Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002/08/20 - Agenda PacketDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES • TUESDAY AUGUST 20, 2002 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: John Mannerino Pam Stewart Dan Coleman Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias Larry McNiel CONSENT CALENDAR 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 (Kirt) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00618 -PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES - A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 70 single-family lots on 47.9 acres of land in the Very-Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Etiwanda and Summit Avenues in the Etiwanda Specific Plan -APN: 225-171-05, 12, 13, 20, 22, and 25. Related files: Tentative Tract SUBTT16147, Conditional Use Permit DRC CUP00-49, and Tree Removal Permit 00-35. 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. 7:10 p.m (Rick) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBTT16274-JUSTIN DING - A Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a 5.03 property into seven parcels (Parcel 1 -27,500 square feet, Parcel2- 24,300 square feet, Parcel 3 - 27,200 square feet, Parcel 4 - 35,500 square feet, Parcel 5 - 20,600 square feet, Parcel 6 - 20,200 square feet, Parcel 7 - 21,000 square feet) located on the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and Mayberry Avenue -APN: 1074-261-05. 7:30 p.m. (Kirt) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00442-YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES-The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for two previously approved tentative tract maps consisting of 109 single-family lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street -APN: 225-161-11, 12, 45, and 50. Related Files: Tract Maps SUBTT14493 and SUBTT14522. 7:50 p.m. (Emily) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00322 -ASH - A request to construct asingle- familycustom home, totaling 11,950 square feet in the Very Low Residential District on • 3.26 acres of land, located at the terminus of W hirlaway Street and Klusman Avenue. APN: 1061-511-06 and 07. DRC AGENDA August 20, 2002 Page 2 • 8:10 p.m. (Doug) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEWDRC2002-00328 - PARAGON -A request to construct two industrial warehouse buildings (Building "A" 270,544 square and Building "B" 187,760 square feet) totaling 458,314 square feet on 24.32 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 14), located south of 6th Street, east and west of Santa Anita Avenue - APN: 229-283-48. 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 • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Kirt Coury August 20, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00618 -PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES - A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 70 single-family lots on 47.9 acres of land in the Very-Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Etiwanda and Summit Avenues in the Etiwanda Specific Plan - APN: 225-171-05, 12, 13, 20, 22, and 25. Related files: Tentative Tract SUBTT16147, Conditional Use Permit DRC CUP00-49, and Tree Removal Permit 00-35. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, John Mannerino, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Kirt Coury The Committee reviewed the revised plans and recommended approval of the project subject to the following plan corrections: The proposed perimeter walls along the north, west, and northwest property boundary shall be shall be textured with a decorative slurry and paint finish subject to review and approval of the City Planner. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:10 p.m. Rick Fisher August 20, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBTT16274 -JUSTIN DING - A Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a 5.03 property into seven parcels (Parcel 1 - 27,500 square feet, Parcel 2 - 24,300 square feet, Parcel 3 - 27,200 square feet, Parcel 4 - 35,500 square feet, Parcel 5 - 20,600 square feet, Parcel 6 - 20,200 square feet, Parcel 7 - 21,000 square feet) located on the northwest corner of W ilson Avenue and Mayberry Avenue - APN: 1074-261-05. Design Parameters: Each of the seven proposed lots complies with the minimum lot size (20,000 square feet) and minimum parcel width (100 feet) required in the Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) zone of the Residential Development District. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. None Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Most trees are proposed for removal in order to construct proposed improvements. In • particular, the arborist identified 3 large Coast Live Oak trees, which should be preserved. The 3 trees are identified as #21, 23, and 24 on the Grading Plan. Located at the southeast corner of Lot 4 are #21 and #23. Adjacent to the curb is #24 on Wilson Avenue. All 3 trees conflict with proposed improvements within the drip line of their canopies; therefore, staff recommends preservation by relocation to the three street corners of the project within the front yards of Lots 1, 4, and 5. 2. If considered "flag lots," Lots 2 and 4 will meet the 200-foot minimum lot depth. Staff supports such a consideration as meeting the intent of the 200-foot lot depth standard to provide adequate room for horse keeping. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. Construct 10-foot wide access ramps from local feeder trails to the corral area. Ramp grade shall not exceed 5:1. