, INC. - Site plan and architectural review of a 139,983 square foot office/warehouse on a 6.6-acre project site located south of Mission Park Drive between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue within the Industrial Park (IP) Development District - APNs: 0229-401-06, 07, 08 and 09. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00012 and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00126. 1 of 2 _ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA AUGUST 5, 2014 CftCHO um ONCA B. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 - ROUTE 66 IECA - A request to preserve the Historic Cucamonga Service Station including restoring the front building (Phase 1) and to reconstruct the rear 2,391 square foot service garage (Phase 2) within the Foothill Boulevard Specialty Commercial (SC) District, located at 9670 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0208-153-05. III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 23, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2of2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag August 5, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2014-00127 - COMMERCE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LP FOR CSF, INC. - Site plan and architectural review of a 139,983 square foot office/warehouse on a 6.6-acre project site located south of Mission Park Drive between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue within the Industrial Park (IP) Development District - APNs: 0229-401-06, 07, 08 and 09. Related cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2014-00012 and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00126. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to construct a 135,183 square foot industrial building on 6.6 acres for a site that is bounded by Mission Park Drive to the north, Richmond Place to the west and Buffalo Avenue to the east. There is an existing commercial development to the south. The project will take vehicle access from Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue. The project site is currently zoned Industrial Park (IP) which does not permit warehouse uses over 50,000 square feet in size. The applicant is requesting to change the zoning to General Industrial in conformance with the existing development to the north, east, and west. Staff has indicated to the applicant that they were in support of the concept of changing the zoning. The project is in conformance will all other standards of the Development Code including parking, setbacks, landscape coverage, site improvements, and building design. Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the site and building design. Each face of the building is articulated and the roof parapets vary in height to provide visual interest. Large expanses of glass have been used at the corners of the building and on the pop -outs. Clearstory windows are used around the building to add additional visual interest. Staff's main concern with the building design is whether the proposed stone veneer is appropriate for an industrial building or is more appropriate for a commercial building. Staff feels that if stone veneer is used, it should be limited to the building entrance and eliminated from the other locations. Consideration should also be given to adding a single clerestory window to the faux tower element on the south elevation to add visual interest and to break up this wall plane. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: Whether the stone veneer is appropriate for an industrial building; and, if it is, whether it should be limited to the two entrances to the building. 2. Whether a single clerestory window should be added to the faux tower element on the south elevation DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00127 — COMMERCE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LP FOR CSF, INC. August 5, 2014 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the design issues raised by staff and forward the project to the Planning Commission for their review with any recommended design changes incorporated into the final submittal. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima August 5, 2014 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 - ROUTE 66 IECA - A request to preserve the historic Cucamonga Service Station including restoring the front building (Phase 1) and to reconstruct the rear 2,391 square foot service garage (Phase 2) within the Foothill Boulevard Specialty Commercial (SC) District, located at 9670 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0208-153-05. Design Parameters: The lot size is approximately 9,490 square feet and is zoned Specialty Commercial (SC) within the Foothill Boulevard Overlay Zoning District. The goal of the SC districts is intended to accommodate `specialty uses, which promote a special landmark quality or create a special ambience that is unique to a particular subarea.' To the east, are two small stores (key shop, florist); to the north, is single-family residential; to the west, is vacant land which currently is pending a new commercial development; and to the south, are commercial uses. The property originally included two buildings: a front and rear building. The exact construction date is unknown, but is estimated to be around 1915 for both buildings. The rear building suffered deterioration and collapsed in 2011 after a heavy rain. The front building still exists and is a one-story Mission style structure. Architectural features include flat roofing with arched parapet and coping, red tile roof, smooth -stucco wall surface, and a porte-cochere supported by square piers. Project Description and Architectural Design: At this time, the applicant is proposing to finish Phase 1 of the project which includes a re -roof, new AC unit, restoring the interior, new foundation, sandblasting and re -painting of the structure. An interesting discovery was made while sandblasting the structure. They found the original paint scheme underneath the white stucco to be yellow, blue, and red. The property owners conducted research of other Richfield stations and found that this color scheme was quite common for these types of stations during this era. Phase 2 of this project proposes to reconstruct the rear 2,391 square foot service garage. At this time, this portion of the project is still pending and will be completed at a later date. 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. The color scheme is quite different from what the community is used to seeing at this historic station, which is on a major intersection. However, this recent discovery and research proves this color scheme of yellow, blue and red is an accurate representation of the gas station's period of significance. Does the committee support the bold change in color for this historic station? 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. DRC AGENDA CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 — ROUTE 66 IECA August 5, 2014 Page 2 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval and forward the project to the Historic Preservation Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima Members Present: 11 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA C CONGA JULY 15, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER 71 Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca A Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly X Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00425 — MANNING HOMES — A review of five (5) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a previously approved subdivision within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place — APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Variance DRC2014-00426, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00427. 1 of 2 ACTION A. Approved as presented. ADESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA U LY 155 2014 NCHORJ CUCAMONGA B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW B. Approved as DRC2014-00378 — CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING FOR DEDEAUX presented. PROPERTIES, LLC — A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 125,000 square feet on two vacant parcels of about 252,000 square feet (5.8 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northwest corner of 6th Street and Rochester Avenue — APNs: 0229-262-01 and -31. Related file: Development Review DRC2008-00185. None. III. 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. 7:15 p.m. IV. 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. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn July 15, 2014 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00425 — MANNING HOMES - A review of five (5) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a previously approved subdivision within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Variance DRC2014-00426, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00427. Design Parameters: On June 13, 2012, the Planning Commission approved SUBTT18747 for the subdivision of 3.4 acres into 5 lots, Development Review DRC2009-00010, for the design of the five (5) single-family residences, and Variance DRC2010-00963, which provided for a reduction in the minimum lot depth on the two most westerly lots (Lots 1 and 5). Following that approval, the property was sold to the current applicant who submitted a revised architecture for the project site. The project proposes the development of five (5) single-family residences on a cul-de-sac with single -story and two-story floor plans. The 3 lots at the end of the cul-de-sac, along the eastern project boundary (Lots 2, 3, and 4) will be two-story, while the two lots on the western project boundary (Lots 1 and 5) will be single -story. Additionally, the applicant submitted Variance DRC2014-00426, for a reduction in minimum lot rear yard setback from 60 to 30 feet for Lots 1 and 5. The original Variance application permitted a reduction in the lot depth requirement for these two lots, but did not address any reduction on lot setback requirements in their eventual development. The architectural styles for the projects two-story units are identical to the architecture used in the development of SUBTT18819, located at the southwest corner of Victoria Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue. This includes the following: Lot 2 — Bungalow, Lot 3 — Traditional, and Lot 4 — Spanish. These architectural plans were submitted unrevised from this previously approved architecture. The architectural style for the single -story unit, located on Lots 1 — Spanish, and Lot 5 — Tuscan, were designed to be compatible to the style, massing, and use of materials of the two-story units. Staff Comments Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. There are no major design issues. 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 design issues. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00425 — MANNING HOMES July 15, 2014 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Development Review DRC2014-00425. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Tom Grahn DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 PM Mike Smith July 15, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00378 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING FOR DEDEAUX PROPERTIES, LLC -A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 125,000 square feet on two vacant parcels of about 252,000 square feet (5.8 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northwest corner of 6th Street and Rochester Avenue - APNs: 0229-262-01 and -31. Related file: Development Review DRC2008-00185. Background: This is a two-phase project site. The first phase encompassed the north half of the site and consists of a warehouse building of about 135,000 square feet and associated improvements that were completed during the mid-1980s. The second phase on the south half of the site proposes the construction of a second warehouse building and associated improvements. The second phase was originally reviewed and recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee on September 6, 2008, and then reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on November 12, 2008 (Related file: Development Review DRC2008-00185). Due to the downturn in the economy around that time, no further significant activity, i.e. issuance of construction/grading permits and commencement of construction/grading, on the project occurred. In June 2012, the applicant, on behalf of his client, proposed minor revisions to the architecture of the building. The revisions were minimal and were comprised of removing some glazing and form -lined areas of the building - the overall project was not significantly affected. The revisions were administratively approved in July 2012. On November 12, 2013, the approval of the project expired per Resolution of Approval No. 08-66, Standard Condition 131, as building permits had not been issued or the approved use had not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. In April 2014, a new application for the project was submitted (in effect, to "re -entitle" it). The "new" project is fundamentally the same as the original project (described below) that was approved by the Planning Commission in November 2008. Design Parameters: The second phase of the project site is comprised of two parcels with a combined area of about 241,360 square feet. The larger, rectangular north parcel is about 710 feet (east -west) by about 320 feet (north to south). The smaller, triangular south parcel is about 280 feet (east -west) by about 280 feet (north to south). The site is vacant and is dominated by short grasses; the perimeter of the site along the street frontages is landscaped with ground cover and numerous mature trees. A part of the site is being used for parking for the building constructed during the first phase; this parking area will be removed. The property is bound on the east by Rochester Avenue and on the south by 6th Street. The overall project site is bound on the north, south, and west by warehouse distribution buildings between 150,000 and 250,000 square feet in floor area. To the east is an office complex consisting of five buildings. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is General Industrial (GI) District. The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of about 1,100 feet and 1,090 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to construct a warehouse distribution building of about 120,600 square feet. The building is speculative at this time. Typical for this type of building are offices areas which will be located at the southeast and southwest corners of the building. The dock loading/storage area with 12 dock doors will be located on the north side of the building. These doors will face the doors of the existing building. The new and existing buildings will share a common loading area; access to this area will be through shared drive aisles between the buildings. There will be two points of access — the existing one via Rochester Avenue and another via 6th Street. The building is required to have 109 parking stalls; 109 parking stalls will be provided. Landscape coverage is 20 percent; the minimum requirement is 10 percent for this development district. The proposed building will be of concrete tilt -up construction painted with a palette of two different colors. An additional primary material will be metal accents while a secondary material will be glass DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00425 — MANNING HOMES July 15, 2014 Page 2 panels. Generous amounts of glass have been provided at the offices areas and at various locations along the wall planes of the building. Key features include vertical elements located at intermediate points along the primary wall planes that interrupt the wall plane with thin form -lined concrete insets and vertically arranged glass panels. Where glass has been provided, there are also horizontal metal accents that project from the wall plane. These accents punctuate the application of glass and provide shaded relief. On the East Elevation, there are a couple of vertical metal accents that extend from the ground to above the parapet wall. Each office entrance will also have a metal canopy. 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. Landscaping at the southeast and southwest corners of the site shall be intensified to ensure that the presence of the parking lot immediately adjacent to this corner is minimized. 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back -flow devices, 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. 3. The employee lunch area shall have an overhead trellis with cross members spaced no more than 18" on center with minimum dimensions of 4" x 12". Each support column shall have a decorative base that incorporates the architectural design and finishes/trim used on the building. The trellis shall be painted to match the building, and tables, chairs/benches, and waste receptacles shall be provided. 4. 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. 5. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 6. All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public view shall be constructed of decorative masonry blocks, i.e. slump stone, split -face, or have a decorative finish such as stucco. 7. Incorporate undulating berms along the street frontages (where applicable), within the landscape setback and landscape areas. The highest part of the berms should be at least 3 feet in height. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00425 — MANNING HOMES July 15, 2014 Page 3 8. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public right-of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the 45-foot setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway. 9. 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 project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented and recommended approval to the Planning Commission. Members Present: Fletcher, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ;RANCHO CUCAMONGA . JULY 159 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEWDRC2014-00425— MANNING HOMES —A review of five (5) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a previously approved subdivision within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place — APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Variance DRC2014-00426, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00427. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00378 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING FOR DEDEAUX 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA g�NaHo J U LY 159 2014 GUCAhtONM PROPERTIES, LLC - A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 125,000 square feet on two vacant parcels of about 252,000 square feet (5.8 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northwest corner of 6th Street and Rochester Avenue - APNs: 0229-262-01 and -31. Related file: Development Review DRC2008-00185. 11 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 2, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn July 15, 2014 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00425 — MANNING HOMES - A review of five (5) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a previously approved subdivision within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Variance DRC2014-00426, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00427. Design Parameters: On June 13, 2012, the Planning Commission approved SUBTT18747 for the subdivision of 3.4 acres into 5 lots, Development Review DRC2009-00010, for the design of the five (5) single-family residences, and Variance DRC2010-00963, which provided for a reduction in the minimum lot depth on the two most westerly lots (Lots 1 and 5). Following that approval, the property was sold to the current applicant who submitted a revised architecture for the project site. The project proposes the development of five (5) single-family residences on a cul-de-sac with single -story and two-story floor plans. The 3 lots at the end of the cul-de-sac, along the eastern project boundary (Lots 2, 3, and 4) will be two-story, while the two lots on the western project boundary (Lots 1 and 5) will be single -story. Additionally, the applicant submitted Variance DRC2014-00426, for a reduction in minimum lot rear yard setback from 60 to 30 feet for Lots 1 and 5. The original Variance application permitted a reduction in the lot depth requirement for these two lots, but did not address any reduction on lot setback requirements in their eventual development. The architectural styles for the projects two-story units are identical to the architecture used in the development of SUBTT18819, located at the southwest corner of Victoria Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue. This includes the following: Lot 2 — Bungalow, Lot 3 — Traditional, and Lot 4 — Spanish. These architectural plans were submitted unrevised from this previously approved architecture. The architectural style for the single -story unit, located on Lots 1 — Spanish, and Lot 5 — Tuscan, were designed to be compatible to the style, massing, and use of materials of the two-story units. Staff Comments: Major Issues: The following design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: There are no major design issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: There are no secondary design issues. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00425 — MANNING HOMES July 15, 2014 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Development Review DRC2014-00425. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tom Grahn Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 PM Mike Smith July 15, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00378 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING FOR DEDEAUX PROPERTIES, LLC -A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 125,000 square feet on two vacant parcels of about 252,000 square feet (5.8 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northwest corner of 6th Street and Rochester Avenue - APNs: 0229-262-01 and -31. Related file: Development Review DRC2008-00185. Background: This is a two-phase project site. The first phase encompassed the north half of the site and consists of a warehouse building of about 135,000 square feet and associated improvements that were completed during the mid-1980s. The second phase on the south half of the site proposes the construction of a second warehouse building and associated improvements. The second phase was originally reviewed and recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee on September 6, 2008, and then reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on November 12, 2008 (Related file: Development Review DRC2008-00185). Due to the downturn in the economy around that time, no further significant activity, i.e. issuance of construction/grading permits and commencement of construction/grading, on the project occurred. In, June 2012, the applicant, on behalf of his client, proposed minor revisions to the architecture of the building. The revisions were minimal and were comprised of removing some glazing and form -lined areas of the building - the overall project was not significantly affected. The revisions were administratively approved in July 2012. On November 12, 2013, the approval of the project expired per Resolution of Approval No. 08-66, Standard Condition B1, as building permits had not been issued or the approved use had not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. In April 2014, a new application for the project was submitted (in effect, to "re -entitle" it). The "new" project is fundamentally the same as the original project (described below) that was approved by the Planning Commission in November 2008. Design Parameters: The second phase of the project site is comprised of two parcels with a combined area of about 241,360 square feet. The larger, rectangular north parcel is about 710 feet (east -west) by about 320 feet (north to south). The smaller, triangular south parcel is about 280 feet (east -west) by about 280 feet (north to south). The site is vacant and is dominated by short grasses; the perimeter of the site along the street frontages is landscaped with ground cover and numerous mature trees. A part of the site is being used for parking for the building constructed during the first phase; this parking area will be removed. The property is bound on the east by Rochester Avenue and on the south by 6th Street. The overall project site is bound on the north, south, and west by warehouse distribution buildings between 150,000 and 250,000 square feet in floor area. To the east is an office complex consisting of five buildings. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is General Industrial (GI) District. The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of about 1,100 feet and 1,090 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to construct a warehouse distribution building of about 120,600 square feet. The building is speculative at this time. Typical for this type of building are offices areas which will be located at the southeast and southwest corners of the building. The dock loading/storage area with. 12 dock doors will be located on the north side of the building. These doors will face the doors of the existing building. The new and existing buildings will share a common loading area; access to this area will be through shared drive aisles between the buildings. There will be two points of access — the existing one via Rochester Avenue and another via 6th Street. The building is required to have 109 parking stalls; 109 parking stalls will be provided. Landscape coverage is 20 percent; the minimum requirement is 10 percent for this development district. The proposed building will be of concrete tilt -up construction painted with a palette of two different colors. An additional primary material will be metal accents while a secondary material will be glass DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00425 — MANNING HOMES July 15, 2014 Page 2 panels. Generous amounts of glass have been provided at the offices areas and at various locations along the wall planes of the building. Key features include vertical elements located at intermediate points along the primary wall planes that interrupt the wall plane with thin form -lined concrete insets and vertically arranged glass panels. Where glass has been provided, there are also horizontal metal accents that project from the wall plane. These accents punctuate the application of glass and provide shaded relief. On the East Elevation, there are a couple of vertical metal accents that extend from the ground to above the parapet wall. Each office entrance will also have a metal canopy. 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. 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. Landscaping at the southeast and southwest corners of the site shall be intensified to ensure that the presence of the parking lot immediately adjacent to this corner is minimized. 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back -flow devices, 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. 