Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001/06/19 - Agenda PacketDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES • TUESDAY JUNE 19, 2001 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Larry McNiel Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Larry Henderson John Mannerino The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. NO ITEMS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. • 7:00 p.m. (Brent) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (DRCCUP99-63) -HALL AND FOREMAN - A request to construct a 135,881 square foot retail store with interiorfast food restaurant, an approximately 15,263 square foot outdoor garden center as well as 18,000 square feet of future in-line retail shops on 17.64 acres of land and to modify the existing master plan for Conditional Use Permit 95-25 to include these facilities in the Medium Residential District (8 to 14 dwelling units per acre) and the Community Commercial District (Subarea 2) located on the west side of Vineyard Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard -APN: 207-211-05, 06, 12 - 15, 36, 38, and 40. Related files: GPA 99-06, FBSPA 99-03, DDA 99-06, TPM 15427. 7:40 p.m. (Warren) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC 01-03 - PARAGON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A request to construct a 189,314 square foot warehouse building on 8.08 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 5), located at 9000 Hermosa Avenue-APN: 209-261-09, 30. 8:00 p.m. (Debra) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DRC2001-00231)-HOGLE-IRELAND,INC.-The review of detailed site plan and building elevations for McDonald's Restaurant on 1.44-acres of land within the previously approved Terra Vista Commons Master Plan located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard west of Milliken Avenue in the Mixed Use (MFC) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan -APN: 107-421-98 and 227-771-53. Related file: Conditional Use Permit 99-25. DRC AGENDA June 19, 2001 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT r1 U • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Brent Le Count June 19, 2001 CIVVIRVIVIVICIVIML IIVIrMVI RCr VRI /11VV IiVIV VIIIVIV/1L VJG rCRlVlll IVRVVVr~~-VJI- HALL AND FOREMAN - A request to construct a 135,881 square foot retail store with interior fast food restaurant, an approximately 15,263 square foot outdoor garden center as well as 18,000 square feet of future in-line retail shops on 17.64 acres of land and to modify the existing master plan for Conditional Use Permit 95-25 to include these facilities in the Medium Residential District (8-to 14 dwelling units per acre) and the Community Commercial District (Subarea 2) located on the west side of Vineyard Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 207-211-05, 06, 12 - 15, 36, 38, and 40. Related files: GPA 99-06, FBSPA 99-03, DDA 99-06, TPM 15427. Background: The project has been to several design review meetings to resolve site planning issues. The revised project locates the building along the west of the site facing Vineyard Avenue. The loading and auto service uses have been removed from the southern area of the building to reduce impacts upon the existing condominiums and apartments to the south. The Committee was in favor of the revised layout subject to the following revisions: Realign the drive aisle along the south property line so that there is room for a deep planter along the south property line to provide a buffer for the Orchard Meadows Condominiums to the south. There is now a large, nearly 80-foot deep, landscaped area at the southwest comer of the site. This area will have to be heavily landscaped to enhance the buffering affect and to ensure that the operator doesn't use the area for staging of outdoor merchandise or outdoor sales. • 2. Truck circulation/loading shall not utilize the driveway or drive aisle along the south of the site. This appears to be the case. Signs could be required at the Vineyard Avenue driveways precluding truck access. Further, Vineyard Avenue could be striped to prohibit left tum movement into center. However, it would be difficult to enforce access restrictions. 3. Provide substantial tree planting to define the main driveway entrance off of Vineyard Avenue. This will likely require enlarging the planters on either side of the driveway. An attempt has been made towards this end. Most of the Palm trees are shown planted in a sidewalk area. There maybe more widening necessary for these planters. Ifthatcannotbe accomplished, triangular shaped planters can be used to accommodate trees without affecting parking layout. 4. Utilize the traditional single column trellis feature established by the Conditional Use Permit 95-25 master plan design throughout the project and specifically along the north side of the main driveway entrance off of Foothill Boulevard to provide a focal element for those entering the site. This does not appear to have been done. Provide a pergola along the pedestrian pathway linking the bus stop on Vineyard Avenue with the main store entrance. There is a pathway shown but no evidence of a pergola covering it. 6. Utilize the star pattern hardscape treatment established by the Conditional Use Permit 95-25 master plan design at all key drive aisle intersections. Utilize decorative paving throughout, especially in front of the main store entry. The starpattem has been used. The entire area • in front of the store entrance should have decorative paving. DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 June 19, 2001 Page 2 There are several "tight" areas in the plan including the narrow planter depth for planters along the west side of the main north south drive aisle. Provide substantial planter depth throughout. There are still several tight areas, especially along the main north-south drive aisle where some planters have as little as 1-foot of depth. These planter islands should have a substantial depth consistent with other shopping centers in the community. 8. Suggest eliminating the Taco Bell drive-thru shown north of the store and replace with parking. This will help "loosen" the Site Plan and allow increased room for landscaping elsewhere. This has been completed. However, the site is approximately 69 parking spaces short because the garden center area was not counted in the overall parking calculations (as was done with Target, Home Depot and Lowe's, the City requires the garden center to be parked at the same ratio as the main store, 5 spaces per 1000 square feet). 9. Provide a focal element at the northeast corner of the building to enhance the entry experience on the Foothill Boulevard driveway. The focal element is proposed to be comprised of a curved parapet, a trellis, and a wall sign. These are not bad focal elements per se but by themselves fall short of fhe desired affect. The curved parapet wall conveys a Hollywood set appearance. Suggest the same level of amhitectural treatment as at the entry or adjacent to the garden center (the tower feature). • 10. Provide an interim screening solution for the truck loading area at the northwest corner of the store given that the in-line shops shown here are planned to be developed at a later phase. There appears to be a screen wall along the east side of the loading area on the elevations but nothing is shown on the Site Plan. Suggest a separate drawing of just the loading area showing the interim screening solution. Also suggest a large member trellis extending over the entire loading area similar to the Albertson's on fhe north side of Foothill Boulevard. 11. Move the building as far west as possible, utilizing the flood channel right-of-way as anon- buildable easement if possible. The building appears to be relocated to the west as far as possible. 12. Parking and garden center lighting along the south side of the building will have to be sensitively designed to avoid casting glare on the residences to the south. This can be a condition of approval. 13. Align the eastern-most north to south drive aisle with the drive aisle associated with the Conditional Use Permit 95-25 master plan to the north. This has not been done. The applicant also presented some architectural vignettes at the May 15th meeting, which the Committee had the following comments: 1. The design has substantial areas of flat stucco walls. Significantly restudy the design to provide much more visual interest and building articulation. There are still large, tlatareas of blank stucco walls, especially the north elevation facing Foothill Boulevard. Trellises are not • recommended as the primary solution to this problem. Substantial architectural features akin to the entry area and garden center area are necessary, especially in areas of visual prominence such as the north elevation. DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 • June 19, 2001 Page 3 2. Revise store entrance design to provide enhanced entry experience. Wrap the entry colonnade around to the north elevation. The entry colonnade does not wrap around to the north elevation. The entry colonnade has been expanded and there is now a roofed element over the entry instead of a simple curved parapet wall (such as on the north elevation). There are three vine covered, wall-mounted trellises on the east side of the entry with the actual entry doors on the north and south sides of the entry vestibule. Suggest another, more open solution to the entrance to make it more clearly defined and visually enticing. 3. The Committee is not in favor of the split faced block wainscoting and suggests use of more up scale material such as river rock veneer or the work. Colors and materials are not annotated on the revised plans. There is a texture that appears to be split-faced block shown for the building wainscoting. 4. Avoid faux columns or other tacked on design elements such as along the south wall near the southwest corner of the store. These features should relate to the building and have substantial pop-out dimension. There is extensive use of faux or tacked-on colonnades on the west and south elevations. The pop-out dimension for these features is not shown, they appear to be 6 inches fo a foot beyond the main building wall. 5. The design of the building should be sensitive to the Foothill Boulevard frontage. The vast • majority of the north elevation facing Foothill Boulevard consists of a bland stucco wall with split faced block wainscoting. Suggest emphasizing this elevation with the same level of architecture as is shown on the east elevation (entry). 6. There are several high quality design examples in the community such as the new Lowe's Home Improvement store at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Milliken Avenue. The revised design does include some features of the Lowe's building, especially in the garden center area and colonnades. At 135, 881 square feet of floor area, the building is similarin size to the Lowe's building and the site is equally visually prominent. While there is no reason to copy the design of Lowe's, there is also no reason to accept a lesser level of architectural design for this project than has already been established in the community. To refresh, the project significantly amends the previously approved master plan associated with Conditional Use Permit 95-25 (Rodriguez) byeliminating the anchortenantand in-line tenants along the south half of the master plan and replacing this with parking. Also associated with the application are a General Plan Amendment and a Development District Amendment to redesignate the land use for the site from Medium Residential to Community Commercial, and a Tentative Parcel Map. 