3. The employee lunch area shall have an overhead trellis with cross members spaced no more than 18" on center with minimum dimensions of 4" x 12". Each support column shall have a decorative base that incorporates the architectural design and finishes/trim used on the building. The trellis shall be painted to match the building, and tables, chairs/benches, and waste receptacles shall be provided. 4. 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. 5. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 6. All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public view shall be constructed of decorative masonry blocks, i.e. slump stone, split -face, or have a decorative finish such as stucco. 7. Incorporate undulating berms along the street frontages (where applicable), within the landscape setback and landscape areas. The highest part of the berms should be at least 3 feet in height. DRC AGENDA DRC2014-00425 — MANNING HOMES July 15, 2014 Page 3 8. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public right-of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the 45-foot setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway. 9. 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 project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA J U LY 1, 2014 - 7 : 00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 18, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO JUNE 17, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. CUCAMONGA Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18928 — ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to create a Tract Map for an 8-unit townhouse development for a 1.02-acre site within the Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00824 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. 1 of 2 ACTION 7: 00 p: m. A. The project was not approved. Revisions are needed and return to DRC. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA June 17, 2014 NCHo CUCAMONGA B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW B. The project was DRC2013-00824 — ALEX MUSTAPHA - Design review for an 8-unit not approved. townhouse development on 1.02 acre within the Medium Residential Revisions are needed District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project and return to DRC is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related files: SUBTT18928 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. C. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00825 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A C. The project was request to remove 26 trees related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18928 not approved. and Design Review DRC2013-00824 for a 1.02-acre site within the Revisions are needed Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - and return to DRC APN: 0207-022-11. D. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00305 - BRAD BULLER FOR D. The project was TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER - A review of a proposed change to the approved. The color scheme/theme of an existing commercial complex of about applicant will need an 63.6 acres within the Community Commercial (CC) District, Terra Vista inspection on a test area (accent colors) CommunityPlan, located at the north side of Foothill Boulevard between then final approval by Haven Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APNs: 1077-422-10, -11, -17, -60, - Planning Manager 62, -66 through -69, and -79 through -92 and/or DRC on the color before applying to the rest of the building(s). None. III. 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. 8:03 p.m. IV. 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. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima June 17, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18928 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to create a Tract Map for an 8-unit townhouse development for a 1.02-acre site within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00824 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00824 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - Design review for an 8-unit townhouse development on 1.02 acre within the Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with. the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related Files: SUBTT18928 & Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00825 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to remove 26 trees related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18928 and Design Review DRC2013-00824 for a 1.02-acre site within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. Desiqn Parameters: The project location is a 1.02-acre site zoned Medium Residential (8-14 du/ac), located on the west side of Carnelian Street, south of Base Line Road. There is an existing single-family residence that is proposed for demolition as part of this project. The property is about 100 feet in width and the lot extends approximately 441 feet west along the northern side and 431 feet west along the southern side (to the flood control easement). There is a regional trail along the Flood Control easement, single-family residential and a water tank owned by San Bernardino County Flood Control to the south, and both single-family and multi -family residential to the north. Project Description and Architectural Design: The applicant is proposing to construct an 8-unit townhouse development along the south side of the property. The product proposes a 2nd floor and a garage for each unit. The lot coverage is approximately 20 percent. There is an open private/common space proposed, which includes an open lawn area, tot lot play area and a barbecue/picnic area. Each unit will have a private landscaped front lawn area (298 square feet), with the exception of Unit 8 (198 square feet). This reduced landscaped area was to accommodate the pedestrian walkway that fronts all of the units. At initial submittal, the design was lacking in architectural details and elements. The applicant has been working with staff to incorporate additional elements to the project to enhance the Spanish architecture theme. Added elements include: Decorative scalloped edges, window trim, exposed rafters, Spanish style red tile roofing material, addition of shutters, decorative wrought iron railings, and sectional garage door details. Additionally, front porches were added to create articulation along the north elevation. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00824 AND SUBTT18928 — ALEX MUSTAPHA June 17, 2014 Page 2 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. Does the design meet the intent of the Spanish architectural style? Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. The General Plan indicates a proposed Trail Head (Figure CS-3) just west of the project site. There is a steep slope, approximately 20 feet in grade difference that exists towards the west side of the site, adjacent to the regional trail. Because of the size of the project and the existing topography, staff has determined that access to the trail was not feasible. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. All future Double -Detector Check (DDC) and Fire Department Connection (FDC) shall be screened per Section 17.48.050 (A)(4) of the Development Code. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The Design Review Committee (DRC) directed the applicant to work with staff to re -design the project. The DRC would like to see more variations between the units. Some suggestions made were to create arched doors and/or windows, utilize recessed windows or bordering, alternate scalloped edging to some units and not the others, include corbels under edges, have variations in roof lines, use various types of iron work, and recessed wall planes. These details shall be used creatively to add a sense of uniqueness to each unit. Not all units have to look identical. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith June 17, 2014 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00305 - BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER - A review of a proposed change to the color scheme/theme of the majority of an existing commercial complex of about 69.9 acres within the Community Commercial (CC) District, Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APNs: 1077-422-10, -11, -17, -60, -62, -66 through -69, and -79 through -92. Site Characteristics: The project site is an existing commercial complex that consists of twenty-six (26) parcels with a combined area of approximately 69.9 acres. The overall dimensions of the complex are approximately 2,600 feet deep (east to west) and 1,600 feet (north to south). The project site is developed with a commercial complex comprised of multiple buildings. To the east and west of the project site are other commercial complexes. To the south is an office complex. To the north is a small commercial development, an apartment complex (Santa Barbara at Terra Vista), and an office complex (Terra Vista Business Park). The site has street frontage on Foothill Boulevard, Haven Avenue, Town Center Drive, and Spruce Avenue to the south, west, north, and east, respectively. The zoning of the site is Community Commercial (CC) District. The zoning of the properties to the west is General Commercial (GC) District, while the properties to the south are zoned Industrial Park (IP) District. The zoning of the properties to the north are Community Commercial (CC) District, Office Park (OPK) District, and High (H) Residential District. The project site and the properties to the north and east are all within the Terra Vista Community Plan. General: The proposal applies to the majority of the complex - the large buildings that are occupied by the anchor tenants (Target, Hobby Lobby, Old Navy, etc.) and various in -line tenants and the smaller pad buildings occupied by a variety of restaurants and offices (Farrell's Ice Cream, Chili's, Panera Bread, Wells Fargo Bank, etc.) along Foothill Boulevard. The proposal does not apply to the two (2) buildings located at the northwest corner of the complex (APNs: 1077-422-47, -48, and -56) that are occupied by, for example, CVS Pharmacy, Five Guys, 1-800-Flowers, and Conroy's. The applicant proposes to change the color scheme/theme for the aforementioned buildings because they have concluded that the current color palette is outdated. The proposal does not include any changes to the architecture, materials, decorative features, and/or floor area of any of the buildings. The new color palette is an effort to more clearly define buildings and building entrances and otherwise establish a distinct identity for the overall complex relative to nearby shopping centers that are similar in size and for individual tenants. The relatively neutral colors of the complex will be replaced with a mix of bolder colors within three (3) palettes on Route 66, Harvest, and Chaparral themes (refer to the plans for color elevations of each building for more information). The proposed color scheme/theme is a significant departure from the scheme/theme that has been applied to the subject commercial complex and other, similar commercial developments throughout the City. However, staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the ongoing evolution of the City's design standards. Within the last several years the City has approved several projects with similarly bold color pallets. An example of this is the commercial complex located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Boulevard where the entrances for the anchor tenants such as Best Buy, REI, and Fresh & Easy are boldly identified with their brand colors. On a smaller scale, individual buildings have been approved (for either new construction or refurbishment) that have bold color pallets and/or signature architecture that are unique to a particular business' brand such as Lazy Dog Cafe, Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor and Restaurant, and Sonic Burger. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00305- BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER June 17, 2014 Page 2 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. Although staff concludes that the proposed palette is consistent with the ongoing evolution in the City's built environment and other projects that have recently incorporated bold and corporate colors, because of the scale and prominence of the established commercial center along two prominent arterials, staff requests that the Committee provide input and feedback regarding the appropriateness of the color scheme, the proposed three color palettes, and any other issues identified by the Committee as result of the applicant's proposal. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. Staff has observed several architectural features that are (or appear to be) in need of repair. These areas should be repaired as part of this color scheme/theme update. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Manager for review and action. Desian Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed and accepted the applicant's color scheme/theme as proposed subject to the condition that the applicant, prior to fully applying any of the paint colors (described as "Accent Colors" in the plans submitted to the City for review), paint a small test area where each of the corresponding new colors will be applied for inspection and evaluation by the City. Approval to continue with the application of the paint to the subject building(s) will be contingent on acceptance by the Planning Manager and/or the Design Review Committee of the colors as they actually appear. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA CoRNCHO JUNE 17, 2014 - 7:00,P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18928 — ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to create a Tract Map for an 8-unit townhouse development for a 1.02-acre site within the Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00824 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA June 17, 2014 RANCHO CUCAMONOA B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00824 — ALEX MUSTAPHA - Design review for an 8-unit townhouse development on 1.02 acre within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. .Related files: SUBTT18928 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. C. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00825 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to remove 26 trees related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18928 and Design Review DRC2013-00824 for a 1.02-acre site within the Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. D. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00305 - BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER - A review of a proposed change to the color scheme/theme of an existing commercial complex of about 63.6 acres within the Community Commercial (CC) District, Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APNs: 1077-422-10, -11, -17, -60, - 62, -66 through -69, and -79 through -92 III. 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. IV. 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. 2 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO June 17, 2014 GUCAMONCA 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 4, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3of3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima June 17, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18928 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to create a Tract Map for an 8-unit townhouse development for a 1.02-acre site within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00824 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00824 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - Design review for an 8-unit townhouse development on 1.02 acre within the Medium Residential District, located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 32 categorical exemption because the project includes in -fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. Related Files: SUBTT18928 & Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00825. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00825 - ALEX MUSTAPHA - A request to remove 26 trees related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18928 and Design Review DRC2013-00824 for a 1.02-acre site within the Medium Residential District located at 7490 Carnelian Street - APN: 0207-022-11. Desiqn Parameters: The project location is a 1.02-acre site zoned Medium Residential (8-14 du/ac), located on the west side of Carnelian Street, south of Base Line Road. There is an existing single-family residence that is proposed for demolition as part of this project. The property is about 100 feet in width and the lot extends approximately 441 feet west along the northern side and 431 feet west along the southern side (to the flood control easement). There is a regional trail along the Flood Control easement, single-family residential and a water tank owned by San Bernardino County Flood Control to the south, and both single-family and multi -family residential to the north. Project Description and Architectural Design: The applicant is proposing to construct an 8-unit townhouse development along the south side of the property. The product proposes a 2nd floor and a garage for each unit. The lot coverage is approximately 20 percent. There is an open private/common space proposed, which includes an open lawn area, tot lot play area and a barbecue/picnic area. Each unit will have a private landscaped front lawn area (298 square feet), with the exception of Unit 8 (198 square feet). This reduced landscaped area was to accommodate the pedestrian walkway that fronts all of the units. At initial submittal, the design was lacking in architectural details and elements. The applicant has been working with staff to incorporate additional elements to the project to enhance the Spanish architecture theme. Added elements include: Decorative scalloped edges, window trim, exposed rafters, Spanish style red tile roofing material, addition of shutters, decorative wrought iron railings, and sectional garage door details. Additionally, front porches were added to create articulation along the north elevation. DRC AGENDA DRC2013-00824 AND SUBTT18928 —ALEX MUSTAPHA June 17, 2014 Page 2 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. Does the design meet the intent Of the Spanish architectural style? Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. The General Plan indicates a proposed Trail Head (Figure CS-3) just west of the project site. There is a steep slope, approximately 20 feet in grade difference that exists towards the west side of the site, adjacent to the regional trail. Because of the size of the project and the existing topography, staff has determined that access to the trail was not feasible. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. 1. All future Double -Detector Check (DDC) and Fire Department Connection (FDC) shall be screened per Section 17.48.050 (A)(4) of the Development Code. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith June 17, 2014 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00305 - BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER - A review of a proposed change to the color scheme/theme of the majority of an existing commercial complex of about 69.9 acres within the Community Commercial (CC) District, Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APNs: 1077-422-10, -11, -17, -60, -62, -66 through -69, and -79 through -92. Site Characteristics: The project site is an existing commercial complex that consists of twenty-six (26) parcels with a combined area of approximately 69.9 acres. The overall dimensions of the complex are approximately 2,600 feet deep (east to west) and 1,600 feet (north to south). The project site is developed with a commercial complex comprised of multiple buildings. To the east and west of the project site are other commercial complexes. To the south is an office complex. To the north is a small commercial development, an apartment complex (Santa Barbara at Terra Vista), and an office complex (Terra Vista Business Park). The site has street frontage on Foothill Boulevard, Haven Avenue, Town Center Drive, and Spruce Avenue to the south, west, north, and east, respectively. The zoning of the site is Community Commercial (CC) District. The zoning of the properties to the west is General Commercial (GC) District, while the properties to the south are zoned Industrial Park (IP) District. The zoning of the properties to the north are Community Commercial (CC) District, Office Park (OPK) District, and High (H) Residential District. The project site and the properties to the north and east are all within the Terra Vista Community Plan. General: The proposal applies to the majority of the complex - the large buildings that are occupied by the anchor tenants (Target, Hobby Lobby, Old Navy, etc.) and various in -line tenants and the smaller pad buildings occupied by a variety of restaurants and offices (Farrell's Ice Cream, Chili's, Panera Bread, Wells Fargo Bank, etc.) along Foothill Boulevard. The proposal does not apply to the two (2) buildings located at the northwest corner of the complex (APNs: 1077-422-47, -48, and -56) that are occupied by, for example, CVS Pharmacy, Five Guys, 1-800-Flowers, and Conroy's. The applicant proposes to change the color scheme/theme for the aforementioned buildings because they have concluded that the current color palette is outdated. The proposal does not include any changes to the architecture, materials, decorative features, and/or floor area of any of the buildings. The new color palette is an effort to more clearly define buildings and building entrances and otherwise establish a distinct identity for the overall complex relative to nearby shopping centers that are similar in size and for individual tenants. The relatively neutral colors of the complex will be replaced with a mix of bolder colors within three (3) palettes on Route 66, Harvest, and Chaparral themes (refer to the plans for color elevations of each building for more information). The proposed color scheme/theme is a significant departure from the scheme/theme that has been applied to the subject commercial complex and other, similar commercial developments throughout the City. However, staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the ongoing evolution of the City's design standards. Within the last several years the City has approved several projects with similarly bold color pallets. An example of this is the commercial complex located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Boulevard where the entrances for the anchor tenants such as Best Buy, REI, and Fresh & Easy are boldly identified with their brand colors. On a smaller scale, individual buildings have been approved (for either new construction or refurbishment) that have bold color pallets and/or signature architecture that are unique to a particular business' brand such as Lazy Dog Cafe, Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor and Restaurant, and Sonic Burger. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2014-00305- BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER June 17, 2014 Page 2 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. Although staff concludes that the proposed palette is consistent with the ongoing evolution in the City's built environment and other projects that have recently incorporated bold and corporate colors, because of the scale and prominence of the established commercial center along two prominent arterials, staff requests that the Committee provide input and feedback regarding the appropriateness of the color scheme, the proposed three color palettes, and any other issues identified by the Committee as result of the applicant's proposal. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. Staff has observed several architectural features that are (or appear to be) in need of repair. These areas should be repaired as part of this color scheme/theme update. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Manager for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA C CONGA JUNE 3, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ 11 II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00583 - Creative Design Associates - Site plan and architectural review of a 13-unit detached condominium project on 2.17 acres within the Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for a site located on the west side of Archibald Avenue and 150 feet north of Monte Vista Street - APN: 0202-131-27, 61 and 62. Related files: Tentative Tract Map 17444, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00942, Minor Exception DRC2013-00941, Minor Exception DRC2014-00358, and Development District Amendment DRC2005-00523. On October 10, 2007, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for 1 of 3 ACTION 7. 00 PM A. Approved as presented. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA WNaHa J U N E 3, 2014 GUCAMONOA Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17444. 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 the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. B. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00305 - BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER - A review of a proposed change to the color scheme/theme of an existing commercial complex of about 69.9 acres within the Community Commercial (CC) District, Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APNs: 1077-422-10, -11, -17, -60, - 62, -66 through -69, and -79 through -92. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912 - MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposed 46-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail -APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083 - MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposal for 46 single-family residences in conjunction with a 46-lot subdivision of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. 2 of 3 B. Continued to the DRC meeting of June 17, 2014 at the request of the applicant C. The project was recommended for approval with noted changes. D. The project was recommended for approval with noted changes. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA WNCHo J U N E 312014 CUCAMONGA 11 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 3 of 3 None. 8: 02 p. m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag June 3, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00583 - Creative Design Associates - Site plan and architectural review of a 13-unit detached condominium project on 2.17 acres within the Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for a site located on the west side of Archibald Avenue and 150 feet north of Monte Vista Street - APN: 0202-131-27, 61 and 62. Related files: Tentative Tract Map 17444, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00942, Minor Exception DRC2013-00941, Minor Exception DRC2014-00358, and Development District Amendment DRC2005-00523. On October 10, 2007, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17444. 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 the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. Project Background: The project was previously approved on October 10, 2007, and the applicant did not request a Time Extension or pull permits within the 5-year approval period. The Design Review expired on October 10, 2012. The Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT 17444) has not expired due to multiple extensions approved by the Legislature. The basic layout and building footprints are similar to the originally approved project. The elevations have been updated to reflect Staff comments. The project site is located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, north of Monte Vista Street. It includes 13 detached units and will be accessed by a shared drive with the mobile home park to the west. The project is required to construct a new signalized intersection at Archibald Avenue and Victoria Street. The new intersection will necessitate relocating the main entrance of the mobile home park in order to align with Victoria Street. Project Design: The project includes three plans - two 2-story models and one 1-story model. The 2-story models will each have two elevation types (Spanish and cottage) and will range in size from 1,697 to 2,145 square feet. The single -story model will have one elevation type (Spanish) and is 1,792 square feet. Each unit includes a minimum 15-foot rear yard, and there is 15 feet between the units. The common open space amenities include two covered picnic tables with barbeque units, a tot lot, and two open play areas. A two -car garage is included with each unit in addition to 11 guest parking spaces, 7 parking spaces over the minimum requirement. The project requires a Minor Exception for wall height. A 7-foot high wall is required along Archibald Avenue and wrapping around unit 9 per the recommendations of the acoustical study. Additionally, an up to 8 foot high wall is required for the walls separating Units 11 and 12 and Units 10 and 13 because of a 2-foot grade difference. Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the design and layout of the project. Each plan provides wall and roof plane articulation, and the architectural theme is carried to all elevations. The project conforms to all Development Code requirements except for wall height for which a Minor Exception has been submitted. 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. There are no major issues. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00583 — CREATIVE DESIGN ASSOCIATES June 3, 2014 Page 2 Secondary Issues: There are no secondary issues. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for final approval. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith June 3, 2014 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00305 - BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER - A review of a proposed change to the color scheme/theme of the majority of an existing commercial complex of about 69.9 acres within the Community Commercial (CC) District, Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APNs: 1077-422-10, -11, -17, -60, -62, -66 through -69, and -79 through -92. Site Characteristics: The project site is an existing commercial complex that consists of twenty-six (26) parcels with a combined area of approximately 69.9 acres. The overall dimensions of the complex are approximately 2,600 feet deep (east to west) and 1,600 feet (north to south). The project site is developed with a commercial complex comprised of multiple buildings. To the east and west of the project site are other commercial complexes. To the south is an office complex. To the north is a small commercial development, an apartment complex (Santa Barbara at Terra Vista), and an office complex (Terra Vista Business Park). The site has street frontage on Foothill Boulevard, Haven Avenue, Town Center Drive, and Spruce Avenue to the south, west, north, and east, respectively. The zoning of the site is Community Commercial (CC) District. The zoning of the properties to the west is General Commercial (GC) District, while the properties to the south are zoned Industrial Park (IP) District. The zoning of the properties to the north are Community Commercial (CC) District, Office Park (OPK) District, and High (H) Residential District. The project site and the properties to the north and east are all within the Terra Vista Community Plan. General: The proposal applies to the majority of the complex - the large buildings that are occupied by the anchor tenants (Target, Hobby Lobby, Old Navy, etc.) and various in -line tenants and the smaller pad buildings occupied by a variety of restaurants and offices (Farrell's Ice Cream, Chili's, Panera Bread, Wells Fargo Bank, etc.) along Foothill Boulevard. The proposal does not apply to the two (2) buildings located at the northwest corner of the complex (APNs: 1077-422-47, -48, and -56) that are occupied by, for example, CVS Pharmacy, Five Guys, 1-800-Flowers, and Conroy's. The applicant proposes to change the color scheme/theme for the aforementioned buildings because they have concluded that the current color palette is outdated. The proposal does not include any changes to the architecture, materials, decorative features, and/or floor area of any of the buildings. The new color palette is an effort to more clearly define buildings and building entrances and otherwise establish a distinct identity for the overall complex relative to nearby shopping centers that are similar in size and for individual tenants. The relatively neutral colors of the complex will be replaced with a mix of bolder colors within three (3) palettes on Route 66, Harvest, and Chaparral themes (refer to the plans for color elevations of each building for more information). The proposed color scheme/theme is a significant departure from the scheme/theme that has been applied to the subject commercial complex and other, similar commercial developments throughout the City. However, staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the ongoing evolution of the City's design standards. Within the last several years the City has approved several projects with similarly bold color pallets. An example of this is the commercial complex located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Boulevard where the entrances for the anchor tenants such as Best Buy, REI, and Fresh & Easy are boldly identified with their brand colors. On a smaller scale, individual buildings have been approved (for either new construction or refurbishment) that have bold color pallets and/or signature architecture that are unique to a particular business' brand such as Lazy Dog Cafe, Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor and Restaurant, and Sonic Burger. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00305- BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER June 3, 2014 Page 2 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. Although staff concludes that the proposed palette is consistent with the ongoing evolution in the City's built environment and other projects that have recently incorporated bold and corporate colors, because of the scale and prominence of the established commercial center along two prominent arterials, staff requests that the Committee provide input and feedback regarding the appropriateness of the color scheme, the proposed three color palettes, and any other issues identified by the Committee as result of the applicant's proposal. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. Staff has observed several architectural features that are (or appear to be) in need of repair. These areas should be repaired as part of this color scheme/theme update. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Manager for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The item was continued to the meeting of June 17, 2014 at the request of the applicant. Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: Oaxaca, Granger DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith June 3, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912 - MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposed 46-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00.889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083 — MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposal for 46 single-family residences in conjunction with a 46-lot subdivision of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. Site Characteristics: The project site is a rectangular parcel with an overall area of approximately 312,000 square feet (7.16 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 1,200 feet deep (east to west) and 250 feet (north to south). The project site is generally vacant with the exception of a single-family residence that was built in ca. 1915 that is located at the east side of the project site near Ramona Avenue. To the west of the project site, is an equestrian/pet supplies retail store (CW Feed & Pet). To the north and east are single-family residences. To the south is an apartment complex (Sycamore Springs) and a mobile home park (Ramona Villa Mobile Home Estates). The site has street frontage on Archibald Avenue and Ramona Street to the west and east, respectively. Adjacent and parallel to the south property line of the site is the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, which is partially completed at this location. The zoning of the west half of the site is Medium (M) Residential District, while the zoning of the east half of the site is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low (L) Residential District. The subject property is generally level with a slope that trends from west to east; the elevations at the west and east sides of the property are approximately 1,398 feet and 1,373 feet, respectively. Associated Applications/Background: The applicant, in conjunction with the subject applications, proposes to change the zoning of the eastern half of the project site to Medium (M) Residential District (Related file: Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887). The applicant has elected to develop the property according to the requirements outlined in Table 17.36.010-2 — Optional Development Standards which will allow for more flexibility in developing the site. However, as the Development Code currently does not have optional development standards for single-family residential development in the Medium (M) Residential District, the applicant, in coordination with staff, is in the process of creating standards that apply to, for example, lot dimensions, setbacks, and lot coverage. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into 45 lots for a single-family residential development. The lots will be developed in accordance with standards that are currently being developed as noted above. Individual lot areas will range between 4,013 square feet to 10,529 square DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18912 AND DRC2013-01083 —MANNING HOMES June 3, 2014 Page 2 feet; the average lot area is 4,907 square feet. The depth of each lot will be at least 90 feet with the exception of Lots 26, 27, 44, and 45. Those lots will have a depth of between approximately 60 feet and 80 feet. The width of each lot, except the above -noted lots, at the required front setback will be between 45 feet and 50 feet. Lots 26, 27, 44, and 45 will have a width of between 65 feet (Lot 27) to 137 feet (Lot 26). Access to the subdivision will be via a new public street connected directly to Ramona Street. This street will terminate with a cul-de-sac at the west side of the project site. For emergency purposes, a second point of access referred to as an Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) will be provided at the end of the cul-de-sac and connect to Archibald Avenue via a specialized driveway. The technical and design details of this driveway are still in process. Parallel to the south property line, the applicant will "build -out" the missing segment of the. Pacific Electric trail between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Street. This segment will have a decomposed granite surface and will match the existing segments of the trail that continue to the east and west of the site. It will complement the existing, concrete -surfaced component of the trail that follows the same general alignment. In conjunction with the tentative tract map, the applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot for a total of 45 single-family residences. Although all of the houses will be two-story, this does not conflict with Section 17.122.010(A)(1)(a) of the Development Code. This Code section requires that a minimum of 25 percent of a residential development be comprised of single -story houses; however, the requirement only applies to residential development with lots in excess of 7,200 square feet. The applicant proposes four (4) types of architectural themes (elevations) — Traditional, Bungalow, Spanish, and Cottage. Each house will incorporate a variety of materials to varying degrees depending on the theme. Each house will have an articulated footprint/floor plan and profile. The applicant proposes three (3) distinct footprints — Plans 1, 2, and 3, and reverse footprints of each for a total of six (6) footprints. The number of available footprints will comply with Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code. Because the footprints and profiles of each house differ, there will be a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. 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. Spanish (all Plans) — Revise the Spanish-themed elevations so that they incorporate more features that are characteristic of the architectural theme including arched and/or recessed windows (with shutters having the corresponding curved top edge) and wrought iron accents on all elevations. 2. All themes (all Plans) — Provide more variety in the roof pitches — do not limit the pitch of the roof to only 4:12 or 5:12. 3. All themes (all Plans) — Add decorative pot shelves at the windows on the rear elevations. 4. Cottage and Bungalow (all Plans) — Add a decorative stone veneer wainscot and trimcap to the front DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18912 AND DRC2013-01083 —MANNING HOMES June 3, 2014 Page 3 and rear elevations and base of the columns/pillars that support the porch cover at the entrances. 5. Traditional (all Plans) — Add a decorative brick veneer wainscot and trimcap to the front and rear elevations and base of the columns/pillars that support the porch cover at the entrances. 6. All themes except Spanish (all Plans) — At the front elevation, the decorative veneer shall `wrap' around the corners of each house and terminate at the return wall. At the rear elevation, the decorative veneer shall wrap around the corners of each house and terminate at a point at least 3 feet from the corner. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Add decorative windows on all garage doors. 2. The molding along the top of the stone or brick veneer wainscots shall also be stone or brick and not foam. 3. All rock veneer shall be real river rock and not synthetic. Staff Recommendation: With Major and Secondary Issues addressed to the satisfaction of the Committee, staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Desian Review Committee Action: Staff presented a brief overview of the project and summarized the major/secondary issues relating to the architecture and site development. The applicant followed with a response to the comments report. He noted that his design team had addressed some of the comments prior to the meeting. The applicant and the Committee discussed the other comments and various solutions to address them. The Committee accepted the applicant's proposed solutions (that were already completed) and recommend approval subject to the completion of the following revisions (to be verified by Staff prior to review and action by the Planning Commission): 1. Add decorative ironwork details and arched windows and/or recessed windows on the front and rear elevations of the Spanish theme; 2. The roof pitch of the Cottage theme shall be 6:12; 3. Add stone veneer to the Cottage theme and brick veneer to the Traditional theme (front and rear elevations) - the Bungalow theme does not need any veneer; 4. Add pot shelves at some of the windows of all themes; DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18912 AND DRC2013-01083 —MANNING HOMES June 3, 2014 Page 4 5. Add windows on the garage doors of at least 50 percent of the homes within the subdivision; and 6. Add vertical elements to the garage doors of the Bungalow and Traditional themes. Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: Oaxaca, Granger THE CITY OF ]RANCHO.CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA PoNCHO CoNGA JUNE 3, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California il I. CALL To ORDER 71 Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00583 - Creative Design Associates - Site plan and architectural review of a 13-unit detached condominium project on 2.17 acres within the Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for a site located on the west side of Archibald Avenue and 150 feet north of Monte Vista Street - APN: 0202-131-27, 61 and 62. Related files: Tentative Tract Map 17444, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00942, Minor Exception DRC2013-00941, Minor Exception DRC2014-00358, and Development District Amendment DRC2005-00523. On October 10, 2007, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA NCHo J U N E 312014 RA Cue"ONGA Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17444. 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 the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. B. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00305 - BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER - A review of a proposed change to the color scheme/theme of 'an existing commercial complex of about 69.9 acres within the Community Commercial (CC) District, Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APNs: 1077-422-10, -11, -17, -60, - 62, -66 through -69, and -79 through -92. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912 - MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposed 46-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail -APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083 - MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposal for 46 single-family residences in conjunction with a 46-lot subdivision of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail -APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. 2 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO JUNE 39 2014 CUCAMONGA II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on May 22, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag June 3, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00583 - Creative Design Associates - Site plan and architectural review of a 13-unit detached condominium project on 2.17 acres within the Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for a site located on the west side of Archibald Avenue and 150 feet north of Monte Vista Street - APN: 0202-131-27, 61 and 62. Related files: Tentative Tract Map 17444, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00942, Minor Exception DRC2013-00941, Minor Exception DRC2014-00358, and Development District Amendment DRC2005-00523. On October 10, 2007, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17444. 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 the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. Project Background: The project was previously approved on October 10, 2007, and the applicant did not request a Time Extension or pull permits within the 5-year approval period. The Design Review expired on October 10, 2012. The Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT 17444) has not expired due to multiple extensions approved by the Legislature. The basic layout and building footprints are similar to the originally approved project. The elevations have been updated to reflect Staff comments. The project site is located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, north of Monte Vista Street. It includes 13 detached units and will be accessed by a shared drive with the mobile home park to the west. The project is required to construct a new signalized intersection at Archibald Avenue and Victoria Street. The new intersection will necessitate relocating the main entrance of the mobile home park in order to align with Victoria Street. Project Design: The project includes three plans - two 2-story models and one 1-story model. The 2-story models will each have two elevation types (Spanish and cottage) and will range in size from 1,697 to 2,145 square feet. The single -story model will have one elevation type (Spanish) and is 1,792 square feet. Each unit includes a minimum 15-foot rear yard, and there is 15 feet between the units. The common open space amenities include two covered picnic tables with barbeque units, a tot lot, and two open play areas. A two -car garage is included with each unit in addition to 11 guest parking spaces, 7 parking spaces over the minimum requirement. The project requires a Minor Exception for wall height. A 7-foot high wall is required along Archibald Avenue and wrapping around unit 9 per the recommendations of the acoustical study. Additionally, an up to 8 foot high wall is required for the walls separating Units 11 and 12 and Units 10 and 13 because of a 2-foot grade difference. Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the design and layout of the project. Each plan provides wall and roof.plane articulation, and the architectural theme is carried to all elevations. The project conforms to all Development Code requirements except for wall height for which a Minor Exception has been submitted. 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. There are no major issues. DRC AGENDA DRC2013-00583 — CREATIVE DESIGN ASSOCIATES June 3, 2014 Page 2 Secondary Issues: There are no secondary issues. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for final approval. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith June 3, 2014 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00305 - BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER - A review of a proposed change to the color scheme/theme of the majority of an existing commercial complex of about 69.9 acres within the Community Commercial (CC) District, Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APNs: 1077-422-10, -11, -17, -60, -62, -66 through -69, and -79 through -92. Site Characteristics: The project site is an existing commercial complex that consists of twenty-six (26) parcels with a combined area of approximately 69.9 acres. The overall dimensions of the complex are approximately 2,600 feet deep (east to west) and 1,600 feet (north to south). The project site is developed with a commercial complex comprised of multiple buildings. To the east and west of the project site are other commercial complexes. To the south is an office complex. To the north is a small commercial development, an apartment complex (Santa Barbara at Terra Vista), and an office complex (Terra Vista Business Park). The site has street frontage on Foothill Boulevard, Haven Avenue, Town Center Drive, and Spruce Avenue to the south, west, north, and east, respectively. The zoning of the site is Community Commercial (CC) District. The zoning of the properties to the west is General Commercial (GC) District, while the properties to the south are zoned Industrial Park (IP) District. The zoning of the properties to the north are Community Commercial (CC) District, Office Park (OPK) District, and High (H) Residential District. The project site and the properties to the north and east are all within the Terra Vista Community Plan. General: The proposal applies to the majority of the complex - the large buildings that are occupied by the anchor tenants (Target, Hobby Lobby, Old Navy, etc.) and various in -line tenants and the smaller pad buildings occupied by a variety of restaurants and offices (Farrell's Ice Cream, Chili's, Panera Bread, Wells Fargo Bank, etc.) along Foothill Boulevard. The proposal does not apply to the two (2) buildings located at the northwest corner of the complex (APNs: 1077-422-47, -48, and -56) that are occupied by, for example, CVS Pharmacy, Five Guys, 1-800-Flowers, and Conroy's. The applicant proposes to change the color scheme/theme for the aforementioned buildings because they have concluded that the current color palette is outdated. The proposal does not include any changes to the architecture, materials, decorative features, and/or floor area of any of the buildings. The new color palette is an effort to more clearly define buildings and building entrances and otherwise establish a distinct identity for the overall complex relative to nearby shopping centers that are similar in size and for individual tenants. The relatively neutral colors of the complex will be replaced with a mix of bolder colors within three (3) palettes on Route 66, Harvest, and Chaparral themes (refer to the plans for color elevations of each building for more information). The proposed color scheme/theme is a significant departure from the scheme/theme that has been applied to the subject commercial complex and other, similar commercial developments throughout the City. However, staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the ongoing evolution of the City's design standards. Within the last several years the City has approved several projects with similarly bold color pallets. An example of this is the commercial complex located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Boulevard where the entrances for the anchor tenants such as Best Buy, REI, and Fresh & Easy are boldly identified with their brand colors. On a smaller scale, individual buildings have been approved (for either new construction or refurbishment) that have bold color pallets and/or signature architecture that are unique to a particular business' brand such as Lazy Dog Cafe, Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor and Restaurant, and Sonic Burger. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2014-003050- BRAD BULLER FOR TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER June 3, 2014 Page 2 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. Although staff concludes that the proposed palette is consistent with the ongoing evolution in the City's built environment and other projects that have recently incorporated bold and corporate colors, because of the scale and prominence of the established commercial center along two prominent arterials, staff requests that the Committee provide input and feedback regarding the appropriateness of the color scheme, the proposed three color palettes, and any other issues identified by the Committee as result of the applicant's proposal. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. Staff has observed several architectural features that are (or appear to be) in need of repair. These areas should be repaired as part of this color scheme/theme update. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Manager for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith June 3, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912 - MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposed 46-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083 — MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposal for 46 single-family residences in conjunction with a 46-lot subdivision of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. Site Characteristics: The project site is a rectangular parcel with an overall area of approximately 312,000 square feet (7.16 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 1,200 feet deep (east to west) and 250 feet (north to south). The project site is generally vacant with the exception of a single-family residence that was built in ca. 1915 that is located at the east side of the project site near Ramona Avenue. To the west of the project site, is an equestrian/pet supplies retail store (CW Feed & Pet). To the north and east are single-family residences. To the south is an apartment complex (Sycamore Springs) and a mobile home park (Ramona Villa Mobile Home Estates). The site has street frontage on Archibald Avenue and Ramona Street to the west and east, respectively. Adjacent and parallel to the south property line of the site is the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, which is partially completed at this location. The zoning of the west half of the site is Medium (M) Residential District, while the zoning of the east half of the site is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low (L) Residential District. The subject property is generally level with a slope that trends from west to east; the elevations at the west and east sides of the property are approximately 1,398 feet and 1,373 feet, respectively. Associated Applications/Background: The applicant, in conjunction with the subject applications, proposes to change the zoning of the eastern half of the project site to Medium (M) Residential District (Related file: Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887). The applicant has elected to develop the property according to the requirements outlined in Table 17.36.010-2 — Optional Development Standards which will allow for more flexibility in developing the site. However, as the Development Code currently does not have optional development standards for single-family residential development in the Medium (M) Residential District, the applicant, in coordination with staff, is in the process of creating standards that apply to, for example, lot dimensions, setbacks, and lot coverage. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into 45 lots for a single-family residential development. The lots will be developed in accordance with standards that are currently being developed as noted above. Individual lot areas will range between 4,013 square feet to 10,529 square DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA SUBTT18912 AND DRC2013-01083 —MANNING HOMES June 3, 2014 Page 2 feet; the average lot area is 4,907 square feet. The depth of each lot will be at least 90 feet with the exception of Lots 26, 27, 44, and 45. Those lots will have a depth of between approximately 60 feet and 80 feet. The width of each lot, except the above -noted lots, at the required front setback will be between 45 feet and 50 feet. Lots 26, 27, 44, and 45 will have a width of between 65 feet (Lot 27) to 137 feet (Lot 26). Access to the subdivision will be via a new public street connected directly to Ramona Street. This street will terminate with a cul-de-sac at the west side of the project site. For emergency purposes, a second point of access referred to as an Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) will be provided at the end of the cul-de-sac and connect to Archibald Avenue via a specialized driveway. The technical and design details of this driveway are still in process. Parallel to the south property line, the applicant will "build -out" the missing segment of the Pacific Electric trail between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Street. This segment will have a decomposed granite surface and will match the existing segments of the trail that continue to the east and west of the site. It will complement the existing, concrete -surfaced component of the trail that follows the same general alignment. In conjunction with the tentative tract map, the applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot for a total of 45 single-family residences. Although all of the houses will be two-story, this does not conflict with Section 17.122.010(A)(1)(a) of the Development Code. This Code section requires that a minimum of 25 percent of a residential development be comprised of single -story houses; however, the requirement only applies to residential development with lots in excess of 7,200 square feet. The applicant proposes four (4) types of architectural themes (elevations) — Traditional, Bungalow, Spanish, and Cottage. Each house will incorporate a variety of materials to varying degrees depending on the theme. Each house will have an articulated footprint/floor plan and profile. The applicant proposes three (3) distinct footprints — Plans 1, 2, and 3, and reverse footprints of each for a total of six (6) footprints. The number of available footprints will comply with Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code. Because the footprints and profiles of each house differ, there will be a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. 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. Spanish (all Plans) — Revise the Spanish-themed elevations so that they incorporate more features that are characteristic of the architectural theme including arched and/or recessed windows (with shutters having the corresponding curved top edge) and wrought iron accents on all elevations. 2. All themes (all Plans) — Provide more variety in the roof pitches — do not limit the pitch of the roof to only 4:12 or 5:12. 3. All themes (all Plans) — Add decorative pot shelves at the windows on the rear elevations. 4. Cottage and Bungalow (all Plans) — Add a decorative stone veneer wainscot and trimcap to the front DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA SUBTT18912 AND DRC2013-01083 —MANNING HOMES June 3, 2014 Page 3 and rear elevations and base of the columns/pillars that support the porch cover at the entrances. 5. Traditional (all Plans) — Add a decorative brick veneer wainscot and trimcap to the front and rear elevations and base of the columns/pillars that support the porch cover at the entrances. 6. All themes except Spanish (all Plans) — At the front elevation, the decorative veneer shall 'wrap' around the corners of each house and terminate at the return wall. At the rear elevation, the decorative veneer shall wrap around the corners of each house and terminate at a point at least 3 feet from the corner. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Add decorative windows on all garage doors. 2. The molding along the top of the stone or brick veneer wainscots shall also be stone or brick and not foam. 3. All rock veneer shall be real river rock and not synthetic. Staff Recommendation: With Major and Secondary Issues addressed to the satisfaction of the Committee, staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MAY 20, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher x Francisco Oaxaca x Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger. x Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19450 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to subdivide a 13.23-acre parcel to create 3 new parcels within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00565 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2014-00250. ACTION TOO p.m. A. Approved as presented. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW B. Approved as DRC2013-00565 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION -A request presented, to develop a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MAY 20,2014 in building area on 13.23 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street -APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19450 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2014-00250. C. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2014-00250 - SCHEU MANAGEMENT C. Approved as CORPORATION - A request to establish a Uniform Sign Program in presented. connection with the proposed develop of a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of building area on 13.23 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00565 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19450. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW D. Approved as DRC2013-00966 — RANCHWOOD HOLDINGS LLC - A request to develop presented. a 23,500 square foot industrial building on a 1.25-acre site within the General Industrial (GI) District south of and abutting 9th Street approximately 200 feet east of Lanyard Court, located at 8705 and 8725 9th Street - APN: 0207-271-14 and 28. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS 11 None. 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. IV. ADJOURNMENT 11 T32 p.m. 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. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez May 20, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19450 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to subdivide a 13.23-acre parcel to create 3 new parcels within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00565 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2014-00250. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00565 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to develop a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of building area on 13.23 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19450 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2014-00250. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2014-00250 - SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to establish a Uniform Sign Program in connection with the proposed develop of a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of building area on 13.23 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00565 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19450. Site Characteristics: The project area is located on a 13.23-acre vacant undeveloped parcel located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street. The site is abutting existing industrial development to the north, east, and west and is located to the north, across 7th Street, from an existing multi -tenant industrial complex. The site currently does not contain any trees, and similar to adjacent properties in this area, does contain a gradual slope from north to south. Design Parameters: The applicant proposes to subdivide the 13.23-acre parcel into three parcels, creating a 2.13-acre parcel (Parcel 1), a 4.82-acre parcel (Parcel 2) and a 5.89-acre parcel (Parcel 3). Parcel 1, which is adjacent to Archibald Avenue and 7th Street is approximately 530 feet wide by 175 feet long. Parcel 2, which is south of and abutting Acacia Street and Cottage Avenue, is approximately 450 feet wide by 615 feet long. Parcel 3, which is adjacent to the existing rail spur along the eastern perimeter of the site, is approximately 400 feet wide by 615 feet long. In addition to the two -lot subdivision of the subject property, the applicant also proposes to develop a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of building area. Building 1 (15,775 square feet) and Building 2 (13,415 square feet), which are located on Parcel 1, are designed to cater towards businesses looking to occupy buildings that contain a large portion of office with minimal storage area. Building 3 (19,950 square feet), Building 4 (20,500 square feet) and Building 5 (20,391 square feet), which are located on Parcel 2, are designed to cater towards businesses looking to occupy buildings that contain a primarily open warehouse and storage area with up to 40 percent office area. Building 6 (81,910 square feet), which is located on Parcel 3, is designed with the intent to accommodate one large industrial user, as 76,775 square feet of this building is comprised of a single, open, warehouse, and distribution area. The remaining 5,135 square feet of the building will be used for office area. Lastly, the building will contain multiple shipping and receiving truck bays that will provide vehicular access into the building. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTPM19450, DRC2013-00565, AND DRC2014-00250 May 20, 2014 Page 2 The buildings will be comprised of concrete tilt -up walls, portions of which will incorporate decorative sandblasted wall planes as well as vertical and horizontal 2 inch wide reveals that span the length of all elevations. The building will also include clear anodized aluminum mullions that surround the storefront glass windows and doors, all of which are recessed into the front building elevation. Each building, with the exception of Buildings 1 and 2, will have metal roll -up doors that will provide access into the warehouse area of each unit. The applicant has requested to construct this project in two phases. Phase one will involve the installation of all improvements shown within Parcel 3, the landscape strip adjacent to the 7th Street frontage, and the landscape strip, drive aisle, and drive approach adjacent to the northern property line of the site. Phase two will involve the construction of all remaining improvements, including Buildings 1 through 5, as well as the remaining parking and landscaped areas. The development when completed, will contain a total of 452 provided parking spaces, 27 percent overall landscape coverage, decorative paving at each drive entrance, and three employee break areas all of which meet the requirements and intent of the Development Code. Additionally, staff notes that the initial submittal of the proposed development did not incorporate rail service improvements that are required by the Development Code for rail adjacent properties. The applicant has since incorporated staffs comments and feedback into the development package, which now includes an optional future rail spur that will tie into the existing rail spur adjacent to the eastern property line should a future tenant at this location have a need for rail service. Lastly, the applicant is requesting to establish a Uniform Sign Program (USP) for this development. The proposed USP contains provisions that regulate permanent building signage for each individual tenant as well as permanent monument signage for property identification. The USP allows for a maximum of one non -illuminated sign for each tenant occupying Building 1 through 5, with the exception of the tenant occupying the space closest to Archibald Avenue in Building 1 that will be allowed to have a total of two building signs. Building 6, which is intended to occupy a single large tenant, will be permitted to have a total of two non -illuminated building signs. The Uniform Sign Program indicates that there will be a total of two property identification (monument) signs, one sign to be located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street and the other sign to be located at the southeast corner of the site, adjacent to the end of 7th Street. 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. 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. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, Design Review, and Uniform Sign Program. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee recommended approval of the project and had no issues.; DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTPM19450, DRC2013-00565, AND ORC2014-00250 May 20, 2014 Page 3 Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, and Granger Staff Planner: Dominick Perez DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Steve Fowler May 20, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00966 - RANCHWOOD HOLDINGS LLC - A request to develop a 23,675 square foot industrial building located on a 1.25-acre site within the General Industrial (GI) District south of and abutting 9th Street approximately 200 feet east of Lanyard Court at 8705 and 8725 9th Street - APNs: 0207-271-14 and 28. The overall project site is triangular in shape and is approximately 1,100 feet (east to west) at its widest point along 8th Street and 260 feet (east to west) at its narrowest point along 7th Street. It is approximately 1,200 feet (north to south). The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of about 1,100 feet and 1,075 feet, respectively. The overall project site is bound on the west by the Cucamonga flood control channel and beyond that there are single-family residences in the City of Ontario. To the east are industrial office/warehouse buildings and an operations facility for Verizon. To the north is property owned by the City of Rancho Cucamonga where a City Public Works administration building and a household hazardous waste facility is located. The property to the south is vacant. The zoning of the property and the properties to the north and east is General Industrial (GI) District. The zoning of the properties to the south is Low -Medium (LM) Residential District. Desiqn Parameters: The applicant submitted a request to construct a single 23,675 square foot concrete tilt up industrial building on the south side of 9th Street between Lanyard Court and Vineyard Avenue. The site is currently composed of two parcels totaling 1.25 acres of land. Both parcels currently have single family residences on them. Both houses will be removed and neither have any historical significance per the submitted cultural assessment report. The basic layout of the building will be typical for a warehouse building. One unique design feature is that the dock area is located inside the building with roll up doors to visually conceal the area from adjacent properties. The floor plan has 1,500 square feet of office space and with 1,500 square feet of mezzanine above it and a 20,675 square feet of warehouse space. The majority of the parking is located behind a screen wall and sliding security gate. The rear of the property is enclosed by chain link fence with dense landscaping to screen the parking area from adjacent properties. The required parking is 33 stalls and 35 parking stalls will be provided with 2 trailer storage/parking areas both required and provided. Landscape coverage is 14 percent; the minimum requirement for this Development District is 12 percent. The proposed buildings will be of concrete tilt -up construction. The building will be painted with a palette of four colors. The majority of the building will be color #2 Alpaca with greys and white as accent colors. The building glass will be blue in color and the awning with the store front mullions will be clear Anodized. The employee lunch area contains a trellis feature near the front of the building. The concrete at the drive approach and the pedestrian area near the front entrance will have a decorative pattern. 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 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. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2014-00966 — RANCHWOOD HOLDINGS LLC May 20, 2014 Page 2 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. All 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 Double Detector Checks (DDCs) and Fire Department Connections (FDCs) shall be screened on three sides behind the 4-foot high walls. The walls shall incorporate the design and materials used on the buildings. 3. The employee lunch area shall have an overhead trellis with cross members spaced no more than 18 inches on center with minimum dimensions of 4 inches by 12 inches. 4. All doors (roll -up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall or glass panel. 5. Provide durable street furniture in outdoor employee eating area, such as tables, chairs, waste receptacles. 6. All trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standard. The design of the trash enclosures shall incorporate the materials, finish, color, and trim used on the buildings. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of this application to the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Steve Fowler THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA rrcxo CUCAMONGA MAY 20, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger — Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz 11 II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19450 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to subdivide a 13.23-acre parcel to create 3 new parcels within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00565 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2014-00250. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00565 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to develop a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of 1 of 2 _ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MAY 20, 2014 NCHo CUCAMONGA building area on 13.23 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19450 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2014-00250. C. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2014-00250 - SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to establish a Uniform Sign Program in connection with the proposed develop of a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of building area on 13.23 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00565 and Tentative Parcel Map SU BTPM 19450. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00966 — RANCHWOOD HOLDINGS LLC - A request to develop a 23,500 square foot industrial building on a 1.25-acre site within the General Industrial (GI) District south of and abutting 9th Street approximately 200 feet east of Lanyard Court, located at 8705 and 8725 9th Street - APN: 0207-271-14 and 28. III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on May 8, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez May 20, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19450 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to subdivide a 13.23-acre parcel to create 3 new parcels within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00565 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2014-00250. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00565 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to develop a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of building area on 13.23 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19450 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2014-00250. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2014-00250 - SCHEU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION - A request to establish a Uniform Sign Program in connection with the proposed develop of a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of building area on 13.23 acres of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN: 0209-211-24. Related files: Design Review DRC2013-00565 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19450. Site Characteristics: The project area is located on a 13.23-acre vacant undeveloped parcel located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street. The site is abutting existing industrial development to the north, east, and west and is located to the north, across 7th Street, from an existing multi -tenant industrial complex. The site currently does not contain any trees, and similar to adjacent properties in this area, does contain a gradual slope from north to south. Design Parameters: The applicant proposes to subdivide the 13.23-acre parcel into three parcels, creating a 2.13-acre parcel (Parcel 1), a 4.82-acre parcel (Parcel 2) and a 5.89-acre parcel (Parcel 3). Parcel 1, which is adjacent to Archibald Avenue and 7th Street is approximately 530 feet wide by 175 feet long. Parcel 2, which is south of and abutting Acacia Street and Cottage Avenue, is approximately 450 feet wide by 615 feet long. Parcel 3, which is adjacent to the existing rail spur along the eastern perimeter of the site, is approximately 400 feet wide by 615 feet long. In addition to the two -lot subdivision of the subject property, the applicant also proposes to develop a 6-building industrial complex totaling 173,340 square feet of building area. Building 1 (15,775 square feet) and Building 2 (13,415 square feet), which are located on Parcel 1, are designed to cater towards businesses looking to occupy buildings that contain a large portion of office with minimal storage area. Building 3 (19,950 square feet), Building 4 (20,500 square feet) and Building 5 (20,391 square feet), which are located on Parcel 2, are designed to cater towards businesses looking to occupy buildings that contain a primarily open warehouse and storage area with up to 40 percent office area. Building 6 (81,910 square feet), which is located on Parcel 3, is designed with the intent to accommodate one large industrial user, as 76,775 square feet of this building is comprised of a single, open, warehouse, and distribution area. The remaining 5,135 square feet of the building will be used for office area. Lastly, the building will contain multiple shipping and receiving truck bays that will provide vehicular access into the building. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA SUBTPM19450, DRC2013-00565, AND DRC2014-00250 May 20, 2014 Page 2 The buildings will be comprised of concrete tilt -up walls, portions of which will incorporate decorative sandblasted wall planes as well as vertical and horizontal 2 inch wide reveals that span the length of all elevations. The building will also include clear anodized aluminum mullions that surround the storefront glass windows and doors, all of which are recessed into the front building elevation. Each building, with the exception of Buildings 1 and 2, will have metal roll -up doors that will provide access into the warehouse area of each unit. The applicant has requested to construct this project in two phases. Phase one will involve the installation of all improvements shown within Parcel 3, the landscape strip adjacent to the 7th Street frontage, and the landscape strip, drive aisle, and drive approach adjacent to the northern property line of the site. Phase two will involve the construction of all remaining improvements, including Buildings 1 through 5, as well as the remaining parking and landscaped areas. The development when completed, will contain a total of 452 provided parking spaces, 27 percent overall landscape coverage, decorative paving at each drive entrance, and three employee break areas all of which meet the requirements and intent of the Development Code. Additionally, staff notes that the initial submittal of the proposed development did not incorporate rail service improvements that are required by the Development Code for rail adjacent properties. The applicant has since incorporated staff's comments and feedback into the development package, which now includes an optional future rail spur that will tie into the existing rail spur adjacent to the eastern property line should a future tenant at this location have a need for rail service. Lastly, the applicant is requesting to establish a Uniform Sign Program (USP) for this development. The proposed USP contains provisions that regulate permanent building signage for each individual tenant as well as permanent monument signage for property identification. The USP allows for a maximum of one non -illuminated sign for each tenant occupying Building 1 through 5, with the exception of the tenant occupying the space closest to Archibald Avenue in Building 1 that will be allowed to have a total of two building signs. Building 6, which is intended to occupy a single large tenant, will be permitted to have a total of two non -illuminated building signs. The Uniform Sign Program indicates that there will be a total of two property identification (monument) signs, one sign to be located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street and the other sign to be located at the southeast corner of the site, adjacent to the end of 7th Street. 