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 blank walls with plant-on faux colonnades shown on the west and south elevations are • inconsistent with City design policy to provide 360-degree architectural treatment. These elevations should be significantly upgraded in appearance. Colonnades should have a substantial pop-out dimension from the main building wall. DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 • June 19, 2001 Page 4 2. Upgrade the architectural treatment of the north elevation facing Foothill Boulevard and the east elevation facing Vineyard Avenue. This can mean using more architectural features similar to the entry, the garden center, and the tower next to the garden center. There should be minimal areas of unarticulated blank stucco wall and trellises should be used only as an accent rather than the primary source of visual interest. The colonnade surrounding the garden center shall have more decorative features similar to the Lowe's garden center (see attached Lowe's plans). 3. Provide a substantial focal element at the northeast corner of the building aligned with the north-south driveway entrance off of Foothill Boulevard. Wrapping the colonnade as previously suggested and/or provision of a tower feature similar to the tower next to the garden center would be appropriate. Secondarv Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. The curved parapet at the northeast corner of the building shall have a substantial depth dimension (10 feet) to avoid a fin-like or Hollywood set-like appearance and match the entry on the east elevation. 2. Restudy the main entry to the building to be more clearly defined and visually enticing • 3. Incorporate the use of lighter, more traditional exterior building materials such as stucco, fieldstone, and the wainscoting per previous Design Review Committee direction. 4. Provide a traditional single column trellis feature establish by the Conditional Use Permit 95-25 master plan design throughout the project and specifically along the north side of the main driveway entrance off of Foothill Boulevard to provide a focal element for those entering the site. 5. Provide intensive use of climbing vines (with appropriate irrigation) to cover unarticulated building walls and freestanding walls. 6. Provide enhanced landscaping and berms along the Vineyard Avenue frontage including specimen sized trees, shrubs, and boulders. 7. Incorporate landscaping and pedestrian amenities along the front (east side) and Foothill Boulevard side (north side) of the building. Limit areas where paving juts directly up against the building walls. This could be accomplished by adding tree wells in strategic locations, seating areas with overhead shade structures, and water features to emphasize architecture. 8. Incorporate hedge planting in between columns for the garden center colonnade so that shrubs will grow to obscure the wrought iron and merchandise behind as much as possible. 9. Provide large member trellises along the outside of the garden center to draw the eye away from the merchandise stored inside. • 10. Provide substantial landscaping including trees, shrubs, and boulders in the large landscaped area at the southwest corner of the site to provide a dense buffer for residents to the south. This area shall not be used for container storage, even of a temporary duration. DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 • June 19, 2001 Page 5 11. Provide an actual pergola along the main east-west pedestrian pathway to foster a strong pedestrian connection between the building and Vineyard Avenue/bus stop. 12. Incorporate cart storage areas with landscape islands in the parking area instead of just using a parking space. Provide cart storage areas in the southwest corner area of the site. 13. Unless cart storage is to be handled inside the building, provide a cart corral along the front of the building with a decorative wall to completely conceal stored carts. 14. Align the eastern most north-south drive aisle with that approved for Conditional Use Permit 95-25 (Rodriguez). 15. Provide signs at the Vineyard Avenue driveway entrances prohibiting truck access, especially for the driveway at the southeast corner of the site. 16. Should be noted that this review entails Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Conceptual Elevations only. The Committee still needs to review a revised sight line/view impact study relative to the residences to the south, a Grading Plan, and a more detailed set of building elevations including color and material callouts, overall dimensions, shop elevations, and Floor Plan information. All plan view exhibits should be the same scale to aid in review for consistency. The site plan works well at 50-foot scale. 17. Provide a continuous sidewalk system along the main north-south spine to connect from • Wal-Mart to Foothill Boulevard. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All lighting, including parking lot light standards, wall-mounted lighting, garden center lighting, and any security lighting shall be designed to completely shield glare from surrounding residential development and public streets. This is particularly important relative to the condos and apartments south of the site and the Steven's home along Vineyard Avenue. 2. A bus shelterwill be required as a condition of approval. The design guidelines thatare now pending completion should include provisions for bus shelter design to be compatible with the adjacent buildings. 3. No outdoor storage, including container storage, shall be permitted. 4. No outdoor display of merchandise shall be permitted. The garden center shall not be considered outdoor display so long as no merchandise is stacked above the height of the surrounding colonnade walls. 5. The letter height for the main wall signs shall not exceed 5 feet consistent with other large retail operations. 6. During the lifetime of the business operation, the operator/owner shall replace any dead or • dying landscaping immediately. 7. The site is approximately 69 parking spaces deficient because the garden center was not included in the applicant's required parking calculations. The garden center shall count as floor area for parking calculations. Provide the necessary parking. DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 June 19, 2001 • Page 6 Parking lot light standards shall not exceed 15 feet overall (including pedestal). The elevations show very high light standards. 9. Provide metal gated access points along the block wall along the south side of the site to allow maintenance of the slope landscaping behind. The gates shall be designed to attenuate noise from the project relative to the existing residences to the south. 10. The perimeter block walls shall be decorative masonry with decorative cap. 11. Development of the in-line shops at the north end of the building and the pad at the southeast comer of the site will be subject to new Development Review or Conditional Use Permit applications. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised in light of the above comments, including provision of further detailed information, and brought back for further review. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Larry Henderson Staff Planner: Brent Le Count • The Committee requested that the project be revised in light of staffs comments with the additional comments listed below. The Committee also directed staff to work with the applicant to resolve design issues. The applicant agreed to restudy the design accordingly. The Committee disagreed with staff that some of the architectural features on the building have merit. The overall design should be restudied instead of only making adjustments to features already shown. The goal is to provide high quality architecture that will enhance the community and responded to the visual prominence of the site. Avoid a boxy, "warehouse" like appearance. 2. While Lowe's and other large retail buildings have been discussed as examples of high quality architectural design, it is not necessary to replicate the design of these buildings but instead to bring the overall architectural statement up to the same level of quality. 3. Incorporate various architectural forms, shapes, and massing to achieve a cohesive sense of design quality rather than tack minor features on to a box-like building. 4. The Committee is not in favor of the use of split-face block, either as a wainscoting or any other form of accent material. Prefer use of more traditional materials such as the or fieldstone. Tile insets and wall medallions can be used to enhance elevations. 5. The faux colonnades on the south and west sides should project approximately 3 to 4 feet away from the building wall to cast sufficient shadow and convey a sense of depth. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:40 p.m. Warren Morelion June 19, 2001 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC 01-03 -PARAGON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A request to construct a 189,314 square foot warehouse building on 8.08 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 5), located at 9000 Hermosa Avenue - APN: 209-261-09, 30. ' Design Parameters: The site is located on Hermosa Avenue, approximately 700 feet north of 6th Street. The site is vacant and slopes southerly at approximately 2 percent. The site is bordered on the south by existing General Industrial development, and on the north and west by vacant land. To the east of the site is the San Bernardino County Flood Control Channel. The applicant is proposing to develop a single tenant warehouse/distribution building with two office areas. The offices are located at separate ends of the building, and total approximately 10,000 square feet. The building's loading area will front onto Hermosa Avenue and will be screened by a 14-foot high combination of berming and screen wall. The screen wall will be slightly raised above Hermosa Avenue with berming to the base of the wall to limit its height to a maximum of 8 feet, as seen from Hermosa Avenue. The screen wall will be architecturally integrated with the building design. The building incorporates two primary building materials. The building will be made with tilt-up concrete painted white and gray. Sandblasting will be added as accent to the offices and column treatments. The project will also incorporate glass at the office areas at each end of the building. • The building is well articulated both in horizontal and vertical design and is consistentwith approved industrial projects in the area. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issue: Because the proposed building backs up to a Regional Trail, upgrade landscaping by planting at least one tree per 30 linear of property boundary at the rear of the property. Also, look at planting a type of vine and/or shrub that would make the area more aesthetically appealing. 2. Slopes on the building side of the project's loading area entrances appear to be relatively high and steep. Recommend adding short retaining walls to limit their size and slope. Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Provide gate at entrance to the future Regional Trail. Suggest some type of wrought iron gate. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project subject to the above-mentioned conditions. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Larry Henderson Staff Planner: Warren Morelion DRC COMMENTS DRC 01-03 -PARAGON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION June 19, 2001 • Page 2 The Committee recommended approval of the project subject to staffs comments and the additional comments listed below. The applicant agreed to the requested changes: Provide three to four gray column-like panel treatments matching those on the front and sides of the building on the east side (facing the flood control channel). Arrange the panel treatments with logical spacing to provide a sense of rhythm along the east elevation. 2. Provide furniture and shade for the employee outdoor eating area. Provide intensified landscaping around the area to provide a buffer from Hermosa Avenue traffic and the parking area. The above changes should be included on plans submitted for final approval. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:00 p.m. Debra Meier June 19, 2001 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DRC2001-00231) - HOGLE-IRELAND, INC. -The review of detailed site plan and building elevations for McDonald's Restaurant on 1.44-acres of land within the previously approved Terra Vista Commons Master Plan located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard west of Milliken Avenue in the Mixed Use (MFC) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan - APN: 107-421-98 and 227-771-53. Related file: Conditional Use Permit 99-25. Design Parameters: Conditional Use Permit 99-25 was approved by the Commission on January 12, 2001. This approval included the Master Plan 'and Design Guidelines for The Commons at Terra Vista, a master planned commercial center, the approval of Pad E, which has been constructed, and the conceptual approval of Pad D as afast-food drive-thru restaurant. The proposed McDonald's is located on Pad D. The Commons at Terra Vista is a mixed-use master plan concept, that will eventually include a combination of retail, restaurants, service stations, and high-density residential development. The residential component has only been approved as a master plan in concept at this time. The proposed building elevations reflect all the details, materials and color palette, as established by the Master Plan Design Guidelines, and the structures that have been completed within The Commons to date. Staff has no further comments pertaining to the building elevations at this time. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee • discussion: 1. Construct a 3-foot decorative screen wall along south and east edges of drive-thru lane (similar to Texaco/A&W drive-thru in same center). 2. Provide pedestrian access from the sidewalk on Foothill Boulevard to the restaurant. 3. Indicate the location of the "loading zone" that will be used by the tractor-trailer that provides deliveries to the restaurant, and indicate turning radii along the truck route. 4. Provide elevations of the enclosure wall, trellis structure (shown on page C2.1) and support columns proposed at the outdoor dining patio. 5. Although signage is approved by separate action, you are proposing four building mounted signs in addition to a monument sign. The City's Sign Ordinance, and the Uniform Sign Program (USP 134), will allow a maximum of three signs in any combination of wall and/or monument. 6. The landscaping required along Foothill Boulevard is more extensive than what is reflected on the plan. The project proponent will need to field verify the extent of required landscaping to be shown on the plan, prior to Planning Commission review and approval. 7. Fabric awnings shall be a solid color. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommended that the Committee review the project, address the issues noted above and any other issues as identified by the Committee members, and forward to • the Planning Commission for review and approval. DRC COMMENTS DRC2001-00231 - HOGLE-IRELAND June 19, 2001 • Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Larry Henderson Staff Planner: Debra Meier The Committee had the following comments pertaining to the issues identified by staff. The items reflected in bold font shall be either revised prior to the Planning Commission hearing and/or incorporated as a condition of approval. The Committee agreed that the applicant shall incorporate a 3-foot decorative screen wall along the south and east edges of the drive-thru lane. The project site sits 4 to 5-feet above Foothill Boulevard. Therefore, the screen wall is necessary to properly screen the drive-thru activity. The retaining wall shall include a decorative cap that is coordinated with the building design. The applicant shall provide pedestrian access from the sidewalk on Foothill Boulevard to the restaurant in the location thatwould resemble the shortest path from the sidewalk that pedestrians would be likely to take. 3. The applicant illustrated the anticipated turning movements thatwould likely be used by the tractor-trailer delivery trucks, as well as the location where the truck will be directed to park • during deliveries in the northerly portion of the parking lot. This information was acceptable to the Committee without further revision. 4. The applicant illustrated the trellis structure and support columns proposed at the outdoor dining patio. All elements of the columns and trellis support structure were compatible with the architectural style and design of the building. The Committee requested that vines be added to the base of all columns supporting trellises, in order to provide a greater degree of shade as the vine matures onto the trellis. 5. The information regarding signage was included as information only, and will be addressed with a subsequent Sign Permit. 6. The applicant will coordinate with the site developer and complete all necessary landscaping along Foothill Boulevard. The material sample board provided by the applicant identifies the awnings as a solid Terra Cotta color to match the architectural style. The applicant shall incorporate these additional comments made by the Committee: 1. Extend the eaves beyond the building face on all tower elements. 2. The elevated building segments on the south and east elevations shall be made deeper (at least doubled in size), to alleviate the "false front" appearance of these segments. 3. Vines shall be planted at the base of all trellis support columns, including the outdoor eating • patio and over the drive-thru lane. The Committee recommended approval subject to the modifications as noted in herein. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • • JULY 19, 2001 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Bu er Secretary • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY JUNE 19, 2001 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Larry McNiel Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Larry Henderson John Mannerino The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. NO ITEMS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public • testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:00 p.m. (Brent) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (DRCCUP99-63)-HALL AND FOREMAN -A request to construct a 135,881 square foot retail store with interior fast food restaurant, an approximately 15,263 square foot outdoor garden center as well as 18,000 square feet of future in-line retail shops on 17.64 acres of land and to modify the existing master plan for Conditional Use Permit 95-25 to include these facilities in the Medium Residential District (8 to 14 dwelling units per acre) and the Community Commercial District (Subarea 2) located on the west side of Vineyard Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard -APN: 207-211-05, 06, 12 - 15, 36, 38, and 40. Related files: GPA 99-06, FBSPA 99-03, DDA 99-06, TPM 15427. 7:40 p.m. (Warren) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC 01-03 - PARAGON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A request to construct a 189,314 square foot warehouse building on 8.08 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 5), located at 9000 Hermosa Avenue -APN: 209-261-09, 30. 8:00 p.m. (Debra) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DRC2001-00231) - HOGLE-IRELAND, INC. -The review of detailed site plan and building elevations for McDonald's Restaurant on 1.44-acres of land within the previously approved Terra Vista Commons Master Plan located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard west of Milliken Avenue in the Mixed Use (MFC) • District of the Terra Vista Community Plan -APN: 107-421-98 and 227-771-53. Related file: Conditional Use Permit 99-25. DRC AGENDA June 19, 2001 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT 1, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 14, 2001, at least 72 hours prtorto the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center D "ve, Rancho Cucamonga. ,, Ui O~ • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Brent Le Count June 19, 2001 HALL AND FOREMAN - A request to construct a 135,881 square foot retail store with interior fast food restaurant, an approximately 15,263 square foot outdoor garden center as well as 18,000 square feet of future in-line retail shops on 17.64 acres of land and to modify the existing master plan for Conditional Use Permit 95-25 to include these facilities in the Medium Residential District (8-to 14 dwelling units per acre) and the Community Commercial District (Subarea 2) located on the west side of Vineyard Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 207-211-05, 06, 12 -15, 36, 38, and 40. Related files: GPA 99-06, FBSPA 99-03, DDA 99-06, TPM 15427. Background: The project has been to several design review meetings to resolve site planning issues. The revised project locates the building along the west of the site facing Vineyard Avenue. The loading and auto service uses have been removed from the southern area of the building to reduce impacts upon the existing condominiums and apartments to the south. The Committee was in favor of the revised layout subject to the following revisions: Realign the drive aisle along the south property line so that there is room for a deep planter along the south property line to provide a buffer for the Orchard Meadows Condominiums to the south. There is now a large, nearly 80-foot deep, landscaped area at the southwest corner of the site. This area will have to be heavily landscaped to enhance the buffering affect and to ensure that the operator doesn't use the area for staging of outdoor merchandise or outdoor sales. 2. Truck circulation/loading shall not utilize the driveway or drive aisle along the south of the site. This appears to be the case. Signs could be required at the Vineyard Avenue driveways precluding truck access. Further, Vineyard Avenue could be striped to prohibit left tum movement into center. However, it would be difficult to enforce access restrictions. 3. Provide substantial tree planting to define the main driveway entrance off of Vineyard Avenue. This will likely require enlarging the planters on either side of the driveway. An attempt has been made towards this end. Most of the Palm frees are shown planted in a sidewalk area. There maybe more widening necessary for these planters. Ifthatcannotbe accomplished, triangular shaped planters can be used to accommodate trees without affecting parking layout. 4. Utilize the traditional single column trellis feature established by the Conditional Use Permit 95-25 master plan design throughout the project and specifically along the north side of the main driveway entrance off of Foothill Boulevard to provide a focal element for those entering the site. This does not appear to have been done. 5. Provide a pergola along the pedestrian pathway linking the bus stop on Vineyard Avenue with the main store entrance. There is a pathway shown but no evidence of a pergola covering it. 6. Utilize the star pattern hardscape treatment established by the Conditional Use Permit 95-25 master plan design at all key drive aisle intersections. Utilize decorative paving throughout, especially in front of the main store entry. The starpattem has been used. The entire area in front of the store entrance should have decorative paving. • DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 • June 19, 2001 Page 2 7. There are several "tight" areas in the plan including the narrow planter depth for planters along the west side of the main north south drive aisle. Provide substantial planter depth throughout. There are still several fight areas, especially along the main north-south drive aisle where some planters have as little as 1-foot of depth. These planter islands should have a substantial depth consistent with other shopping centers in the community. 8. Suggest eliminating the Taco Bell drive-thru shown north of the store and replace with parking. This will help "loosen" the Site Plan and allow increased room for landscaping elsewhere. This has been completed. However, the site is approximately 69 parking spaces short because the garden center area was not counted in the overall parking calculations (as was done with Target, Home Depot and Lowe's, the City requires the garden center to be parked at the same ratio as the main store, 5 spaces per 1000 square feet). 9. Provide a focal element at the northeast corner of the building to enhance the entry experience on the Foothill Boulevard driveway. The focal element is proposed to be comprised of a curved parapet, a trellis, and a wall sign. These are not bad focal elements per se but by themselves fall short of the desired affect. The curved parapet wall conveys a Hollywood set appearance. Suggest the same level of architectural treatment as at the entry or adjacent to the garden center (the tower feature). . 10. Provide an interim screening solution for the truck loading area at the northwest corner of the store given that the in-line shops shown here are planned to be developed at a later phase. There appears to be a screen wall along the east side of the loading area on the elevations but nothing is shown on the Site Plan. Suggest a separate drawing of just the loading area showing the interim screening solution. Also suggest a large member trellis extending over the entire loading area similar to the Albertson's on the north side of Foothill Boulevard. 11. Move the building as far west as possible, utilizing the flood channel right-of-way as anon- buildable easement if possible. The building appears to be relocated to the west as far as possible. 12. Parking and garden center lighting along the south side of the building will have to be sensitively designed to avoid casting glare on the residences to the south. This can be a condition of approval. 13. Align the eastern-most north to south drive aisle with the drive aisle associated with the Conditional Use Permit 95-25 master plan to the north. This has not been done. The applicant also presented some architectural vignettes at the May 15th meeting, which the Committee had the following comments: 1. The design has substantial areas of flat stucco walls. Significantly restudy the design to provide much more visual interest and building articulation. There are stilllarge, flat areas of blank stucco walls, especially the north elevation facing Foothill8oulevard. Trellises are not • recommended as the primary solution to this problem. Substantial architectural features akin to the entry area and garden center area are necessary, especially in areas of visual prominence such as the north elevation. DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 • June 19, 2001 Page 3 ?. Revise store entrance design to provide enhanced entry experience. Wrap the entry colonnade around to the north elevation. The entry colonnade does not wrap around to the north elevation. The entry colonnade has been expanded and there is now a roofed element over the entry instead of a simple curved parapet wall (such as on the north elevation). There are three vine covered, wall-mounted trellises on the east side of the entry with the actual entry doors on the north and south sides of the entry vestibule. Suggest another, more open solution to the entrance to make it more clearly defined and visually enticing. 3. The Committee is not in favor of the split faced block wainscoting and suggests use of more up scale material such as river rock veneer or the work. Colors and materials are not annotated on the revised plans. There is a texture that appears to be split-faced block shown for the building wainscoting. 4. Avoid faux columns or other tacked on design elements such as along the south wall near the southwest corner of the store. These features should relate to the building and have substantial pop-out dimension. There is extensive use of faux or tacked-on colonnades on the west and south elevations. The pop-out dimension for these features is not shown, they appear to be 6 inches to a foot beyond the main building wall. 5. The design of the building should be sensitive to the Foothill Boulevard frontage. The vast • majority of the north elevation facing Foothill Boulevard consists of a bland stucco wall with split faced block wainscoting. Suggest emphasizing this elevation with the same level of architecture as is shown on the east elevation (entry). 6. There are several high quality design examples in the community such as the new Lowe's Home Improvement store at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Milliken Avenue. The revised design does include some features of the Lowe's building, especially in the garden center area and colonnades. At 135,881 square feet of floor area, the building is similar in size to the Lowe's building and the site is equally visually prominent. While there is no reason to copy the design of Lowe's, there is also no reason to accept a lesser level of architectural design for this project than has already been established in the community. To refresh, the project significantly amends the previously approved master plan associated with Conditional Use Permit 95-25 (Rodriguez) by eliminating the anchor tenant and in-line tenants along the south half of the master plan and replacing this with parking. Also associated with the application are a General Plan Amendment and a Development District Amendment to redesignate the land use for the site from Medium Residential to Community Commercial, and a Tentative Parcel Map. 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. The blank walls with plant-on faux colonnades shown on the west and south elevations are inconsistent with City design policy to provide 360-degree architectural treatment. These elevations should be significantly upgraded in appearance. Colonnades should have a substantial pop-out dimension from the main building wall. DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 June 19, 2001 • Page 4 2. Upgrade the architectural treatment of the north elevation facing Foothill Boulevard and the east elevation facing Vineyard Avenue. This can mean using more architectural features similar to the entry, the garden center, and the tower next to the garden center. There should be minimal areas of unarticulated blank stucco wall and trellises should be used only as an accent rather than the primary source of visual interest. The colonnade surrounding the garden center shall have more decorative features similar to the Lowe's garden center (see attached Lowe's plans). Provide a substantial focal element at the northeast corner of the building aligned with the north-south driveway entrance off of Foothill Boulevard. Wrapping the colonnade as previously suggested and/or provision of a tower feature similar to the tower next to the garden center would be appropriate. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: The curved parapet at the northeast corner of the building shall have a substantial depth dimension (10 feet) to avoid a fin-like or Hollywood set-like appearance and match the entry on the east elevation. 2. Restudy the main entry to the building to be more clearly defined and visually enticing. • 3. Incorporate the use of lighter, more traditional exterior building materials such as stucco, fieldstone, and the wainscoting per previous Design Review Committee direction. 4. Provide a traditional single column trellis feature establish by the Conditional Use Permit 95-25 master plan design throughout the project and specifically along the north side of the main driveway entrance off of Foothill Boulevard to provide a focal element for those entering the site. 5. Provide intensive use of climbing vines (with appropriate irrigation) to cover unarticulated building walls and freestanding walls. 6. Provide enhanced landscaping and berms along the Vineyard Avenue frontage including specimen sized trees, shrubs, and boulders. 7. Incorporate landscaping and pedestrian amenities along the front (east side) and Foothill Boulevard side (north side) of the building. Limit areas where paving juts directly up against the building walls. This could be accomplished by adding tree wells in strategic locations, seating areas with overhead shade structures, and water features to emphasize architecture. 8. Incorporate hedge planting in between columns for the garden center colonnade so that shrubs will grow to obscure the wrought iron and merchandise behind as much as possible. 9. Provide large member trellises along the outside of the garden center to draw the eye away from the merchandise stored inside. • 10. Provide substantial landscaping including trees, shrubs, and boulders in the large landscaped area at the southwest corner of the site to provide a dense bufferfor residents to the south. This area shall not be used for container storage, even of a temporary duration. DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 June 19, 2001 • Page 5 11. Provide an actual pergola along,the main east-west pedestrian pathway to foster a strong pedestrian connection between the building and Vineyard Avenue/bus stop. 12. Incorporate cart storage areas with landscape islands in the parking area instead of just using a parking space. Provide cart storage areas in the southwest corner area of the site. 13. Unless cart storage is to be handled inside the building, provide a cart corral along the front of the building with a decorative wall to completely conceal stored carts. 14. Align the eastern most north-south drive aisle with that approved for Conditional Use Permit 95-25 (Rodriguez). 15. Provide signs at the Vineyard Avenue driveway entrances prohibiting truck access, especially for the driveway at the southeast corner of the site. 16. Should be noted that this review entails Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Conceptual Elevations only. The Committee still needs to review a revised sight line/view impact study relative to the residences to the south, a Grading Plan, and a more detailed set of building elevations including color and material callouts, overall dimensions, shop elevations, and Floor Plan information. All plan view exhibits should be the same scale to aid in review for consistency. The site plan works well at 50-foot scale. . 17. Provide a continuous sidewalk system along the main north-south spine to connect from Wal-Mart to Foothill Boulevard. Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All lighting, including parking lot light standards, wall-mounted lighting, garden center lighting, and any security lighting shall be designed to completely shield glare from surrounding residential development and public streets. This is particularly important relative to the condos and apartments south of the site and the Steven's home along Vineyard Avenue. 2. A bus shelter will be required as a condition of approval. The design guidelines that are now pending completion should include provisions for bus shelter design to be compatible with the adjacent buildings. 3. No outdoor storage, including container storage, shall be permitted. 4. No outdoor display of merchandise shall be permitted. The garden center shall not be considered outdoor display so long as no merchandise is stacked above the height of the surrounding colonnade walls. 5. The letter height for the main wall signs shall not exceed 5 feet consistent with other large retail operations. 6. During the lifetime of the business operation, the operator/owner shall replace any dead or • dying landscaping immediately. 7. The site is approximately 69 parking spaces deficient because the garden center was not included in the applicant's required parking calculations. The garden center shall count as floor area for parking calculations. Provide the necessary parking. DRC COMMENTS DRCCUP99-63 June 19, 2001 . Page 6 8. Parking lot light standards shall not exceed 15 feet overall (including pedestal). The elevations show very high light standards. 9. . Provide metal gated access points along the block wall along the south side of the site to allow maintenance of the slope landscaping behind. The gates shall be designed to attenuate noise from the project relative to the existing residences to the south. 10. The perimeter block walls shall be decorative masonry with decorative cap. 11. Development of the in-line shops at the north end of the building and the pad at the southeast corner of the site will be subject to new Development Review or Conditional Use Permit applications. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised in light of the above comments, including provision of further detailed information, and brought back for further review. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: • Staff Planner: Brent Le Count C~ _ ~ ~ .