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. 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. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, Design Review, and Uniform Sign Program. Desian Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Dominick Perez Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Steve Fowler May 20, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00966 - RANCHWOOD HOLDINGS LLC - A request to develop a 23,675 square foot industrial building located on a 1.25-acre site within the General Industrial (GI) District south of and abutting 9th Street approximately 200 feet east of Lanyard Court at 8705 and 8725 9th Street - APNs: 0207-271-14 and 28. The overall project site is triangular in shape and is approximately 1,100 feet (east to west) at its widest point along 8th Street and 260 feet (east to west) at its narrowest point along 7th Street. It is approximately 1,200 feet (north to south). The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of about 1,100 feet and 1,075 feet, respectively. The overall project site is bound on the west by the Cucamonga flood control channel and beyond that there are single-family residences in the City of Ontario. To the east are industrial office/warehouse buildings and an operations facility for Verizon. To the north is property owned by the City of Rancho Cucamonga where a City Public Works administration building and a household hazardous waste facility is located. The property to the south is vacant. The zoning of the property and the properties to the north and east is General Industrial (GI) District. The zoning of the properties to the south is Low -Medium (LM) Residential District. Design Parameters: The applicant submitted a request to construct a single 23,675 square foot concrete tilt up industrial building on the south side of 9th Street between Lanyard Court and Vineyard Avenue. The site is currently composed of two parcels totaling 1.25 acres of land. Both parcels currently have single family residences on them. Both houses will be removed and neither have any historical significance per the submitted cultural assessment report. The basic layout of the building will be typical for a warehouse building. One unique design feature is that the dock area is located inside the building with roll up doors to visually conceal the area from adjacent properties. The floor plan has 1,500 square feet of office space and with 1,500 square feet of mezzanine above it and a 20,675 square feet of warehouse space. The majority of the parking is located behind a screen wall and sliding security gate. The rear of the property is enclosed by chain link fence with dense landscaping to screen the parking area from adjacent properties. The required parking is 33 stalls and 35 parking stalls will be provided with 2 trailer storage/parking areas both required and provided. Landscape coverage is 14 percent; the minimum requirement for this Development District is 12 percent. The proposed buildings will be of concrete tilt -up construction. The building will be painted with a palette of four colors. The majority of the building will be color #2 Alpaca with greys and white as accent colors. The building glass will be blue in color and the awning with the store front mullions will be clear Anodized. The employee lunch area contains a trellis feature near the front of the building. The concrete at the drive approach and the pedestrian area near the front entrance will have a decorative pattern. 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 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. All 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 Double Detector Checks (DDCs) and Fire Department Connections (FDCs) shall be screened on three sides behind the 4-foot high walls. The walls shall incorporate the design and materials used on the buildings. 3. The employee lunch area shall have an overhead trellis with cross members spaced no more than 18 inches on center with minimum dimensions of 4 inches by 12 inches. 4. All doors (roll -up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall or glass panel. 5. Provide durable street furniture in outdoor employee eating area, such as tables, chairs, waste receptacles. 6. All trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standard. The design of the trash enclosures shall incorporate the materials, finish, color, and trim used on the buildings. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of this application to the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA O C C"oNCA MAY 6, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00833 - JERRY LIN FOR ALLSTATE RECYCLING - A request to construct a 10,224 square foot concrete tilt -up office building and a 10,500 square foot concrete tilt -up warehouse building on a 2.44-acre site within the Heavy Industrial (HI) Development District, located on the south side of Whittram Avenue and east of Pecan Avenue at 13113 Whittram Avenue - APN: 0229-192-10. Related files: Conditional Use Permits DRC2011-00254 and DRC2013-00834. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. 1 of 2 ACTION 7.00 p.m. A. Approved as presented. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO MAY 612014 CUCAMONCA B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC - Site plan review of a 17-lot subdivision totaling 8.32 acres (16 lots for residential purposes and 1 lot for existing church) currently located within the Very Low (VL) Development District with a request for a General Plan Amendment (DRC2013-00961) and an Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment (DRC2013-00962) to change the project site to Low (L) Residential (church site to remain Very Low Residential) for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0227-061-03 and 82. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961 and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS 11 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. II IV. ADJOURNMENT II 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. 2 of 2 B. The applicant was directed by the Committee to redesign the project to address concerns of the residents and come back to DRC. None. 8:23 p.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag May 6, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00833 — JERRY LIN FOR ALLSTATE RECYCLING - A request to construct a 10,224 square foot concrete tilt -up office building and a 10,500 square foot concrete tilt -up warehouse building on a 2.44-acre site located within the Heavy Industrial (HI) Development District, located on the south side of Whittram Avenue and east of Pecan Avenue at 13113 Whittram Avenue - APN: 0229-192-10. Related Projects: Conditional Use Permits DRC2011-00254 and DRC2013-00834. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Project Overview: Allstate Recycling proposes to expand their existing recycling facility by adding a 10,224 square foot office building and a 10,500 square foot warehouse on a 2.44-acre project site directly adjacent to their existing operation. The expansion will bring the majority of their operation onto adjacent parcels, greatly reducing truck traffic between the sites. The new facility will include both their household recycling operation, which currently takes place on Etiwanda Avenue, and their more intense ferrous metal recycling operation. All the parcels will be connected by a drive aisle running along the south property line and includes covered areas for the household recycling operation and bailing equipment. The new two-story office building will face Whitram Avenue with the majority of the parking areas located in front and along the sides of the building. The warehouse building will be located along the west property line. The recycling operation will be screened from public view by the office building and 8-foot high gates. The buildings have a contemporary appearance and include clear anodized metal panels to accent the main entrance. The metal panels are carried over to the front of the warehouse and each building also includes a decorative cornice. Staff Comments: The applicant has done an excellent job creating buildings with a strong visual presence that are well articulated and carry architectural features to each elevation. The buildings meet all Development Code requirements including setbacks, parking, landscaping, screening, and building design. The expansion and redesign of the overall site will eliminate the necessity for trucks to back up onto the site from Whittram Avenue and from traveling between the two existing business locations. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for final approval as presented. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag May 6, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC - Site plan review of a 17-lot subdivision totaling 8.32 acres (16 lots for residential purposes and 1 lot for existing church) currently located within the Very Low (VL) Development District with a request for a General Plan Amendment (DRC2013-00961) and an Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment (DRC2013-00962) to change the project site to Low (L) Residential (church site to remain Very Low Residential) for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0227-061-03 and 82. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961 and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to subdivide an 8.32-acre site for the development of 16 single-family residences. A portion of the site is being purchased from the Cross and Crown Lutheran Church at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Carnesi Drive, which will become Lot 17 of the tract map. The project site is currently zoned Very Low (VL) Residential and is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The narrowness of the site precludes developing a double loaded street that meets the required 200-foot lot depth. The applicant has requested to change the zoning designation to Low (L) residential, which requires 100-foot lot depths. The existing single-family residences to the east were developed prior to the incorporation of the City and are within the Low (L) zoning district. The lot sizes average 7,500 square feet, below the 15,000 average lot size required by the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant feels that the zone change will allow for the creation of a new street that connects to the existing development to the east and provides a density transition from the smaller lots to the east and the larger lots to the north. The new lots would also be compatible to the existing residences to the west, along Etiwanda Avenue, which are on lots between 15,000 and 16,000 square feet. The applicant is also requesting a Variance to allow walls over the maximum permitted 6-foot height limit. The additional wall height is necessary for the lots to drain to the public street and to accommodate the waste water system. The applicant was unable to obtain an off -site drainage easement from the Mormon Church to the south. The church submitted a letter stating they would rather face a large retaining wall (12 feet high) than to disrupt their site to install the drainage facility. The applicant has also contacted homeowners to the east who will face up to 9-foot high walls along the eastern perimeter of the project. Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on April 14, 2014. There were approximately 80 persons in attendance, including approximately 20 persons from the church in support of the project. The attendees brought up three main issues regarding the project: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18936 — STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT, INC. May 6, 2014 Page 2 Property owners were in opposition to the proposed street connection to Pinon Street to the east. It was felt that the opening up of Pinon Street, which currently dead ends into the project site, would greatly increase .traffic from vehicles looking for a shorter route to Etiwanda Avenue. 2. The property owners to the north (along Carnesi Drive) were against the demolition of the wall along the north side of the project site (south side of Carnesi Drive) to develop a public street to the project. 3. The property owners to the north were also against the proposed change in land use designation from Very Low (25,000 square foot average lots) to Low (15,000 square foot lots). Property owners felt that it would increase traffic and decrease their home values. Property owners did not want smaller lot homes facing their larger lot homes to the north. The meeting concluded with the applicant informing the group that they would investigate developing the project with a cul-de-sac (with a connection for emergency vehicles only). Staff Comments: Staff supports the concept of the General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments and the Variance for the increased wall heights. Without the amendments, the required lot dimensions would negate plotting houses on the both sides of the new public street and require that an equestrian trail be plotted adjacent to the existing non -equestrian lots. The amendments allow for good street design, livability, and transition in density. The lots meet all other requirements of the Low (L) Development District including lot depth (100 feet), width (80 feet) and average lot size (15,000 square feet). The average lot size is 15,039 square feet, with the lots ranging in size from 10,014 square feet to 28,150 square feet. Staff, though, is concerned that the compatibility and access issues raised by the neighborhood will be difficult to completely resolve. The Design Review Committee (DRC) meeting was scheduled prior to the neighborhood meeting. The applicant has requested that the meeting not be cancelled and informed staff that they will provide alternative designs for the DRC to review. The applicant has been informed that they will be required to hold a second neighborhood meeting after a new layout has been finalized. Major Issues: Neighborhood concerns regarding traffic and compatibility. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project and determine whether it can be moved forward to the Planning Commission or that additional modifications to the layout are necessary. Design Review Committee Action: The design of the subdivision was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC) on Tuesday, May 6, 2014. In attendance were approximately 30 to 35 residents that reside in the Toll Brother's subdivision north of the project. Staff provided an overview of the project and answered questions related to the project from the two DRC members (Commissioners Rich Fletcher and Francisco Oaxaca). The DRC then turned the DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18936 — STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT, INC. May 6, 2014 Page 3 meeting over to the applicant to provide their perspective on the project and to address the concerns raised at the neighborhood meeting. The applicant laid out the site constraints that led to the current site layout. This included the narrowness of the site, fire access concerns, and density transition from the existing developments to the east and north. The applicant stated that the proposed layout was the best compromise to address the site constraints and to provide a project that fits into the surrounding neighborhood. To address the concerns of the existing development to the east, they presented the DRC with an updated Site Plan that included a cul-de-sac with an emergency vehicle access gate instead of the direct connection to Pinon Street. At this time, the meeting was opened for comments from the residents in attendance who raised similar concerns to those raised at the neighborhood meeting. There was unanimous agreement among the residents from the Toll Brothers neighborhood that they did not want the current wall along Carnesi Drive to be demolished or for houses to be built on smaller lots. Residents emphasized that either of these changes would bring down their home values and increase traffic. Residents were in agreement that a street connection from Etiwanda Avenue through the church property was an acceptable alternative. This design change would create new constraints on any future expansion by the church. The idea of creating a gated community was also discussed, which received mixed comments from the neighbors, many of who did not want the wall to come down under any circumstance. The meeting concluded with the DRC recommending that the applicant redesign the project to address the concerns raised by the residents and to come back to the Design Review Committee for review of the changes and alternative layouts in response to the issues raised. The applicant stated that they would attempt to address the neighbors' concerns and work with staff on an updated layout. Staff informed the applicant that they would need to hold a second neighborhood meeting prior to returning to the DRC. The meeting concluded at approximately 8:30 p.m. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MAY 6, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00833 - JERRY LIN FOR ALLSTATE RECYCLING - A request to construct a 10,224 square foot concrete tilt -up office building and a 10,500 square foot concrete tilt -up warehouse building on a 2.44-acre site within the Heavy Industrial (HI) Development District, located on the south side of Whittram Avenue and east of Pecan Avenue at 13113 Whittram Avenue - APN: 0229-192-10. Related files: Conditional Use Permits DRC2011-00254 and DRC2013-00834. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA �Ha MAY 612014 cUCAMONGA B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC - Site plan review of a 17-lot subdivision totaling 8.32 acres (16 lots for residential purposes and 1 lot for existing church) currently located within the Very Low (VL) Development District with a request for a General Plan Amendment (DRC2013-00961) and an Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment (DRC2013-00962) to change the project site to Low (L) Residential (church site to remain Very Low Residential) for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0227-061-03 and 82. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961 and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT 11 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on April 24, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag May 6, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00833 — JERRY LIN FOR ALLSTATE RECYCLING - A request to construct a 10,224 square foot concrete tilt -up office building and a 10,500 square foot concrete tilt -up warehouse building on a 2.44-acre site located within the Heavy Industrial (HI) Development District, located on the south side of Whittram Avenue and east of Pecan Avenue at 13113 Whittram Avenue - APN: 0229-192-10. Related Projects: Conditional Use Permits DRC2011-00254 and DRC2013-00834. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Project Overview: Allstate Recycling proposes to expand their existing recycling facility by adding a 10,224 square foot office building and a 10,500 square foot warehouse on a 2.44-acre project site directly adjacent to their existing operation. The expansion will bring the majority of their operation onto adjacent parcels, greatly reducing truck traffic between the sites. The new facility will include both their household recycling operation, which currently takes place on Etiwanda Avenue, and their more intense ferrous metal recycling operation. All the parcels will be connected by a drive aisle running along the south property line and includes covered areas for the household recycling operation and bailing equipment. The new two-story office building will face Whitram Avenue with the majority of the parking areas located in front and along the sides of the building. The warehouse building will be located along the west property line. The recycling operation will be screened from public view by the office building and 8-foot high gates. The buildings have a contemporary appearance and include clear anodized metal panels to accent the main entrance. The metal panels are carried over to the front of the warehouse and each building also includes a decorative cornice. Staff Comments: The applicant has done an excellent job creating buildings with a strong visual presence that are well articulated and carry architectural features to each elevation. The buildings meet all Development Code requirements including setbacks, parking, landscaping, screening, and building design. The expansion and redesign of the overall site will eliminate the necessity for trucks to back up onto the site from Whittram Avenue and from traveling between the two existing business locations. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the project to the Planning Commission for final approval as presented. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag May 6, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC - Site plan review of a 17-lot subdivision totaling 8.32 acres (16 lots for residential purposes and 1 lot for existing church) currently located within the Very Low (VL) Development District with a request for a General Plan Amendment (DRC2013-00961) and an Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment (DRC2013-00962) to change the project site to Low (L) Residential (church site to remain Very Low Residential) for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0227-061-03 and 82. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961 and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to subdivide an 8.32-acre site for the development of 16 single-family residences. A portion of the site is being purchased from the Cross and Crown Lutheran Church at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Carnesi Drive, which will become Lot 17 of the tract map. The project site is currently zoned Very Low (VL) Residential and is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The narrowness of the site precludes developing a double loaded street that meets the required 200-foot lot depth. The applicant has requested to change the zoning designation to Low (L) residential, which requires 100-foot lot depths. The existing single-family residences to the east were developed prior to the incorporation of the City and are within the Low (L) zoning district. The lot sizes average 7,500 square feet, below the 15,000 average lot size required by the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant feels that the zone change will allow for the creation of a new street that connects to the existing development to the east and provides a density transition from the smaller lots to the east and the larger lots to the north. The new lots would also be compatible to the existing residences to the west, along Etiwanda Avenue, which are on lots between 15,000 and 16,000 square feet. The applicant is also requesting a Variance to allow walls over the maximum permitted 6-foot height limit. The additional wall height is necessary for the lots to drain to the public street and to accommodate the waste water system. The applicant was unable to obtain an off -site drainage easement from the Mormon Church to the south. The church submitted a letter stating they would rather face a large retaining wall (12 feet high) than to disrupt their site to install the drainage facility. The applicant has also contacted homeowners to the east who will face up to 9-foot high walls along the eastern perimeter of the project. Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on April 14, 2014. There were approximately 80 persons in attendance, including approximately 20 persons from the church in support of the project. The attendees brought up three main issues regarding the project: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA SUBTT18936 —STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT, INC. May 6, 2014 Page 2 Property owners were in opposition to the proposed street connection to Pinon Street to the east. It was felt that the opening up of Pinon Street, which currently dead ends into the project site, would greatly increase traffic from vehicles looking for a shorter route to Etiwanda Avenue. 2. The property owners to the north (along Carnesi Drive) were against the demolition of the wall along the north side of the project site (south side of Carnesi Drive) to develop a public street to the project. 3. The property owners to the north were also against the proposed change in land use designation from Very Low (25,000 square foot average lots) to Low (15,000 square foot lots). Property owners felt that it would increase traffic and decrease their home values. Property owners did not want smaller lot homes facing their larger lot homes to the north. The meeting concluded with the applicant informing the group that they would investigate developing the project with a cul-de-sac (with a connection for emergency vehicles only). Staff Comments: Staff supports the concept of the General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments and the Variance for the increased wall heights. Without the amendments, the required lot dimensions would negate plotting houses on the both sides of the new public street and require that an equestrian trail be plotted adjacent to the existing non -equestrian lots. The amendments allow for good street design, livability, and transition in density. The lots meet all other requirements of the Low (L) Development District including lot depth (100 feet), width (80 feet) and average lot size (15,000 square feet). The average lot size is 15,039 square feet, with the lots ranging in size from 10,014 square feet to 28,150 square feet. Staff, though, is concerned that the compatibility and access issues raised by the neighborhood will be difficult to completely resolve. The Design Review Committee (DRC) meeting was scheduled prior to the neighborhood meeting. The applicant has requested that the meeting not be cancelled and informed staff that they will provide alternative designs for the DRC to review. The applicant has been informed that they will be required to hold a second neighborhood meeting after a new layout has been finalized. Major Issues: Neighborhood concerns regarding traffic and compatibility. Secondary Issues: None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project and determine whether it can be moved forward to the Planning Commission or that additional modifications to the layout are necessary. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA C �oNCA APRIL 15, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz 11 II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19505 - ROYAL FALCON INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC - A request to subdivide a 0.29-acre parcel into two lots for a site located on the northeast corner of 24th Street and Center Avenue within the Low (L) Residential Development District; APN: 0209-122-01. Related file: Variance DRC2014-00112. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. 1 of 3 ACTION 7. 00 p.m. A. The Committee recommended approval. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA APRIL 15, 2014 CHO UCAMONM B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19518 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A proposal to subdivide a property comprised of nine (9) parcels with a combined area of about 375,000 square feet (8.61 acres) into three (3) parcels in conjunction with the modification of a previously approved industrial/warehouse complex comprised within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the south side of 8th Street about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue - APNs: 0209-151-39 and -41 through -48. Related files: Development Review DRC2013-01118, Development Review DRC2007-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, Minor Exception DRC2008-00152, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2008-00681. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01118 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A review of proposed modifications to a previously approved industrial/warehouse complex and architectural review of three (3) buildings on a property of about 904,000 square feet (20.7 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue at the south side of 8th Street and the south and north sides of 7th Street - APNs: 0209-151-38 through -48. Related files: Development Review DRC20070-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19518, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2013-01120. D. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2013-01120 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A modification of Uniform Sign Program #xxx for a partially constructed industrial/warehouse complex on a property of 20.7 acres within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the south side of 8th Street about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue - APNs: 0209-151-38 through -48. Related files: Development Review DRC2013- 0118, Development Review DRC2007-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19518, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, and Minor Exception DRC2008-00152. 2 of 3 B. The Committee recommended approval. C. The Committee recommended approval. D. The Committee recommended approval. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA 0ONM APRIL 15, 2014 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III None. 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. IV. ADJOURNMENT 111 7:15 p.m. 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. Q 3 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima April 15, 2014 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19505 - ROYAL FALCON INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC - A request to subdivide a 0.29-acre parcel into two lots for a site located on the northeast corner of 24th Street and Center Avenue within the Low (L) Residential Development District; APN: 0209-122-01. Related file: Variance DRC2014-00112. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Design Parameters: The project site is a vacant, rectangular -shaped corner parcel with an overall area of approximately 0.29 acre (12,500 square feet). The site is approximately 100 feet deep (north to south) and approximately 125 feet wide (east to west). The zoning for the project site and surrounding areas is Low (L) Residential (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre). The surrounding land uses to the north, east, south, and west are all single-family residential. The project site is currently vacant with an approved entitlement for the construction of a single-family residence. The street frontage will be along 24th Street. Project Description: The applicant is proposing to split the existing parcel into two parcels. Currently, the proposed subdivision does not meet the minimum net average for parcel area (8,000 square feet). However, the property will gain additional real estate because of a pending vacation of the alley (10 feet) just east of the project site and a proposed vacation along 24th Street (10 feet) and Center Avenue (7 feet). With the vacations, the parcel (prior to subdividing) will be approximately 110 feet deep (north to south) and approximately 142 feet wide (east to west); this will increase the parcel size to approximately 15,547 square feet (total). With the property vacations, the proposed 2 parcel subdivision meets the minimum parcel sizes but does not meet the minimum net average parcel area. Therefore, a Variance is required for the minimum net average parcel area requirement. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the vacations at its meeting on February 12, 2014; the vacations are scheduled for City Council review and approval on April 2, 2014. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major/Secondary Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this 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. None. Technical Issue: A variance is required for the minimum net average for the parcel area. The lots are only off by a small margin (7,627 square feet and 7,920 square feet), and staff feels that the smaller lots are consistent with the rest of the older established neighborhood of Northtown. DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTPM19505 - ROYAL FALCON INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC April 15, 2014 Page 2 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the proposed variance and subdivision and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Steve Fowler April 15, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19518 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A proposal to subdivide a property comprised of nine (9) parcels with a combined area of about 375,000 square feet (8.61 acres) into three (3) parcels in conjunction with the modification of a previously approved industrial/warehouse complex comprised within the General Industrial (GI) District located at the south side of 8th Street about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue - APNs: 0209-151-39 and - 41 through -48. Related files: Development Review DRC2013-01118, Development Review DRC2007-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, Minor Exception DRC2008-00152, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2008-00681. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01118 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A review of proposed modifications to a previously approved industrial/warehouse complex and architectural review of three (3) buildings on a property of about 904,000 square feet (20.7 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue at the south side of 8th Street and the south and north sides of 7th Street - APNs: 0209-151-38 through - 48. Related files: Development Review DRC20070-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19518, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2013-01120. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2013-01120 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A modification of Uniform Sign Program #xxx for a partially constructed industrial/warehouse complex on a property of 20.7 acres within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the south side of 8th Street about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue - APNs: 0209-151-38 through -48. Related files: Development - Review DRC2013-0118, Development Review DRC2007-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19518, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, and Minor Exception DRC2008-00152. Background: The overall project was reviewed by the City and approved by the Planning Commission on November 12, 2010 (Related files: Development Review DRC2007-00551 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794). The original approval was for an industrial/warehouse complex on a property of about 904,000 square feet (20.7 acres) that was comprised of twelve (12) buildings, ranging in floor area between 130,019 square feet (Buildings Al and A2) to 5,342 square feet (Building L), with a combined floor area of 389,600 square feet and a subdivision of the property into twelve (12) parcels. The applicant constructed three (3) buildings — Buildings Al, A2, and B — and associated improvements, but left the remainder of the project site undeveloped. The overall project site is triangular in shape and is approximately 1,100 feet (east to west) at its widest point along 8th Street and 260 feet (east to west) at its narrowest point along 7th Street. It is approximately 1,200 feet (north to south). The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of approximately 1,100 feet and 1,075 feet, respectively. The overall project site is bound on the west by the Cucamonga flood control channel and beyond that there are single-family residences in the City of Ontario. To the east are industrial office/warehouse buildings and an operations facility for Verizon. To the north is property owned by the City of Rancho Cucamonga where a City Public Works administration building and a household hazardous waste facility is located. The property to the south is vacant; the zoning of the property and the properties to the north and east is General Industrial (GI) District; and the zoning of the properties to the. south is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTPM19518, DRC2013-01118, AND DRC2013-01120 — DCE 8TH & VINDYARD, LLC April 15, 2014 Page 2 Design Parameters: The applicant submitted a request to modify the complex by 'deleting' nine (9) of the buildings from the proposal and replacing them with three (3) larger industrial/warehouse buildings. In conjunction with this revision, the applicant is `consolidating' nine (9) of the twelve (12) parcels that comprise the complex into three (3) parcels (Parcels 1, 2, and 3) that will correspond with each of the proposed buildings (Buildings C, D, and E). The redesign of the complex will result in three (3) buildings that, when combined with the previously constructed buildings, will have overall floor area of 389,923 square feet — an increase of 323 square feet from the original combined floor area of 389,600 square feet. The architecture of the proposed buildings is consistent with the architecture of the previously approved buildings. The most significant changes are the footprint and the larger size of each building. The basic layout of each building will be typical for warehouse buildings. All of the buildings will have dedicated docks for loading/unloading. All of the buildings will have their respective offices and entrances along the central drive aisle. The loading/unloading areas will be screened from public view by walls and/or the building. Parking for employees and visitors will be generally arranged along the central drive aisle and near the office entrances. The combined required parking is 287 stalls; 291 parking stalls will be provided. The combined required trailer storage/parking is 41 stalls. The applicant is providing 34 stalls with the previous approval of a Minor Exception (DRC2008-00152). The landscape coverage is 10 percent; the minimum requirement for this Development District is 12 percent. The proposed buildings will be of concrete tilt -up construction. Each building will be painted with a palette of three colors; there will be some variation so that the each building will be painted a different set of three colors. The boldest or darkest of the three colors (that will comprise each palette) will be at the general area around the offices of each building. An additional primary material will be form -lined concrete applied on the wall panels at various locations on each building with glass panels serving as a secondary material. Glass has been proposed at the office areas and at various locations along the wall planes of each building. At the office entrances of each building, there will be a trellis feature. The greatest degree of wall articulation will occur at the corners of the building. The landscape coverage is 10 percent; the minimum requirement for this Development District is 12 percent and this requirement has been met. Sign Design Parameters: The program proposes Sign Type 1A for "Major Tenants." Within this category, there are two design options — illuminated channel letters (Option #1) and non -illuminated foam letters (Option #2). There is a monument sign (Sign Type B) proposed at each of the central drive aisle entrances at 7th Street and 8th Street. Miscellaneous address, door, and window identification signs are included (Sign Types C, D, and E). In general, the proposed sign program complies with the standards and guidelines set forth in the Sign Ordinance, including the maximum number of signs per tenant, wall sign construction/materials, and the basic dimensions of each wall sign, including sign area and text height. Each proposed sign location and area meets the intent of the Sign Ordinance. The overall changes in this modification are that the original Uniform Sign Program had a Sub -Tenant Sign that has been removed and the elevations have changed because of the design change. 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 at this time. DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTPM19518, DRC2013-01118, AND DRC2013-01120 — DCE 8TH & VINDYARD, LLC April 15, 2014 Page 3 Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 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. All 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 Double Detector Checks (DDCs) and Fire Department Connections (FDCs) shall be screened on three sides behind the 4-foot high walls. The walls shall incorporate the design and materials used on the buildings. 3. The employee lunch area shall have an overhead trellis with cross members spaced no more than 18 inches on center with minimum dimensions of 4 inches by 12 inches. 4. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 5. Incorporate undulating berms along the street frontages (where applicable), within the landscape setback and landscape areas. The highest part of the berms should be at least 3 feet in height. 6. Decorative paving shall be provided at all vehicular access points onto the site. Decorative paving is already proposed at the main drive entrances at 7th and 8th Streets, but it is missing from the secondary access point located on the west side of Building A. 7. All doors (roll -up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall or glass panel. 8. Provide durable street furniture in outdoor employee eating area, such as tables, chairs, waste receptacles. 9. All trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standard. The design of the trash enclosures shall incorporate the materials, finish, color, and trim used on the buildings. 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: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA APRIL 15, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II. 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 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. A. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19505 - ROYAL FALCON INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC - A request to subdivide a 0.29-acre parcel into two lots for a site located on the northeast corner of 24th Street and Center Avenue within the Low (L) Residential Development District; APN: 0209-122-01. Related file: Variance DRC2014-00112. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA )aHo APRIL 15, 2014 CUCAMONCA B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19518 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A proposal to subdivide a property comprised of nine (9) parcels with a combined area of about 375,000 square feet (8.61 acres) into three (3) parcels in conjunction with the modification of a previously approved industrial/warehouse complex comprised within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the south side of 8th Street about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue - APNs: 0209-151-39 and -41 through -48. Related files: Development Review DRC2013-01118, Development Review DRC2007-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, Minor Exception DRC2008-00152, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2008-00681. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01118 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A review of proposed modifications to a previously approved industrial/warehouse complex and architectural review of three (3) buildings on a property of about 904,000 square feet (20.7 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue at the south side of 8th Street and the south and north sides of 7th Street - APNs: 0209-151-38 through -48. Related files: Development Review DRC20070-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19518, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2013-01120. D. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2013-01120 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A modification of Uniform Sign Program #xxx for a partially constructed industrial/warehouse complex on a property of 20.7 acres within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the south side of 8th Street about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue - APNs: 0209-151-38 through -48. Related files: Development Review DRC2013-0118, Development Review DRC2007-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19518, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, and Minor Exception DRC2008-00152. 2 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA APRIL 15, 2014 NCHG CUCAMONGA III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on April 3, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3of3 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima April 15, 2014 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19505 - ROYAL FALCON INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC - A request to subdivide a 0.29-acre parcel into two lots for a site located on the northeast corner of 24th Street and Center Avenue within the Low (L) Residential Development District; APN: 0209-122-01. Related file: Variance DRC2014-00112. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Design Parameters: The project site is a vacant, rectangular -shaped corner parcel with an overall area of approximately 0.29 acre (12,500 square feet). The site is approximately 100 feet deep (north to south) and approximately 125 feet wide (east to west). The zoning for the project site and surrounding areas is Low (L) Residential (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre). The surrounding land uses to the north, east, south, and west are all single-family residential. The project site is currently vacant with an approved entitlement for the construction of a single-family residence. The street frontage will be along 24th Street. Project Description: The applicant is proposing to split the existing parcel into two parcels. Currently, the proposed subdivision does not meet the minimum net average for parcel area (8,000 square feet). However, the property will gain additional real estate because of a pending vacation of the alley (10 feet) just east of the project site and a proposed vacation along 24th Street (10 feet) and Center Avenue (7 feet). With the vacations, the parcel (prior to subdividing) will be approximately 110 feet deep (north to south) and approximately 142 feet wide (east to west); this will increase the parcel size to approximately 15,547 square feet (total). With the property vacations, the proposed 2 parcel subdivision meets the minimum parcel sizes but does not meet the minimum net average parcel area. Therefore, a Variance is required for the minimum net average parcel area requirement. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the vacations at its meeting on February 12, 2014; the vacations are scheduled for City Council review and approval on April 2, 2014. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major/Secondary 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. Technical Issue: A variance is required for the minimum net average for the parcel area. The lots are only off by a small margin (7,627 square feet and 7,920 square feet), and staff feels that the smaller lots are consistent with the rest of the older established neighborhood of Northtown. DRC AGENDA SUBTPM19505 - ROYAL FALCON INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC April 15, 2014 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. None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the proposed variance and subdivision and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Steve Fowler April 15, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19518 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A proposal to subdivide a property comprised of nine (9) parcels with a combined area of about 375,000 square feet (8.61 acres) into three (3) parcels in conjunction with the modification of a previously approved industrial/warehouse complex comprised within the General Industrial (GI) District located at the south side of 8th Street about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue - APNs: 0209-151-39 and - 41 through -48. Related files: Development Review DRC2013-01118, Development Review DRC2007-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, Minor Exception DRC2008-00152, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2008-00681. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01118 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A review of proposed modifications to a previously approved industrial/warehouse complex and architectural review of three (3) buildings on a property of about 904,000 square feet (20.7 acres) within the General Industrial (GI) District, located about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue at the south side of 8th Street and the south and north sides of 7th Street - APNs: 0209-151-38 through - 48. Related files: Development Review DRC20070-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19518, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2013-01120. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2013-01120 - DCT 8TH & VINEYARD, LLC - A modification of Uniform Sign Program #xxx for a partially constructed industrial/warehouse complex on a property of 20.7 acres within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the south side of 8th Street about 640 feet west of Hellman Avenue - APNs: 0209-151-38 through -48. Related files: Development Review DRC2013-0118, Development Review DRC2007-00551, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19518, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794, and Minor Exception DRC2008-00152. Background: The overall project was reviewed by the City and approved by the Planning Commission on November 12, 2010 (Related files: Development Review DRC2007-00551 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18794). The original approval was for an industrial/warehouse complex on a property of about 904,000 square feet (20.7 acres) that was comprised of twelve (12) buildings, ranging in floor area between 130,019 square feet (Buildings Al and A2) to 5,342 square feet (Building L), with a combined floor area of 389,600 square feet and a subdivision of the property into twelve (12) parcels. The applicant constructed three (3) buildings — Buildings Al, A2, and B — and associated improvements, but left the remainder of the project site undeveloped. The overall project site is triangular in shape and is approximately 1,100 feet (east to west) at its widest point along 8th Street and 260 feet (east to west) at its narrowest point along 7th Street. It is approximately 1,200 feet (north to south). The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of approximately 1,100 feet and 1,075 feet, respectively. The overall project site is bound on the west by the Cucamonga flood control channel and beyond that there are single-family residences in the City of Ontario. To the east are industrial office/warehouse buildings and an operations facility for Verizon. To the north is property owned by the City of Rancho Cucamonga where a City Public Works administration building and a household hazardous waste facility is located. The property to the south is vacant; the zoning of the property and the properties to the north and east is General Industrial (GI) District; and the zoning of the properties to the south is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. DRC AGENDA SUBTPM19518, DRC2013-01118, AND DRC2013-01120 — DCE 8TH & VINDYARD, LLC April 15, 2014 Page 2 Design Parameters: The applicant submitted a request to modify the complex by 'deleting' nine (9) of the buildings from the proposal and replacing them with three (3) larger industrial/warehouse buildings. In conjunction with this revision, the applicant is 'consolidating' nine (9) of the twelve (12) parcels that comprise the complex into three (3) parcels (Parcels 1, 2, and 3) that will correspond with each of the proposed buildings (Buildings C, D, and E). The redesign of the complex will result in three (3) buildings that, when combined with the previously constructed buildings, will have overall floor area of 389,923 square feet — an increase of 323 square feet from the original combined floor area of 389,600 square feet. The architecture of the proposed buildings is consistent with the architecture of the previously approved buildings. The most significant changes are the footprint and the larger size of each building. The basic layout of each building will be typical for warehouse buildings. All of the buildings will have dedicated docks for loading/unloading. All of the buildings will have their respective offices and entrances along the central drive aisle. The loading/unloading areas will be screened from public view by walls and/or the building. Parking for employees and visitors will be generally arranged along the central drive aisle and near the office entrances. The combined required parking is 287 stalls; 291 parking stalls will be provided. The combined required trailer storage/parking is 41 stalls. The applicant is providing 34 stalls with the previous approval of a Minor Exception (DRC2008-00152). The landscape coverage is 10 percent; the minimum requirement for this Development District is 12 percent. The proposed buildings will be of concrete tilt -up construction. Each building will be painted with a palette of three colors; there will be some variation so that the each building will be painted a different set of three colors. The boldest or darkest of the three colors (that will comprise each palette) will be at the general area around the offices of each building. An additional primary material will be form -lined concrete applied on the wall panels at various locations on each building with glass panels serving as a secondary material. Glass has been proposed at the office areas and at various locations along the wall planes of each building. At the office entrances of each building, there will be a trellis feature. The greatest degree of wall articulation will occur at the corners of the building. The landscape coverage is 10 percent; the minimum requirement for this Development District is 12 percent and this requirement has been met. Sign Design Parameters: The program proposes Sign Type 1A for "Major Tenants." Within this category, there are two design options — illuminated channel letters (Option #1) and non -illuminated foam letters (Option #2). There is a monument sign (Sign Type B) proposed at each of the central drive aisle entrances at 7th Street and 8th Street. Miscellaneous address, door, and window identification signs are included (Sign Types C, D, and E). In general, the proposed sign program complies with the standards and guidelines set forth in the Sign Ordinance, including the maximum number of signs per tenant, wall sign construction/materials, and the basic dimensions of each wall sign, including sign area and text height. Each proposed sign location and area meets the intent of the Sign Ordinance. The overall changes in this modification are that the original Uniform Sign Program had a Sub -Tenant Sign that has been removed and the elevations have changed because of the design change. 