~. od ~m a i w - • q+ 1 1 ;a ! S 15 E d ~E! a 1 1 1 1 a! e] f % k k i! ~~ '~ 1 1 d ~ ~ v o a a ••~ I 1 1 b ! ! ~~ e E 9 ~ ~ ! ~ ! ! d~ i / a ~ ~ ~ ~ o00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o~®o® ®~ 1 !i ~l , I t, rl~ ~~ !e o , 3 pp ~ !~~ k ~~ jt 's l I,~~l~1~1~~~ ~~1 r ~! 11 !! ~l ~i 4~ ~, ~r ~8 ! ~ ! ~ t!t ~ !~ ?, It if 1i l ® z JJ $° 11 o i a gi 8~ • r-- r--pp r-- 6 1 L _ _ L__ 6 ([Y tlL P ~~ i _~'__~~. `~ i x ai m < • F w <~ i I ~ e. IP~I~' s~,,l `~~l~`~~11~ ~~ ;S e u u C G Z ~ ~ i ~ L- 111 m ~ tlh ~i4 ~ ~i ~` m ti e 9 li;I~a~j~l~iili 1 ~ ~~91~i~iil~ag~:~:~' i1 s a; !al~~Il11aa9alEa1l ~ ~ ~~~e~oooq C) u ~_ ~_ C//2 ® _ ~--~ Z ! Z' .~.~ F• d ~ > ~ ~ < w a tl ~ a; 3 <. o; _ [. Al i y .i a m ^' ~ a~ • • ~1-~ " ~__ 4 ~ ~1 z <~ ~~ L ~~ CJS m a N nu ~ii~® 1 F5 ~ 1 ~ 31 g I~I ~i ~! ii ii ii ~i !i l ai11'119 ~~it: s a: ii ii ~! it i~ i9 i! ~t iB O GOOOO©OOm f- a PP~` CJ [2] Z': B4 m .~ m p~ w _, J ~~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:40 p.m. Warren Morelion June 19, 2001 Lyl Iyl Llyl 1\LVIL VY 1../1\V V I-VJ - r/"~I V\V VIV DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A request to construct a 189,314 square foot warehouse building on 8.08 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 5), located at 9000 Hermosa Avenue - APN: 209-261-09, 30. Design Parameters: The site is located on Hermosa Avenue, approximately 700 feet north of 6th Street. The site is vacant and slopes southerly at approximately 2 percent. The site is bordered on the south by existing General Industrial development, and on the north and west by vacant land. To the east of the site is the San Bernardino County Flood Control Channel. The applicant is proposing to develop a single tenant warehouse/distribution building with two office areas. The offices are located at separate ends of the building, and total approximately 10,000 square feet. The building's loading area will front onto Hermosa Avenue and will be screened by a 14-foot high combination of berming and screen wall. The screen wall will be slightly raised above Hermosa Avenue with berming to the base of the wall to limit its height to a maximum of 8 feet, as seen from Hermosa Avenue. The screen wall will be architecturally integrated with the building design. The building incorporates two primary building materials. The building will be made with tilt-up concrete painted white and gray. Sandblasting will be added as accent to the offices and column treatments. The project will also incorporate glass at the office areas at each end of the building. • The building is well articulated both in horizontal and vertical design and is consistent with approved industrial projects in the area. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issue: Because the proposed building backs up to a Regional Trail, upgrade landscaping by planting at least one tree per 30 linear of property boundary at the rear of the property. Also, look at planting a type of vine and/or shrub that would make the area more aesthetically appealing. 2. Slopes on the building side of the project's loading area entrances appear to be relatively high and steep. Recommend adding short retaining walls to limit their size and slope. Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Provide gate at entrance to the future Regional Trail. Suggest some type of wrought iron gate. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project subject to the above-mentioned conditions. • Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Warren Morelion DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:00 p.m. Debra Meier June 19, 2001 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DRC2001-00231) - HOGLE-IRELAND. INC. -The review of detailed site plan and building elevations for McDonald's Restaurant on 1.44-acres of land within the previously approved Terra Vista Commons Master Plan located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard west of Milliken Avenue in the Mixed Use (MFC) District of the Terra Vista Community Plan - APN: 107-421-98 and 227-771-53. Related file: Conditional Use Permit 99-25. Design Parameters: Conditional Use Permit 99-25 was approved by the Commission on January 12, 2001. This approval included the Master Plan and Design Guidelines for The Commons at Terra Vista, a master planned commercial center, the approval of Pad E, which has been constructed, and the conceptual approval of Pad D as afast-food drive-thru restaurant. The proposed McDonald's is located on Pad D. The Commons at Terra Vista is a mixed-use master plan concept, that will eventually include a combination of retail, restaurants, service stations, and high-density residential development. The residential component has only been approved as a master plan in concept at this time. The proposed building elevations reflect all the details, materials and color palette, as established by the Master Plan Design Guidelines, and the structures that have been completed within The Commons to date. Staff has no further comments pertaining to the building elevations at this time. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee • discussion: 1. Construct a 3-foot decorative screen wall along south and east edges of drive-thru lane (similar to Texaco/A&W drive-thru in same center). 2. Provide pedestrian access from the sidewalk on Foothill Boulevard to the restaurant. 3. Indicate the location of the "loading zone" that will be used by the tractor-trailer that provides deliveries to the restaurant, and indicate turning radii along the truck route. 4. Provide elevations of the enclosure wall, trellis structure (shown on page C2.1) and support columns proposed at the outdoor dining patio. 5. Although signage is approved by separate action, you are proposing four building mounted signs in addition to a monument sign. The City's Sign Ordinance, and the Uniform Sign Program (USP 134), will allow a maximum of three signs in any combination of wall and/or monument. 6. The landscaping required along Foothill Boulevard is more extensive than what is reflected on the plan. The project proponent will need to field verify the extent of required landscaping to be shown on the plan, prior to Planning Commission review and approval. 7. Fabric awnings shall be a solid color. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review the project, address the issues noted above and any other issues as identified by the Committee members, and forward to • the Planning Commission for review and approval. DRC COMMENTS DRC2001-00231 -HOGLE-IRELAND June 19, 2001 • Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Debra Meier C~ fL J • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES TUESDAY JUNE 5, 2001 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Larry McNiel Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Larry Henderson John Mannerino The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. 7:00 p.m (Alan) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00232 -VAN DAELE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION -The modification of home Plans 1, 2, 3, and 4 for previously approved Design Review 99-27 building floor plans and elevations for 159 homes within Tract 15540 in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) located between Foothill Boulevard and Arrow Route, west of the Cucamonga Creek Control Channel - APN'S: 207-211-01, 18 through 21, 31, 32, and 34. Related files: Variance 99-06, Tree Removal Permit Application 93-04. 7:10 p.m (Emily) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 16189 - CONCORDIA - A request to subdivide 26.94 acres of land into 75 lots for the purpose of single family home construction in the Low and Low-Medium Residential District (2-4 and 4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of East Avenue and Victoria Street -APN: 227-141- 46,42,44,65and aportion of 71. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:20 p.m. (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16195 (SUBTT16195) -COLORADO PACIFIC COMMUNITIES - A residential subdivision of 139 single-family lots on 45.28 acres in the Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) and 13.25 acres of open space in the Low Residential District (up to 4 dwelling units per acre), utilizing the Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. All residential development is proposed on the 45.28-acre parcel located on the south side of Highland Avenue east of Etiwanda Avenue; and all the required open space (per the Optional Development Standards) is proposed on the 13.25-acre parcel located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue south of Victoria Avenue -APN: 227-051-01, 04, 05, 06, 09 and 28; and APN: 227- 121-16 and 49. Related file: Tree Removal Permit, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment, and Development Agreement. DRC AGENDA June 5, 2001 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT r 1 LJ CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Alan Warren June 5, 2001 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00232 -VAN DAELE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - The modification of home Plans 1, 2, 3, and 4 for previously approved Design Review 99-27 building floor plans and elevations for 159 homes within Tract 15540 in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) located between Foothill Boulevard and Arrow Route, west of the Cucamonga Creek Control Channel -APN'S: 207-211-01, 18 through 21, 31, 32, and 34. Related files: Variance 99-06, Tree Removal Permit Application 93-04. Design Parameters: The design review was approved by the Planning Commission in July 2000. The project has been purchased from the previous developer by Van Daele Development Corporation. The modification before the Committee involves Floor Plan changes to all the models, primarily to 1) relocate the laundry area from the garage to inside the house, and 2) to enlarge the living and bedroom areas. Specifically the following changes can be noted from the revised plans: Plan 1 The laundry area has been relocated to the interior house from the garage. No exterior changes will result. Plan 2 The laundry area has been relocated to the second floor above the porch area, and bedroom #3 has been enlarged to cantilever beyond the rear first floor area. The front porch has been extended towards the front. Also, front elevation windows and window treatments have been expanded. . Plan 3 Bedroom #4 has been enlarged towards the front and filling in a rear corner has enlarged the grand room. As a result of the bedroom enlargement, the second story bedroom window has been enlarged Plan 4 - While keeping the same exterior dimensions, the Floor Plan has been completely redesigned. Most noticeable exterior changes include chimneys being relocated outside of the exterior walls and the front entry feature has been narrowed when viewed from the street. Please refer to the Exhibits that provide notes regarding the proposed new Floor Plans and elevations. It is staffs opinion that the overall affect of the changes do not detract from the already well-designed homes. The changes do not appear to be related in any way to cost cutting measures but instead to developing improved home design. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion: Staff is in full support of the proposed modification. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong • Staff Planner: Alan Warren The Committee approved the project as submitted. CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS • 7:10 p.m. Emily Wimer June 5, 2001 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 16189-CONCORDIA-A requestto subdivide 26.94 acres of land into 75 lots for the purpose of single family home construction in the Low and Low-Medium Residential District (2-4 and 4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of East Avenue and Victoria Street -APN: 227-141- 46,42,44,65 and a portion of 71. Design Parameters: The site is located on the east side of East Avenue, just south of Victoria Avenue and north of Tract 15911 (currently under construction). It is surrounded by residential development to the south and west. To the east is the I-15 Freeway and to the north is Etiwanda High School. The applicant has submitted a request for a Variance for the excessive wall height to buffer freeway noise. The height of the wall is proposed to be softened by a combined split face/fluted block design with vine planting along the base trained to climb the walls which is consistent with Tract 15911. The revised acoustical analysis has changed the plotting on Lots 40, 42, and 47. The previous plotting of these homes created a need fora 13-foot screen wall on the rears and sides of these homes. The maximum sound wall height will be 17 feet on Lots 19 through 28, the lots directly abutting the Freeway. This sound wall height is consistent with the other previously approved Tracts, which abut the freeway as well. 