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 at this time. DRC AGENDA SUBTPM19518, DRC2013-01118, AND DRC2013-01120 — DCE 8TH & VINDYARD, LLC April 15, 2014 Page 3 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. All 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 Double Detector Checks (DDCs) and Fire Department Connections (FDCs) shall be screened on three sides behind the 4-foot high walls. The walls shall incorporate the design and materials used on the buildings. 3. The employee lunch area shall have an overhead trellis with cross members spaced no more than 18 inches on center with minimum dimensions of 4 inches by 12 inches. 4. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 5. Incorporate undulating berms along the street frontages (where applicable), within the landscape setback and landscape areas. The highest part of the berms should be at least 3 feet in height. 6. Decorative paving shall be provided at all vehicular access points onto the site. Decorative paving is already proposed at the main drive entrances at 7th and 8th Streets, but it is missing from the secondary access point located on the west side of Building A. 7. All doors (roll -up, dock doors, emergency access) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall or glass panel. 8. Provide durable street furniture in outdoor employee eating area, such as tables, chairs, waste receptacles. 9. All trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standard. The design of the trash enclosures shall incorporate the materials, finish, color, and trim used on the buildings. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Steve Fowler Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA APRIL 1, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted On March 20, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE RANCHO AGENDA CUCAMONGA MARCH 18, 2014 - 7:00 R M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell Lou Munoz _ MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 6, 2013, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ANCHO CUCAMONGA MARCH 4, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER I ACTION Roll Call 7:00 P.M. Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca A Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00743 - KB HOME - A review of a A. The project was proposal for 76 single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved as approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres within the Very Low (VL) presented with the Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of direction of the East Avenue about 150 feet north of the Foothill FreewaySR-210 Committee add ( ) - arches to the front APNs: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related files: Tentative Tract entryway at the Map SUBTT18122, Variance DRC2009-00020, and Tree Removal Permit front elevations of DRC2009-00224. Plans 1 and 1x. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ►xcHo MARCH 4, 2014 UCAM CONGA II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 2 of 2 None. 7: 29 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith March 4, 2014 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00743-- KB HOME: - A review of a proposal for 76 single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of East Avenue about 150 feet north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APNs: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122, Variance DRC2009-00020, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00224. Background: The proposed project was reviewed by the Committee on January 28, 2014. The Committee generally accepted the proposal as submitted with some exceptions. The Committee directed the applicant to do the following and submit the proposal for a follow-up review prior to forwarding the application to the Planning Commission for review (Exhibit A): Revise the Spanish Colonial-themed elevations so that they incorporated more features that are characteristic of Spanish Colonial architecture. The features that were requested include arched and/or recessed windows, shutters with curved top edges that match the corresponding arched window, and arched trim above the garage doors; 2. Use stackstone veneer comprised of blocks that have a vertical dimension greater than originally proposed so that each stack is visually 'thicker'; 3. Vary the type of rock veneers on the Craftsman-themed elevations. The applicant proposed a stackstone veneer for all houses that had the Craftsman theme. The Committee wanted the houses to have a stone veneer constructed of either fieldstone, river rock, brick, or stackstone veneer; and 4. Add decorative windows on the garage doors. Staff Comments: The applicant agreed to complete the revisions as directed by the Committee. With the exception of Revision #1 as listed above, the revisions can be included as conditions of approval and verified during review of the construction plans by Staff during plan check. Those conditions of approval will read as follows: The minimum vertical dimension of each stack of stackstone rows/blocks shall be 4 inches. 2. The rock veneers on the Craftsman themed elevations shall be varied so that the houses with this theme will have either fieldstone, river rock, brick, or stackstone veneer. The ratio of the veneers that are applied shall be equal throughout the subdivision, i.e. no particular veneer that is used shall be the dominant veneer. Adjoining Craftsman-themed houses shall not have the same type of veneer. 3. All garage doors shall have decorative windows that match the theme of the corresponding house. For Revision #1, the applicant has prepared a new set of plans (for the Spanish Colonial theme only) showing the revisions as directed. Staff conducted a side -by -side comparison of the original and revised plans and has concluded that the applicant has completed the revisions as discussed at the Design Review Committee meeting on January 28, 2014. The applicant has made the following revisions (staff DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DR2013-00743 — KB HOME March 3, 2014 Page 2 will provide a set of both the original and revised plans and show the changes that were made to the Committee during the meeting): 1. The majority of the windows that are located beneath a gable roof on all elevations have been revised so that the horizontal edge at the top of each window has been changed to an arc. 2. At windows there were proposed to be recessed into the building wall, then the horizontal soffit above the window now has been changed to an arched soffit. 3. At some of the windows that are located beneath a gable roof on all elevations, the top edge of the rectangular foam trim has been changed to include a curvilinear/arced top edge. 4. Where there were rectangular shutters at the above -noted windows, the shutters now have an arced top edge that 'reflects' the adjoining window. 5. At garages that are located beneath a gable roof, the top edge of the rectangular foam trim has been changed to include a curvilinear/arced top edge, or, if recessed, the top edge of the soffit is now arched. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved with the above -noted revisions incorporated by the applicant and those recommended by staff and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The project as approved as presented with the direction of the Committee to add arches to the front entryway at the front elevations of Plans 1 and U. Members Present: Fletcher, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA cR NCHO MARCH 4, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. UCAMON Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00743 - KB HOME - A review of a proposal for 76 single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of East Avenue about 150 feet north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APNs: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122, Variance DRC2009-00020, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00224. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA MARCH 4, 2014 �Ho CUCAMONGA III. 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. IV. 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, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on February 20, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2of2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith March 4, 2014 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00743 - KB HOME: - A review of a proposal for 76 single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of East Avenue about 150 feet north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APNs: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122, Variance DRC2009-00020, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00224. Background: The proposed project was reviewed by the Committee on January 28, 2014. The Committee generally accepted the proposal as submitted with some exceptions. The Committee directed the applicant to do the following and submit the proposal for a follow-up review prior to forwarding the application to the Planning Commission for review (Exhibit A): Revise the Spanish Colonial-themed elevations so that they incorporated more features that are characteristic of Spanish Colonial architecture. The features that were requested include arched and/or recessed windows, shutters with curved top edges that match the corresponding arched window, and arched trim above the garage doors; 2. Use stackstone veneer comprised of blocks that have a vertical dimension greater than originally proposed so that each stack is visually `thicker'; 3. Vary the type of rock veneers on the Craftsman-themed elevations. The applicant proposed a stackstone veneer for all houses that had the Craftsman theme. The Committee wanted the houses to have a stone veneer constructed of either fieldstone, river rock, brick, or stackstone veneer; and 4. Add decorative windows on the garage doors. Staff Comments: The applicant agreed to complete the revisions as directed by the Committee. With the exception of Revision #1 as listed above, the revisions can be included as conditions of approval and verified during review of the construction plans by Staff during plan check. Those conditions of approval will read as follows: The minimum vertical dimension of each stack of stackstone rows/blocks shall be 4 inches. 2. The rock veneers on the Craftsman themed elevations shall be varied so that the houses with this theme will have either fieldstone, river rock, brick, or stackstone veneer. The ratio of the veneers that are applied shall be equal throughout the subdivision, i.e. no particular veneer that is used shall be the dominant veneer. Adjoining Crafts man-themed houses shall not have the same type of veneer. 3. All garage doors shall have decorative windows that match the theme of the corresponding house. For Revision #1, the applicant has prepared a new set of plans (for the Spanish Colonial theme only) showing the revisions as directed. Staff conducted a side -by -side comparison of the original and revised plans and has concluded that the applicant has completed the revisions as discussed at the Design Review Committee meeting on January 28, 2014. The applicant has made the following revisions (staff DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DR2013-00743 — KB HOME March 3, 2014 Page 2 will provide a set of both the original and revised plans and show the changes that were made to the Committee during the meeting): 1. The majority of the windows that are located beneath a gable roof on all elevations have been revised so that the horizontal edge at the top of each window has been changed to an arc. 2. At windows there were proposed to be recessed into the building wall, then the horizontal soffit above the window now has been changed to an arched soffit. 3. At some of the windows that are located beneath a gable roof on all elevations, the top edge of the rectangular foam trim has been changed to include a curvilinear/arced top edge. 4. Where there were rectangular shutters at the above -noted windows, the shutters now have an arced top edge that 'reflects' the adjoining window. 5. At garages that are located beneath a gable roof, the top edge of the rectangular foam trim has been changed to include a curvilinear/arced top edge, or, if recessed, the top edge of the soffit is now arched. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved with the above -noted revisions incorporated by the applicant and those recommended by staff and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. _ Mike Smith January 28, 2014 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00743 - KB HOME - A review of a proposal for 76 single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etlwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of East Avenue, about 150 feet north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APN: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122, Variance 2009-00020, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00224. On November 9, 2011. a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122. The Callfomle 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. Background: A tentative tract map for the purpose of subdividing the property into seventy-six (76) lots for single-family residential development, filed by Chaffey Joint Union High School District, was approved for this project site by the Planning Commission on November 9, 2011 (Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122). To date, the final map has not been recorded. The property has since been sold, to KB Home for the development/construction of the homes. Site Characteristics: The project site is a vacant, rectangular -shaped property with an area of approximately 2.4 million square feet (53 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 2,500 feet (east to west) by approximately 940 feet (north to south). The area of the lots that will comprise the above -noted subdivision range between 21,780 square feet to 36,890 square feet (the minimum lot area is 20,000 square feet).; The minimum average lot area is 25,230 square feet (the. minimum average lot area is 25,000 square feet). The depth of each lot will be at least 200 feed and the width_ of each lot will meet the required 90-foot dimension. Ali lots will be conventional, i.e. rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. To the north and west of the project site, are single-family residences. To the south, is a vacant parcel owned by Caltrans and used by the San Bemardino County Flood Control District for access to their facilities further to the east. Beyond this parcel is the Foothill Freeway (SR-210). The properties to the east are vacant. The zoning of the property and all the surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. General: The applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot of the above -noted subdivision for a total of seventy-six (76) single-family residences. The floor areas of the houses will range between 3,381 square feet (Plan 1) to 4,506 square feet (Plan 4). Thirty-eight (38) of the houses will be one-story, while the houses on the remainder of the lots will be two-story. This equates to 50 percent of the lots having single -story houses. This mix of one- and two-story homes is consistent with. the policy adopted by the Planning Commission requiring that 25 percent (minimum) of the proposed houses be single -story. The garages of sixty-four (64) of the houses (80.6 percent of the total number of proposed houses) will be setback from the front part of the house or will not face towards the street, i.e., they are "side entry' garages. This will comply with Section 5.42.606 of the Etlwande Specific Plan which requires that 50 percent of the garages be oriented or situated in a manner that minimizes its visual presence (as seen from the street). The houses on all comer lots (Lots 1, 17, 20 through 23, 28, 29, 40, 41, 52, 53, 64, 65, and 76) will be single -story as required per Section 5.42.608 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. EXHIBIT A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00743 — KB HOME January 28, 2014 Page 2 The architecture of each house will be consistent with the general design requirements outlined in Section 6.41600 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant proposes four (4) types of architectural themes (elevations) — Spanish, Colonial, Cottage, and Farmhouse. Each house will incorporate a variety of materials to varying degrees. Depending on the theme, the Colonial, Cottage, and Farmhouse will have a combination of stone veneer, board and batt siding, lap siding, and stucco finish. Because of the nature of the theme, the Spanish elevation will be exclusively finished with stucco. The roofing will be either flat or barrel concrete tile. Each house will have an articulated footprint/floor plan and profile. The applicant proposes four (4) distinct footprints — Plans 1, 2, 2x, 3, and 4 — and reverse footprints of each for a total of ten (10) footprints. Plans 1, 2, and 2x will be one-story while the others will be two-story. The number of available footprints will comply with Figure 5-45 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Because the footprints and profiles of each house differ, them will be a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. Each house will have a front entrance comprised of either an enclosed courtyard or a covered porch.. Potential homeowners have the option of a casita attached to the house (Plan 2x). Depending on the theme, there will also be details such as wood brockets/rafters tails at the roof eaves, decorative trim and shutters around the windows, wrought Iron accent features, corbels, molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots, wood shingle siding, and decorative garage doors. Chimneys are not proposed. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Mafor Issues: The following broad design Issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this projea 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. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Deslan Review Committee Action: Staff presented a brief overview and background of the project and summarized the design characteristics of the proposed houses. The Committee generally accepted the proposal as submitted with some exceptions. The Committee directed the applicant to revise the Spanish Colonial thorned elevations so that they incorporated more features that are characteristic of Spanish Colonial architecture. The features that were requested include arched and/or recessed windows, shutters with cured top edges that match the corresponding arched window, and arched trim above the garage doors. The Committee requested that the stackstone veneer be comprised of blocks that were thicker, i.e. the vertical dimension of each stack should be Increased. Also, the Committee requested that the applicant vary the type of rock veneers on the Craftsman themed elevations. The applicant proposed a DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00743 — KS HOME January 28, 2014 Page 3 stackstone veneer for all houses that had the Craftsman theme. The Committee wanted the houses to have a stone veneer constructed of either fieldstone, river rock, brick, or stackstone veneer. The applicant was directed to revise the proposal as noted and submit the proposal for a follow-up review by the Committee prior to forwarding the application to the Planning Commission for review. Lastly, the Committee directed the applicant to add decorative windows on the garage doors. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner. Mike Smith THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA CU oNcn FEBRUARY 18, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER ACTION Roll Call 7.00 p.m. Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett — Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz 11 II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00508 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING -A A. Approved as request to develop a 126-room hotel and for a site plan review for a presented. 3,000 square foot office pad within the Haven Overlay Zoning District, located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Haven Avenue - APN: 0210-081-13 Related file: Tentative Parcel Map 19474. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA FEBRUARY 18, 2014 CHO UCAMONOA III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III None. 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. IV. ADJOURNMENT III 7:32 p.m. 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. 2 of 2 7:00 p.m. Steve Fowler February 18, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00508 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING - A request to develop a 126-room hotel and for a site plan review for a 3,000 square foot office. pad within the Haven Overlay Zoning District, located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Haven Avenue - APN: 0210-081-13. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map 19474. Design Parameters: The 2.97-acre project site is located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street; to the east is an existing warehouse building; to the south is a multi -building office park; to the west, across Haven Avenue, is the Universal Technical Institute, a technical school for automotive repair; and to the north, across 6th Street, are office buildings. The project site is vacant with no existing trees or structures. No demolition or removal of significant vegetation or trees will be required. The parcel is relatively flat, sloping towards the south. The project is within the Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District which requires exemplary, sophisticated urban office architecture. Site planning should promote an environment utilizing plazas, courtyards, and other pedestrian amenities. The project was previously reviewed by the Committee on November 5, 2013. At that meeting the following issues were discussed: Major Issues (November 5, 2013, Meeting): 1. Overall, staff compliments the architectural design of the hotel. Since Haven Avenue is a gateway corridor, staff recommends the following enhancements be made in order to fulfill the requirement of two primary building materials and exemplary architecture: • Provide a different primary building material on the main tower and end towers. The lack of glass, metal, and/ or rich materials (granite, travertine, etc.) gives the building a more residential type feel rather than a sophisticated urban style that is required by the Haven Overlay Zoning District. The hotel needs to be re -designed to meet this requirement in a manner that provides sophisticated, urban architecture that is well thought out. Token showings or tacked -on primary materials in limited quantities shall be avoided. 2. As noted above, both sophisticated architecture and exemplary site planning is required in the Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District. Because of Haven Avenue being designated as a Special Boulevard and the high visibility of the corner, a plaza should be utilized to enhance the visual interest. Some of the following site features maybe utilized to upgrade the corner with the placement of art or water feature, lighted bollards, or the use of ground uplighting, and terraced landscaped planters. Secondary Issues (November 5, 2013, Meeting): 1. Provide berming along 6th Street and along Haven Avenue in the landscape areas adjacent to the street to minimize the view of the parking area. 2. The colored concrete entry treatment off both driveways should also be utilized to form the crosswalks. 3. The monument sign should be redesigned to provide more visual interest at the corner of 6th Street and Haven Avenue. It should be incorporated into a plaza area. Policy Issues (November 5, 2013, Meeting): The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00508 — CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING February 18, 2014 Page 2 All light fixtures shall have glare shields in order to confine the area of illumination within the project site. 2. All outdoor furniture (tables, benches, trash receptacles, bollards, etc.) shall be uniform. 3. All signs shall meet the City's Sign Ordinance requirements. Overall, the Committee liked the design and layout of the project. The Committee agreed that the design needed additional treatment to blend with the other architecture along the Haven Overlay Zoning District. The following changes were proposed and agreed upon during the November 5, 2013, meeting: Major Issues: The applicant introduced a new material to address Major Issue Number 1 by adding a material called Lexan to the front of the building near the entrance. The material is white in color and can be backlit to change colors at night. The Committee was interested in the material, but asked that the applicant work with staff to find the appropriate location for the material on the building. The Committee also wanted to see what kind of lighting would be utilized on the building and what kind of effect it would have on the elevations. The applicant introduced a more pedestrian friendly corner element at the corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street to address Major Issue Number 2. The new design introduced a monument sign with terraced landscaping and a meandering sidewalk behind the signs. The Committee gave direction that the applicant should remove the sign and look at a plaza element or lush landscaping to provide a focal point and to draw attention to the hotel. Secondary Issues: The applicant agreed to add berming in the landscape areas adjacent to the streets to reduce the view of the parking areas, but said it would be limited because of the types of Best Management Practices they are utilizing for water quality purposes. The applicant proposed expanding the colored concrete at the main entry off 6th Street to expand into the drop-off area. The applicant also added the colored concrete at the east parking lot entrance and the crosswalks on -site. The Committee requested that the applicant work with staff to verify that the issues were addressed and to review the modifications and bring the project back to the Committee. Staff has worked with the applicant and changes have been made to the materials that are being utilized on the exterior of the building. The applicant has decided not to use the Lexan on the building, but instead replace it with porcelain tile. This new material will be utilized as a base at the bottom of the hotel. The two colors of the new porcelain material are Lava and Terra. These colors compliment the existing color scheme used by the applicant. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00508 — CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING February 18, 2014 Page 3 The color "War Eagle" used on the tower at the entrance of the building has been increased on the other towers at the corners of the building. On the front towers, the color has been increased to cover the first two floors and on the back side of the building the color has now been utilized on the major face of those tower elements. The applicant has also introduced a conceptual building design for the pad building, on the second parcel, that matches the architectural style of the hotel which has been included for review. This was done to illustrate how this building would visually block parts of the west side of the hotel building. Visibility loss would be minimal since there is more than a 60-foot separation between the two buildings. The applicant also included a pedestrian friendly redesign of the corner element at 6th Street and Haven Avenue. The redesign included terraced landscaping and sidewalks behind a street identification sign. The lush landscaping is in keeping with the landscaping around the site. The hotel will still be utilizing the following exterior materials: anodized aluminum, smooth stucco, glass, and E.I.F.S (Exterior Insulation Finishing System.) The design includes a porte cochere with a metal canopy, outdoor fireplace, and trellis feature at the pool area and decorative concrete at two of the three entry points. The hotel design has a tower element on the north side of the building that is accented by a metal canopy to draw customers to the entrance. The design is also utilizing aluminum reveals to provide horizontal lines to give the structure visual interest. 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. Overall, staff compliments the architectural design of the hotel. Since Haven Avenue is a gateway corridor, staff still has some concerns with the durability of the proposed materials and requests that the applicant provide evidence that the material will endure the elements since this is a highly visible corner within the Haven Avenue corridor. 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. None at this time. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee review the project in and the proposed materials and provide input and direction as needed. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee approved the project as presented. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Steve Fowler THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA FEBRUARY 18, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II. 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 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. A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00508 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING - A request to develop a 126-room hotel and for a site plan review for a 3,000 square foot office pad within the Haven Overlay Zoning District, located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Haven Avenue - APN: 0210-081-13 Related file: Tentative Parcel Map 19474. 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA FEBRUARY 18, 2014 CHO UUMONM III. 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. IV. 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on February 6, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 7:00 p.m. Steve Fowler February 18, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00508 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING - A request to develop a 126-room hotel and for a site plan review for a 3,000 square foot office pad within the Haven Overlay Zoning District, located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Haven Avenue - APN: 0210-081-13. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map 19474. Design Parameters: The 2.97-acre project site is located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street; to the east is an existing warehouse building; to the south is a multi -building office park; to the west, across Haven Avenue, is the Universal Technical Institute, a technical school for automotive repair; and to the north, across 6th Street, are office buildings. The project site is vacant with no existing trees or structures. No demolition or removal of significant vegetation or trees will be required. The parcel is relatively flat, sloping towards the south. The project is within the Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District which requires exemplary, sophisticated urban office architecture. Site planning should promote an environment utilizing plazas, courtyards, and other pedestrian amenities. The project was previously reviewed by the Committee on November 5, 2013. At that meeting the following issues were discussed: Major Issues (November 5, 2013, Meetin Overall, staff compliments the architectural design of the hotel. Since Haven Avenue is a gateway corridor, staff recommends the following enhancements be made in order to fulfill the requirement of two primary building materials and exemplary architecture: Provide a different primary building material on the main tower and end towers. The lack of glass, metal, and/ or rich materials (granite, travertine, etc.) gives the building a more residential type feel rather than a sophisticated urban style that is required by the Haven Overlay Zoning District. The hotel needs to be re -designed to meet this requirement in a manner that provides sophisticated, urban architecture that is well thought out. Token showings or tacked -on primary materials in limited quantities shall be avoided. 2. As noted above, both sophisticated architecture and exemplary site planning is required in the Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District. Because of Haven Avenue being designated as a Special Boulevard and the high visibility of the corner, a plaza should be utilized to enhance the visual interest. Some of the following site features maybe utilized to upgrade the corner with the placement of art or water feature, lighted bollards, or the use of ground uplighting, and terraced landscaped planters. Secondary Issues (November 5, 2013, Meeting): Provide berming along 6th Street and along Haven Avenue in the landscape areas adjacent to the street to minimize the view of the parking area. 2. The colored concrete entry treatment off both driveways should also be utilized to form the crosswalks. 3. The monument sign should be redesigned to provide more visual interest at the corner of 6th Street and Haven Avenue. It should be incorporated into a plaza area. Policy Issues (November 5, 2013, Meeting): The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2013-00508 — CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING February 18, 2014 Page 2 All light fixtures shall have glare shields in order to confine the area of illumination within the project site. 2. All outdoor furniture (tables, benches, trash receptacles, bollards, etc.) shall be uniform. 3. All signs shall meet the City's Sign Ordinance requirements. Overall, the Committee liked the design and layout of the project. The Committee agreed that the design needed additional treatment to blend with the other architecture along the Haven Overlay Zoning District. The following changes were proposed and agreed upon during the November 5, 2013, meeting: Major Issues: The applicant introduced a new material to address Major Issue Number 1 by adding a material called Lexan to the front of the building near the entrance. The material is white in color and can be backlit to change colors at night. The Committee was interested in the material, but asked that the applicant work with staff to find the appropriate location for the material on the building. The Committee also wanted to see what kind of lighting would be utilized on the building and what kind of effect it would have on the elevations. The applicant introduced a more pedestrian friendly corner element at the corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street to address Major Issue Number 2. The new design introduced a monument sign with terraced landscaping and a meandering sidewalk behind the signs. The Committee gave direction that the applicant should remove the sign and look at a plaza element or lush landscaping to provide a focal point and to draw attention to the hotel. Secondary Issues: The applicant agreed to add berming in the landscape areas adjacent to the streets to reduce the view of the parking areas, but said it would be limited because of the types of Best Management Practices they are utilizing for water quality purposes. The applicant proposed expanding the colored concrete at the main entry off 6th Street to expand into the drop-off area. The applicant also added the colored concrete at the east parking lot entrance and the crosswalks on -site. The Committee requested that the applicant work with staff to verify that the issues were addressed and to review the modifications and bring the project back to the Committee. Staff has worked with the applicant and changes have been made to the materials that are being utilized on the exterior of the building. The applicant has decided not to use the Lexan on the building, but instead replace it with porcelain tile. This new material will be utilized as a base at the bottom of the hotel. The two colors of the new porcelain material are Lava and Terra. These colors compliment the existing color scheme used by the applicant. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2013-00508 — CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING February 18, 2014 Page 3 The color "War Eagle" used on the tower at the entrance of the building has been increased on the other towers at the corners of the building. On the front towers, the color has been increased to cover the first two floors and on the back side of the building the color has now been utilized on the major face of those tower elements. The applicant has also introduced a conceptual building design for the pad building, on the second parcel, that matches the architectural style of the hotel which has been included for review. This was done to illustrate how this building would visually block parts of the west side of the hotel building. Visibility loss would be minimal since there is more than a 60-foot separation between the two buildings. The applicant also included a pedestrian friendly redesign of the corner element at 6th Street and Haven Avenue. The redesign included terraced landscaping and sidewalks behind a street identification sign. The lush landscaping is in keeping with the landscaping around the site. The hotel will still be utilizing the following exterior materials: anodized aluminum, smooth stucco, glass, and E.I.F.S (Exterior Insulation Finishing System.) The design includes a porte cochere with a metal canopy, outdoor fireplace, and trellis feature at the pool area and decorative concrete at two of the three entry points. The hotel design has a tower element on the north side of the building that is accented by a metal canopy to draw customers to the entrance. The design is also utilizing aluminum reveals to provide horizontal lines to give the structure visual interest. 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. Overall, staff compliments the architectural design of the hotel. Since Haven Avenue is a gateway corridor, staff still has some concerns with the durability of the proposed materials and requests that the applicant provide evidence that the material will endure the elements since this is a highly visible corner within the Haven Avenue corridor. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 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. None at this time. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee review the project in and the proposed materials and provide input and direction as needed. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Steve Fowler Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA FEBRUARY 4, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Conference Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca _ Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger _ Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 22, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ANCHO CUCAMONGA JANUARY 28, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III 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 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. A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00743 - KB HOME - A review of a proposal for 76 single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of East Avenue, about 150 feet north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APN: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122, Variance 2009-00020, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00224. On November 9, 2011, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no 1 of 2 ACTION 7:00 p.m. A. Generally accepted with corrections to come back for a follow-up review by the Committee. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA NCHo JANUARY 28, 2014 CUCAMONOA further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. 11 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 2 of 2 None. 7:35 p.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith January 28, 2014 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00743 - KB HOME - A review of a proposal for 76 single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of East Avenue, about 150 feet north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APN: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122, Variance 2009-00020, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00224. On November 9, 2011, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122. 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. Background: A tentative tract map for the purpose of subdividing the property into seventy-six (76) lots for single-family residential development, filed by Chaffey Joint Union High School District, was approved for this project site by the Planning Commission on November 9, 2011 (Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122). To date, the final map has not been recorded. The property has since been sold to KB Home for the development/construction of the homes. Site Characteristics: The project site is a vacant, rectangular -shaped property with an area of approximately 2.4 million square feet (53 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 2,500 feet (east to west) by approximately 940 feet (north to south). The area of the lots that will comprise the above -noted subdivision range between 21,780 square feet to 36,890 square feet (the minimum lot area is 20,000 square feet). The minimum average lot area is 25,230 square feet (the minimum average lot area is 25,000 square feet). The depth of each lot will be at least 200 feet, and the width of each lot will meet the required 90-foot dimension. All lots will be conventional, i.e. rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. To the north and west of the project site, are single-family residences. To the south, is a vacant parcel owned by Caltrans and used by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District for access to their facilities further to the east. Beyond this parcel is the Foothill Freeway (SR-210). The properties to the east are vacant. The zoning of the property and all the surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. General: The applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot of the above -noted subdivision for a total of seventy-six (76) single-family residences. The floor areas of the houses will range between 3,381 square feet (Plan 1) to 4,506 square feet (Plan 4). Thirty-eight (38) of the houses will be one-story, while the houses on the remainder of the lots will be two-story. This equates to 50 percent of the lots having single -story houses. This mix of one- and two-story homes is consistent with the policy adopted by the Planning Commission requiring that 25 percent (minimum) of the proposed houses be single -story. The garages of sixty-four (64) of the houses (60.6 percent of the total number of proposed houses) will be setback from the front part of the house or will not face towards the street, i.e., they are "side entry" garages. This will comply with Section 5.42.606 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan which requires that 50 percent of the garages be oriented or situated in a manner that minimizes its visual presence (as seen from the street). The houses on all corner lots (Lots 1, 17, 20 through 23, 28, 29, 40, 41, 52, 53, 64, 65, and 76) will be single -story as required per Section 5.42.608 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00743 — KB HOME January 28, 2014 Page 2 The architecture of each house will be consistent with the general design requirements outlined in Section 5.42.600 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant proposes four (4) types of architectural themes (elevations) — Spanish, Colonial, Cottage, and Farmhouse. Each house will incorporate a variety of materials to varying degrees. Depending on the theme, the Colonial, Cottage, and Farmhouse will have a combination of stone veneer, board and batt siding, lap siding, and stucco finish. Because of the nature of the theme, the Spanish elevation will be exclusively finished with stucco. The roofing will be either flat or barrel concrete tile. Each house will have an articulated footprint/floor plan and profile. The applicant proposes four (4) distinct footprints — Plans 1, 2, 2x, 3, and 4 — and reverse footprints of each for a total of ten (10) footprints. Plans 1, 2, and 2x will be one-story while the others will be two-story. The number of available footprints will comply with Figure 5-45 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Because the footprints and profiles of each house differ, there will be a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. Each house will have a front entrance comprised of either an enclosed courtyard or a covered porch. Potential homeowners have the option of a casita attached to the house (Plan 2x). Depending on the theme, there will also be details such as wood brackets/rafters tails at the roof eaves, decorative trim and shutters around the windows, wrought iron accent features, corbels, molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots, wood shingle siding, and decorative garage doors. Chimneys are not 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 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. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff presented a brief overview and background of the project and summarized the design characteristics of the proposed houses. The Committee generally accepted the proposal as submitted with some exceptions. The Committee directed the applicant to revise the Spanish Colonial themed elevations so that they incorporated more features that are characteristic of Spanish Colonial architecture. The features that were requested include arched and/or recessed windows, shutters with curved top edges that match the corresponding arched window, and arched trim above the garage doors. The Committee requested that the stackstone veneer be comprised of blocks that were thicker, i.e. the vertical dimension of each stack should be increased. Also, the Committee requested that the applicant vary the type of rock veneers on the Craftsman themed elevations. The applicant proposed a DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00743 — KB HOME January 28, 2014 Page 3 stackstone veneer for all houses that had the Craftsman theme. The Committee wanted the houses to have a stone veneer constructed of either fieldstone, river rock, brick, or stackstone veneer. The applicant was directed to revise the proposal as noted and submit the proposal for a follow-up review by the Committee prior to forwarding the application to the Planning Commission for review. Lastly, the Committee directed the applicant to add decorative windows on the garage doors. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA JANUARY 28, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz _ II. 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 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. A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00743 - KB HOME - A review of a proposal for 76 single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of East Avenue, about 150 feet north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APN: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122, Variance 2009-00020, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00224. On November 9, 2011, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no 1 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA jZANcxo JANUARY 28, 2014 CUCAMONCA further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. 11 III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III 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. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT III 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. 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 16, 2014, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 2 of 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mike Smith January 28, 2014 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00743 - KB HOME - A review of a proposal for 76 single-family residences in conjunction with a previously approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of East Avenue, about 150 feet north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APN: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122, Variance 2009-00020, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00224. On November 9, 2011, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122. 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. Background: A tentative tract map for the purpose of subdividing the property into seventy-six (76) lots for single-family residential development, filed by Chaffey Joint Union High School District, was approved for this project site by the Planning Commission on November 9, 2011 (Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122). To date, the final map has not been recorded. The property has since been sold to KB Home for the development/construction of the homes. Site Characteristics: The project site is a vacant, rectangular -shaped property with an area of approximately 2.4 million square feet (53 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 2,500 feet (east to west) by approximately 940 feet (north to south). The area of the lots that will comprise the above -noted subdivision range between 21,780 square feet to 36,890 square feet (the minimum lot area is 20,000 square feet). The minimum average lot area is 25,230 square feet (the minimum average lot area is 25,000 square feet). The depth of each lot will be at least 200 feet, and the width of each lot will meet the required 90-foot dimension. All lots will be conventional, i.e. rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. To the north and west of the project site, are single-family residences. To the south, is a vacant parcel owned by Caltrans and used by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District for access to their facilities further to the east. Beyond this parcel is the Foothill Freeway (SR-210). The properties to the east are vacant. The zoning of the property and all the surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. General: The applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot of the above -noted subdivision for a total of seventy-six (76) single-family residences. The floor areas of the houses will range between 3,381 square feet (Plan 1) to 4,506 square feet (Plan 4). Thirty-eight (38) of the houses will be one-story, while the houses on the remainder of the lots will be two-story. This equates to 50 percent of the lots having single -story houses. This mix of one- and two-story homes is consistent with the policy adopted by the Planning Commission requiring that 25 percent (minimum) of the proposed houses be single -story. The garages of sixty-four (64) of the houses (60.6 percent of the total number of proposed houses) will be setback from the front part of the house or will not face towards the street, i.e., they are "side entry" garages. This will comply with Section 5.42.606 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan which requires that 50 percent of the garages be oriented or situated in a manner that minimizes its visual presence (as seen from the street). The houses on all corner lots (Lots 1, 17, 20 through 23, 28, 29, 40, 41, 52, 53, 64, 65, and 76) will be single -story as required per Section 5.42.608, of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DRC2013-00743 — KB HOME January 28, 2014 Page 2 The architecture of each house will be consistent with the general design requirements outlined in Section 5.42.600 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant proposes four (4) types of architectural themes (elevations) — Spanish, Colonial, Cottage, and Farmhouse. Each house will incorporate a variety of materials to varying degrees. Depending on the theme, the Colonial, Cottage, and Farmhouse will have a combination of stone veneer, board and batt siding, lap siding, and stucco finish. Because of the nature of the theme, the Spanish elevation will be exclusively finished with stucco. The roofing will be either flat or barrel concrete tile. Each house will have an articulated footprint/floor plan and profile. The applicant proposes four (4) distinct footprints — Plans 1, 2, 2x, 3, and 4 — and reverse footprints of each for a total of ten (10) footprints. Plans 1, 2, and 2x will be one-story while the others will be two-story. The number of available footprints will comply with Figure 5-45 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Because the footprints and profiles of each house differ, there will be a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. Each house will have a front entrance comprised of either an enclosed courtyard or a covered porch. Potential homeowners have the option of a casita attached to the house (Plan 2x). Depending on the theme, there will also be details such as wood brackets/rafters tails at the roof eaves, decorative trim and shutters around the windows, wrought iron accent features, corbels, molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots, wood shingle siding, and decorative garage doors. Chimneys are not 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 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. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RANCHO CU AMONGA JANUARY 14, 2014 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher _ Francisco Oaxaca Candyce Burnett _ Donald Granger Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Frances Howdyshell_ Lou Munoz II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III MEETING CANCELLED NO ITEMS SUBMITTED 1, Gail Elwood, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December 18, 2013, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 1 of 1