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. The applicant has been working diligently with staff to resolve major issues. There are no remaining outstanding major issues. The home designs are the same as were approved for Tract 15911 and 15798 (near the southwest corner of the Route 30 and 1-15 Freeways) and exhibit a high level of design integrity. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. Revise Lot 43 to meet the rear yard minimum setback of 20 feet that is required in the Low- Medium Residential District. 2. East Avenue Parkway walls (stone pilaster with stucco walls and river rock planters) should have regularly spaced indents similar to or matching that of Tract 15911. 3. Rear yard fencing visible from public streets (at top of slope) shall be decorative masonry. Policv Issues: The fallowing items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Fieldstone veneer shall be natural river rock as opposed to a manufactured product. Other types of stone veneers may be manufactured. 2. All wall visible from or facing a street shall be decorative masonry on both sides. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval with the above comments. • DRC COMMENTS TT 16189 - CONCORDIA • June 5, 2001 Page 2 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Emily Wimer The Design Review Committee approved the project subject with the following revisions: Lot 43 was re-plotted to incorporate the 20-foot setback at the rear of the property. 2. Provide a minimum width of 3 feet between the sidewalk and property line wall on Victoria Avenue. Provide visual relief with landscaping as well as "jogging" the property line wall. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:20 p.m. Debra Meier June 5, 2001 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16195 (SUBTT16195) - COLORADO PACIFIC COMMUNITIES -A residential subdivision of 139 single-family lots on 45.28 acres in the Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) and 13.25 acres of open space in the Low Residential District (up to 4 dwelling units per acre), utilizing the Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. All residential development is proposed on the 45.28-acre parcel located on the south side of Highland Avenue east of Etiwanda Avenue; and all the required open space (per the Optional Development Standards) is proposed on the 13.25- acre parcel located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue south of Victoria Avenue -APN: 227-051- 01, 04, O5, 06, 09 and 28; and APN: 227-121-16 and 49. Related file: Tree Removal Permit, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment, and Development Agreement. Background and Design Parameters: The Planning Commission conducted aPre-Application Review meeting to discuss the basic concept of this proposed project on March 7, 2001. The basic premise of this project is to consider the two separate parcels within the context of the whole project description in order to analyze land use consistency within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, along with the provisions of open space requirements of the Optional Development Standards of the Specific Plan. The project consists of a residential subdivision of 139 single-family lots on 45.28-acres within the Very Low Residential District, and 13.25 acres of open space in the Low Residential District, of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. All residential development is proposed on the 45.28-acre parcel located on the south side of Highland Avenue east of Etiwanda Avenue; and all the required open space • (per the Optional Development Standards) is proposed on the 13.25-acre parcel, located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue south of Victoria Avenue. In order to accomplish all aspects of the proposed project the Etiwanda Specific Plan will be amended in order to specifically allow the transfer of open space and/or density to off-site parcels, when certain findings can be made, and it is in the best interest of the community to do so. This amendment will be added to the Optional Development Standards, Figure 5-3, of the Specific Plan. In addition, the applicant is proposing a Development Agreement in order to identify all the technical details of the transfer of both density and open space. Upon successful approval and completion of the project will result in a 13-acre public park site adjacent to the Etiwanda Intermediate School, the future Pacific Electric Trail; and the development of a 139 lot subdivision developed using the Low Density Optional Development Standards (although the underlying land use designation will remain Very Low Density Residential). The proposed Tentative Tract Map is compatible with the existing development immediately adjacent to the site. All lots in both adjacent tracts are approximately 7,500 square feet in area, while lots within the proposed project average approximately 10,000 square feet (8,500 square feet minimum). The north boundary of the site is Highland Avenue, and the new State Route 30/210 freeway. Undeveloped properties adjacent to the west and south are in the Very Low Density District, and undeveloped property to the east (south of the existing tract) is in the Low Density District. The Cross and Crown Lutheran Church is located on Etiwanda Avenue south of the site, and the Cucamonga County Water Districtwater reservoir is located on Etiwanda Avenue north and west of the project site. • The proposed park site is located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue, south of Victoria Avenue. It is immediately south of the Etiwanda Intermediate School, and north of the historic Etiwanda rail station and the future Pacific Electric Trail. This site is in the Low Density Residential District additional undeveloped property in the Low District abuts the site to the east. DRC COMMENTS TTM 16193 (SUBTT16195) -COLORADO PACIFIC COMMUNITIES • June 5, 2001 Page 2 Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: TENTATIVE TRACT DESIGN The primary issue in the design of the Tentative Tract Map is that the proposed design will remove the existing S-curve alignment of Highland Avenue that Caltrans has constructed in order to connect Highland Avenue to East Avenue. Instead, the applicant proposes to maintain Highland Avenue along the north boundary of the tract, then direct southbound traffic along the east boundary of the tract, until it connects with the existing Highland Avenue connection to East Avenue. The City Traffic Engineer has concurred with the re-alignment proposal; however, such a change presents design challenges. The result of this realignment is that the Highland Avenue alternate' will be directed along the rear of the existing residents that face Ash Avenue thus creating an undesirable "double frontage" condition for existing homeowners. Anew wall will be installed along the property line and the parkway way will be landscaped which would necessitate Landscape Maintenance District for maintenance of over 1,000 feet. City policy is to discourage • unnecessary LMD areas. In general, the proposed Tentative Tract Map utilizes numerous cul-de-sacs in the design, with overall circulation between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue using a curvilinear street pattern. WINDROW REMOVAL, PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT The project site contains approximately 300 existing trees, primarily Eucalyptus windrow remnants, either on-site or along property boundaries (both on-and off-site). This is the area that burned in the "Etiwanda Fire," which damaged many windrows. Many of the trees along the property boundary may affect the rear yards of adjacent residents. The trees at the property boundary may be considered for preservation, whereverfeasible or desirable, in order to minimize impacts to existing residents. This condition is typical of portions of the north property boundary along the Cucamonga County Water District parcel (approximately 30 trees in question), along a portion of the south boundary (approximately 42 trees in question), and along a portion of the east boundary (approximately 21 trees in question). The Etiwanda Specific Plan, Figure 5-13, indicates that the existing Eucalyptus windrow along the south side of Highland Avenue will be preserved. In accordance with the recommendations ofthe Arborist Report, 19 of the 49 trees along Highland Avenue should not be preserved due to health of the tree or previous fire damage. In addition, the California Fan Palms, on the north side of Highland Avenue, are also indicated for preservation in the Specific Plan, and although not analyzed in the Arborist Report, many of these Palm trees appear to be in poor condition from visual inspection. DRC COMMENTS TTM 16193 (SUBTT16195) -COLORADO PACIFIC COMMUNITIES June 5, 2001 • Page 3 All other trees in the interior portion of the site are proposed to'be removed. The Optional Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan does require on-site windrow replacement of 100 linear feet per acre in the Very Low District and 50-feet per acre in the Low District. Since the site is in the Very Low District he proposed project should include 4,500 linear feet (100-feet X 45 acres) of on-site windrow replacement utilizing the 660-foot by 330-foot grid pattern that is typical of the Etiwanda area. The on-site windrow replacement shall be reflected on the Conceptual landscape Plan. No tree removal or replacement is proposed at the open space site at this time. THE KEMP HOUSE The Kemp House is located at the northeast corner of the site facing Highland Avenue. The house was once the residence of the Marcus Kemp familywho were early citrus growers in the Etiwanda Community, as early as 1895. The property remained in the Kemp family until sold in recent years. The house has been altered and specifically no longer contains the veranda and balcony that once wrapped the front portion of the house. The property does not meet the criteria for the National Register of Historic Places, and is only marginally suitable for listing as a State Resource; however, the building is eligible as a local landmark, and a Historic Landmark Designation was initiated by the Planning Division approximately two-years ago when a demolition request was submitted. • The applicant's have submitted a complete Cultural Resource assessment of the Site, with specifc detailed research of the history and significance of the structure. Since the structure is potentially eligible as a local Historic Landmark, the applicant can either preserve the structure in its place on a lot within the Tentative Tract, or relocate the structure to an acceptable site. The current thought is that the "acceptable site" may be the open space parcel that is associated with this project, and eventually the structure would be restored and incorporated into use by Community Services. If the structure is moved, the applicant would be required to place the structures on a new foundation, secure and fence the perimeter, at a minimum. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: A Landscape Master Plan Concept is proposed and will approved with the Tentative Tract Map. The Conceptual Landscape Master Plan will set standards for streetscape design, both on the perimeter of the project, and on internal streets; slope planting; windrow replacement; perimeter walls; and side yard walls and streetscape design concepts for the interior of the project. The intent is to establish a design concept that exemplifies the Etiwanda character, and create a unique pedestrian landscape character for the specific project. 2. A Conceptual Grading Plan includes several sections taken at the property boundary, specifically where existing residents may be affected by the future development. Staff has suggested that the applicant considerthese conditions individuallyto avoid greatvariations in grade to the extent possible. Existing residents typically dislike new wnstruction that will peer into their house or yard and deprive them of privacy. The latest cross-sections illustrate that the applicant has been able to reduce grade separations between on-site and off-site • properties by approximately 2-3 feet. DRC COMMENTS TTM 16193 (SUBTT16195) -COLORADO PACIFIC COMMUNITIES • June 5, 2001 Page 4 In addition, the existing residents have a mixture of fencing types and the applicants have indicated a desire to replace all perimeters fencing with a block wall. The applicant will be required to coordinate with individual property owners to protect improvements and/or trees in-place. 3. The design and layout of the Tentative Tract Map proposes a closure of Catalpa Street, from the east, assuming that existing residents will not look favorably on the potential for increased traffic into their neighborhoods. Therefore, a modified cul-de-sac will be constructed at the western terminus of Catalpa Street in cooperation with existing residents at this location. However, the Tentative Tract Map design is proposing a street connection to Pecan Avenue to the south. Even though there may be some resistance from existing residents, this connection will provide a second means of access into a small subdivision that currently only has one point of access, from Victoria Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that upon review and discussion of all the issues identified by staff, and any questions raised by the Committee, that the committee make recommendations for conditions of approval, and forward the project to the Planning Commission for appropriate action. Design Review Committee Action: • Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Debra Meier Staff reviewed the report and the primary issues with the Committee. The Committee had no further concerns regarding the Tentative Tract design, and concurred with the staff recommendation regarding windrow removal, preservation, and replacement. The Committee discussed with the applicant the various options for use and location of the Kemp House. The City Planner has suggested that the first choice in landmark preservation is to leave the structure in its present location. The applicant, however, believes that this option is a mistake that would result in leaving the house in an undesirable location, and creating an awkward out parcel within the subdivision. The Committee discussed other alternatives and options regarding the use and location of the house. The preferred alternative was to create a separate lot within the 13-acre parcel, facing Etiwanda Avenue adjacent to the existing residence in this location. In so doing, the City can either sell the lot to a separate party for renovation for residential use, or the structure can remain part of the park site and be incorporated into a future plan for use by the Community Services Department. The Committee felt, economics aside, that the community might be better served by having the house moved to a more desirable location on Etiwanda Avenue, rather than the site on Highland Avenue adjacent to the freeway. n U DRC COMMENTS TTM 16193 (SUBTT16195) -COLORADO PACIFIC COMMUNITIES • June 5, 2001 Page 5 The Committee also discussed the "safe route of travel" from the residential development to the future park site. Two options were considered, the f rst is to insure that Etiwanda Avenue has public sidewalk the entire length between the two sites for pedestrian use; and secondly, to consider a paseo style parkway system (as developed within this Tract) continued within future development to the south connecting to Victoria Avenue, then extending a trail behind the Middle School to the future park site. The most feasible option for ensuring access in the near-term is to require the developer to complete any missing sidewalk improvements along Etiwanda Avenue between the two properties. The only way to ensure that the paseo parkway is carried forward to the south would be to amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan to incorporate the conceptual paseo alignment. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS JUNE 5, 2001 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary C~ J r~ lJ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY JUNE 5, 2001 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Larry McNiel Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Larry Henderson John Mannerino The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typically they are items such as plan revisions prepared in response to discussions at a previous meeting. 7:00 p.m. (Alan) • 7:10 p.m. (Emily) v~wcw i-vucac - yHIV LIHCLt UtVtLVF'MtNI CORPORATION -The modification of home Plans 1, 2, 3, and 4 for previously approved Design Review 99-27 building floor plans and elevations for 159 homes within Tract 15540 in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) located between Foothill Boulevard and Arrow Route, west of the Cucamonga Creek Control Channel - APN'S: 207-211-01, 18 through 21, 31, 32, and 34. Related files: Variance 99-06, Tree Removal Permit Application 93-04. V 1 V.7 CONCORDIA - A request to subdivide 26.94 acres of land into 75 lots for the purpose of single family home construction in the Low and Low-Medium Residential District (2-4 and 4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of East Avenue and Victoria Street -APN: 227-141- 46,42,44,65 and a portion of 71. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:20 p.m. (Debra) • Kauai i ioiao~-wwK,vuvrACo-I000MMUNITIES-A residential subdivision of 139 single-family lots on 45.28 acres in the Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) and 13.25 acres of open space in the Low Residential District (up to 4 dwelling units per acre), utilizing the Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. All residential development is proposed on the 45.28-acre parcel located on the south side of Highland Avenue east of Etiwanda Avenue; and all the required open space (per the Optional Development Standards) is proposed on the 13.25-acre parcel located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue south of Victoria Avenue -APN: 227-051-01, 04, 05, O6, 09 and 28; and APN: 227- 121-16 and 49. Related file: Tree Removal Permit, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment, and Development Agreement. • DRC AGENDA June 5, 2001 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT I, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on May 31, 2001, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic C ter Drive ancho Cucamonga. n 1,J CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Alan Warren June 5, 2001 • DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00232 -VAN DAELE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - Themodification ofhome Plans 1, 2, 3, and 4 for previously approved Design Review 99-27 building floor plans and elevations for 159 homes within Tract 15540 in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) located between Foothill Boulevard and Arrow Route, west of, the Cucamonga Creek Control Channel -APN'S: 207-211-01, 18 through 21, 31, 32, and 34. Related files: Variance 99-06, Tree Removal Permit Application 93-04. Design Parameters: The design review was approved by the Planning Commission in July 2000. The project has been purchased from the previous developer by Van Daele Development Corporation. The modification before the Committee involves Floor Plan changes to all the models, primarilyto 1) relocate the laundry area from the garage to inside the house, and 2) to enlarge the living and bedroom areas. Specifically the following changes can be noted from the revised plans: Plan 1 The laundry area has been relocated to the interior house from the garage. No exterior changes will result. Plan 2 The laundry area has been relocated to the second floor above the porch area, and bedroom #3 has been enlarged to cantilever beyond the rear first floor area. The front porch has been extended towards the front. Also, front elevation windows and window treatments have been expanded. • Plan 3 Bedroom #4 has been enlarged towards the front and filling in a rear corner has enlarged the grand room. As a result of the bedroom enlargement, the second story bedroom window has been enlarged Plan 4 - While keeping the same exterior dimensions, the Floor Plan has been completely redesigned. Most noticeable exterior changes include chimneys being relocated outside of the exterior walls and the front entry feature has been narrowed when viewed from the street. Please refer to the Exhibits that provide notes regarding the proposed new Floor Plans and elevations. It is staffs opinion that the overall affect of the changes do not detract from the already well-designed homes. The changes do not appear to be related in any way to cost cutting measures but instead to developing improved home design. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion: Staff is in full support of the proposed modification. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. Desipn Review Committee Action: Members Present: • Staff Planner: Alan Warren CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Emily Wimer June 5, 2001 • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 16189-CONCORDIA-Arequestto subdivide 26.94 acres of land into 75 lots for the purpose of single family home construction in the Low and Low-Medium Residential District (2-4 and 4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of East Avenue and Victoria Street-APN: 227-141- 46,42,44,65 and a portion of 71. Design Parameters: The site is located on the east side of East Avenue, just south of Victoria Avenue and north of Tract 15911 (currently under construction). It is surrounded by residential development to the south and west. To the east is the I-15 Freeway and to the north is Etiwanda High School. The applicant has submitted a request for a Variance for the excessive wall height to buffer freeway noise. The height of the wall is proposed to be softened by a combined split face/fluted block design with vine planting along the base trained to climb the walls which is consistent with Tract 15911. The revised acoustical analysis has changed the plotting on Lots 40, 42, and 47. The previous plotting of these homes created a need fora 13-foot screen wall on the rears and sides of these homes. The maximum sound wall height will be 17 feet on Lots 19 through 28, the lots directly abutting the Freeway. This sound wall height is consistent with the other previously approved Tracts, which abut the freeway as well. 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. The applicant has been working diligently with staff to resolve major issues. There are no remaining outstanding major issues. The home designs are the same as were approved for Tract 15911 and 15798 (near the southwest corner of the Route 30 and 1-15 Freeways) and exhibit a high level of design integrity. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Revise Lot 43 to meet the rear yard minimum setback of 20 feet that is required in the Low- Medium Residential District. 2. East Avenue Parkway walls (stone pilaster with stucco walls and river rock planters) should have regularly spaced indents similar to or matching that of Tract 15911. 3. Rear yard fencing visible from public streets (at top of slope) shall be decorative masonry. Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Fieldstone veneer shall be natural river rock as opposed to a manufactured product. Other types of stone veneers may be manufactured. 2. All wall visible from or facing a street shall be decorative masonry on both sides. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval with the above comments. • Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Emily Wimer DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Debra Meier June 5, 2001 • ~~uvr~AUU t'AC;If-IC COMMUNITIES -A residential subdivision of 139 single-family lots on 45.28 acres in the Very Low Residential District (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) and 13.25 acres of open space in the Low Residential District (up to 4 dwelling units per acre), utilizing the Optional Development Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. All residential development is proposed on the 45.28-acre parcel located on the south side of Highland Avenue east of Etiwanda Avenue; and all the required open space (per the Optional Development Standards) is proposed on the 13.25- acre parcel located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue south of Victoria Avenue -APN: 227-051- 01, 04, O5, 06, 09 and 28; and APN: 227-121-16 and 49. Related file: Tree Removal Permit, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment, and Development Agreement. Backoround and Design Parameters: The Planning Commission conducted aPre-Application Review meeting to discuss the basic concept of this proposed project on March 7, 2001. The basic premise of this project is to consider the two separate parcels within the context of the whole project description in order to analyze land use consistency within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, along with the provisions of open space requirements of the Optional Development Standards of the Specific Plan. The project consists of a residential subdivision of 139 single-family lots on 45.28-acres within the Very Low Residential District, and 13.25 acres of open space in the Low Residential District, of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. All residential development is proposed on the 45.28-acre parcel located on the south side of Highland Avenue east of Etiwanda Avenue; and all the required open space • (per the Optional Development Standards) is proposed on the 13.25-acre parcel, located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue south of Victoria Avenue. In order to accomplish all aspects of the proposed project the Etiwanda Specific Plan will be amended in order to specifically allow the transfer of open space and/or density to off-site parcels, when certain findings can be made, and it is in the best interest of the community to do so. This amendment will be added to the Optional Development Standards, Figure 5-3, of the Specific Plan. In addition, the applicant is proposing a Development Agreement in order to identify all the technical details of the transfer of both density and open space. Upon successful approval and completion of the project will result in a 13-acre public park site adjacent to the Etiwanda Intermediate School, the future Pacific Electric Trail; and the development of a 139 lot subdivision developed using the Low Density Optional Development Standards (although the underlying land use designation will remain Very Low Density Residential). The proposed Tentative Tract Map is compatible with the existing development immediately adjacent to the site. All lots in both adjacent tracts are approximately 7,500 square feet in area, while lots within the proposed project average approximately 10,000 square feet (8,500 square feet minimum). The north boundary of the site is Highland Avenue, and the new State Route 30/210 freeway. Undeveloped properties adjacent to the west and south are in the Very Low Density District, and undeveloped property to the east (south of the existing tract) is in the Low Density District. The Cross and Crown Lutheran Church is located on Etiwanda Avenue south of the site, and the Cucamonga County Water District water reservoir is located on Etiwanda Avenue north and west of the project site. • The proposed park site is located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue, south of Victoria Avenue. It is immediately south of the Etiwanda Intermediate School, and north of the historic Etiwanda rail station and the future Pacific Electric Trail. This site is in the Low Density Residential District additional undeveloped property in the Low District abuts the site to the east. DRC COMMENTS TTM 16193 (SUBTT16195) -COLORADO PACIFIC COMMUNITIES June 5, 2001 • Page 2 Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: TENTATIVE TRACT DESIGN The primary issue in the design of the Tentative Tract Map is that the proposed design will remove the existing S-curve alignment of Highland Avenue that Caltrans has constructed in order to connect Highland Avenue to East Avenue. Instead, the applicant proposes to maintain Highland Avenue along the north boundary of the tract, then direct southbound traffic along the east boundary of the tract, until it connects with the existing Highland Avenue connection to East Avenue. The City Traffic Engineer has concurred with the re-alignment proposal; however, such a change presents design challenges. The result of this realignment is that the Highland Avenue alternate' will be directed along the rear of the existing residents that face Ash Avenue thus creating an undesirable "double frontage" condition for existing homeowners. Anew wall will be installed along the property line and the parkway way will be landscaped which would necessitate Landscape Maintenance District for maintenance of over 1,000 feet. City policy is to discourage • unnecessary LMD areas. In general, the proposed Tentative Tract Map utilizes numerous cul-de-sacs in the design, with overall circulation between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue using a curvilinear street pattern. WINDROW REMOVAL, PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT The project site contains approximately 300 existing trees, primarily Eucalyptus windrow remnants, either on-site or along property boundaries (both on-and off-site). This is the area that burned in the "Etiwanda Fire," which damaged many windrows. Many of the trees along the property boundary may effect the rear yards of adjacent residents. The trees at the property boundary maybe considered for preservation, whereverfeasible or desirable, in order to minimize impacts to existing residents. This condition is typical of portions of the north property boundary along the Cucamonga County Water District parcel (approximately 30 trees in question), along a portion of the south boundary (approximately 42 trees in question), and along a portion of the east boundary (approximately 21 trees in question). The Etiwanda Specific Plan, Figure 5-13, indicates that the existing Eucalyptus windrow along the south side of Highland Avenue will be preserved. In accordance with the recommendations of the Arborist Report, 19 of the 49 trees along Highland Avenue should not be preserved due to health of the tree or previous fire damage. In addition, the California Fan Palms, on the north side of Highland Avenue, are also indicated for preservation in the Specific Plan, and although not analyzed in the Arborist Report, many of these Palm trees appear to be in poor condition from visual inspection. r U DRC COMMENTS TTM 16193 (SUBTT16195) -COLORADO PACIFIC COMMUNITIES June 5, 2001 . Page 3 All other trees in the interior portion of the site are proposed to be removed. The Optional Standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan does require on-site windrow replacement of 100 linear feet per acre in the Very Low District and 50-feet per acre in the Low District. Since the site is in the Very Low District he proposed project should include 4,500 linear feet (100-feet X 45 acres) of on-site windrow replacement utilizing the 660-foot by 330-foot grid pattern that is typical of the Etiwanda area. The on-site windrow replacement shall be reflected on the Conceptual landscape Plan.' No tree removal or replacement is proposed at the open space site at this time. THE KEMP HOUSE The Kemp House is located at the northeast corner of the site facing Highland Avenue. The house was once the residence of the Marcus Kemp familywho were early citrus growers in the Etiwanda Community as early as 1895. The property remained in the Kemp family until sold in recent years. The house has been altered and specifically no longer contains the veranda and balcony that once wrapped the front portion of the house. The property does not meet the criteria for the National Register of Historic Places, and is only marginally suitable for listing as a State Resource; however, the building is eligible as a local landmark, and a Historic Landmark Designation was initiated by the Planning Division approximately two-years ago when a demolition request was submitted. • The applicant's have submitted a complete Cultural Resource assessment of the Site, with specific detailed research of the history and significance of the structure. Since the structure is potentially eligible as a local Historic Landmark, the applicant can either preserve the structure in its place on a lot within the Tentative Tract, or relocate the structure to an acceptable site. The current thought is that the "acceptable site" may be the open space parcel that is associated with this project, and eventually the structure would be restored and incorporated into use by Community Services. If the structure is moved, the applicant would be required to place the structures on a new foundation, secure and fence the perimeter, at a minimum. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: A Landscape Master Plan Concept is proposed and will approved with the Tentative Tract Map. The Conceptual Landscape Master Plan will set standards for streetscape design, both on the perimeter of the project, and on internal streets; slope planting; windrow replacement; perimeter walls; and side yard walls and streetscape design concepts for the interior of the project. The intent is to establish a design concept that exemplifies the Etiwanda character, and create a unique pedestrian landscape character for the specific project. 2. A Conceptual Grading Plan includes several sections taken at the property boundary, specifically where existing residents may be affected by the future development. Staff has suggested that the applicant consider these conditions individually to avoid great variations in grade to the extent possible. Existing residents typically dislike new construction that will peer into their house or yard and deprive them of privacy. The latest cross-sections illustrate that the applicant has been able to reduce grade separations between on-site and off-site • properties by approximately 2-3 feet. DRC COMMENTS TTM 16193 (SUBTT16195) -COLORADO PACIFIC COMMUNITIES June 5, 2001 • Page 4 In addition, the existing residents have a mixture of fencing types and the applicants have indicated a desire to replace all perimeter fencing with a block wall. The applicant will be required to coordinate with individual property owners to protect improvements and/or trees in-place. 3. The design and layout of the Tentative Tract Map proposes a closure of Catalpa Street, from the east, assuming that existing residents will not look favorably on the potential for increased traffic into their neighborhoods. Therefore, a modified cul-de-sac will be constructed at the western terminus of Catalpa Street in cooperation with existing residents at this location. However, the Tentative Tract Map design is proposing a street connection to Pecan Avenue to the south. Even though there may be some resistance from existing residents, this connection will provide a second means of access into a small subdivision that currently only has one point of access, from Victoria Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that upon review and discussion of all the issues identified by staff, and any questions raised by the Committee, that the committee make recommendations for conditions of approval, and forward the project to the Planning Commission for appropriate action. Design Review Committee Action: • Members Present: Staff Planner: Debra Meier •