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above-mentioned revisions being submitted, prior to Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, John Mannerino, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Rick Fisher • The Committee approved the project as presented subject to the above recommendations. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:30 p.m. Kirt Coury August 20, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00442 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES -The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for two previously approved tentative tract maps consisting of 109 single-family lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda planned development located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street - APN: 225-161-1 1, 12, 45, and 50. Related Files: Tract Maps SUBTT14493 and SUBTT14522. Design Perimeters: The site falls within the Rancho Etiwanda planned development, a 1,238 residential unit development approved by the County in May 1991, and recently annexed into the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The site is part of 7 tracts currently being rough graded in the planned development. The site is bordered by vacant land (proposed for residential development) to the north, and south. To the west of the site is the Day Creek Channel, and to the east is Day Creek Boulevard. The site is approximately 500 feet north of the newly constructed 210 Freeway. Access to the site is from Day Creek Boulevard. The applicant is proposing to develop 106 single-family homes on two tracts approved under the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development Agreement (Tract 14493 and 14522). The homes will include 4 different architectural styles with 10 floor plans. The styles include, Country, Ranch, Bungalow and Santa Barbara. The styles will include porches and side on garages. The project will be built in 4 phases. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee • discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The applicant has worked with staff to resolve all major design issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Provide 360-degree architecture by adding carrying more details from front around to side and rear elevations. The following are a few examples of suggested enhancements. Plan 1 C-Ranch add horizontal siding. Plans 1, 2 window mullions are provided on all four front elevations; however, they are not used on any side or rear elevations. Plan 4 A, B, D have corbels underneath the front windows; however, they are not used on side or rear windows. Along with providing enhanced architecture on homes that back and side onto Day Creek Boulevard, Vintage Drive and Banyan Street, provide enhanced architecture on all corner side lots within the development. Corner sides should have wrap around porch elements where possible. Where elevation designs limit wrap around porches, enhance elevations using additional architectural treatments, such as more wood windowsills, banding, decorative gable end details, and stone/rock veneers. All veneers should be wrapped around on side elevations a minimum of 5 feet or to a logical stopping point (e.g., return fencing). 3. Show chimney features on all building elevations, as identified on all floor plans. Chimney's • that back and side onto Day Creek Boulevard, Vintage Drive, Banyan Street, and on all corner side lots within the development should have architectural detail, including brick, stone, or sidings as shown in the adopted architectural guidelines for Rancho Etiwanda. • • DRC AGENDA DRC2002-00442 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES August 20, 2002 Page 2 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All walls visible from or facing a street should be decorative masonry on both sides. 2. All interior private yard slopes, required to be landscaped should receive ground cover, shrubs and one tree for every 150 square feet of area. A ratio of fifty percent 5-gallon and fifty percent 15-gallon shall be provided for trees. 3. All river rock should be authentic and not veneer. 4. Plot one tree in each front yard area on Landscape Plan. 5. Provide decorative and paving/treatments on driveways. To enhance streetscape, decorative paving/treatments should be varied throughout tracts. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above-mentioned revisions being submitted prior to Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, John Mannerino, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Kirt Coury The Committee recommended approval of the proposed project subject to the Secondary and Policy Issues, with a modification to Secondary Issue No. 3 to reflect that no chimney features are provided since the project proposes natural gas burning fireplaces only. In addition, the Committee added the following condition to the project. Rear deck features shall be,provided to all homes that back onto Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Avenue. n U DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS . 7:50 p.m. Emily Wimer August 20, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00322 -ASH - A request to construct asingle-family custom home, totaling 11,950 square feet in the Very Low Residential District on 3.26 acres of land, located at the terminus of Whirlaway Avenue and Klusman Avenue - APN: 1061-511-06 and 07. Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to construct an 11,950 single-family residence on a very isolated property. The two-story home proposed has significant movement proposed in the footprint, resulting in strong articulation in the main story. A rotunda is featured as a single story on the entry (south elevation) of the home. Concrete balustrades are illustrated in all four elevations, as well as deep balconies which add a dramatic effect. Concrete columns are also utilized on all four elevations, which extend to the Porte-cochere illustrated on the west elevation. A 360-degree architecture is accomplished with the following accent features on the elevations: decorative window moldings, divided light windows, and cornice trim. Stucco treatment is proposed on all four sides and illustrated the Mediterranean architectural style. This section should be used to explain the site context and those major issues or constraints, which affect the project's design. The house is setback over 265 feet from curb face along Whirlaway Street. The lot, located at the terminus of Klusman Avenue and Whirlaway Street is in the process of a lot line adjustment to merge three lots into one, 3-acre parcel. The proposed two story house and attached garage (and two-story RV garage) is designed with a minimum of 5 stepped pads that have a total elevation change of 5 feet over native terrain with a grade change of 10 feet across the pad of the house. The proposed house and garage requires a vertical cut of 6 feet and a vertical fill of 7 feet, and has • combined earthwork quantities of cut to equa17,150 cubic yards and fill to equal 5,960 cubic yards. As a side note on the grading plans, the site will be balanced with excess volume being used for the landscape area to include the 275-foot setback area. Under Hillside Development Regulations, projects, which exceed the 5-foot cuUfill maximum OR 1,500 cubic yard minimum, require review by the Design Review Committee and by the Planning Commission. The purpose of this review is to ensure that the proposed project meets the intent of the Hillside Regulations. 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: Grading: The primary issue is whetherthe proposed project substantially meets the intentof the Hillside Development Ordinance. The purpose of the Hillside Ordinance is to minimize the impacts of grading and preserve the natural topography. The major concerns are the quantities of earthwork, primarily comprised of 7,150 cubic yards of cut and 5,960 cubic yards of fill. In contrast to conventional "flat pad" design, staff believes the proposed house meets the guidelines of the Hillside Development Ordinance by reducing earthwork quantities through the use of multiple stepped building pads that permit the house to follow the natural terrain. Also, the effects of grading have been minimized through contouring of slopes use of variable gradients to soften their appearance. The stepped property line walls are consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance as well. • DRC AGENDA DR DRC2002-00322 -ASH August 20, 2002 • Page 2 Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Provide additional trim, or other accent feature required with 360-degree architecture on the west elevation. C~ Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. If a double wall condition will result, the developer should make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. The developer shall notify by mail, all contiguous property owners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fencing along the project's perimeter. 2. All walls exposed to public view, including retaining walls and return walls, shall be decorative (i.e. stucco, split-face or slump stone). 3. Sloped area of 2:1 or greater between 5 and 8 feet in vertical height must be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control per Standard Conditions. 4. Retaining walls are limited to a height of 4 feet in the Hillside area. Terraced retaining walls are strongly recommended as mitigation for large slopes in the front and rear of property. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that with secondary issues being addressed, the proposed project meets the intent of the Hillside Development Regulations and recommends approval. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, John Mannerino, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Emily Wimer The Design Review Committee approved the project as submitted at the meeting. No further revisions are required. The project will be forward to Planning Commission for review and approval. C~ I DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:10 p.m. Doug Fenn August 20, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00328- PARAGON - A request to construct two industrial warehouse buildings (Building "A" - 270,544 square feet and Building "B" 187,760 square feet) totaling 458,314 square feet on 24.32 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 14), located south of 6th Street east and west of Santa Anita Avenue - APN: 229-283-48 Design Parameters: The 24.32-acre site is vacant and is bordered by the proposed extension of 6 Street to the immediate north followed by vacant land, Day Creek Channel to the immediate west followed by vacant land, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Co. drill track to the immediate east followed by a manufacturing facility (Meeder Equipment), and astorage/distribution facility (Weber Distribution) and vacant land to the south. Site development will occur in a single phase. No tenant(s) have been identified for the project. Each building will have two office sections(s) that could roughly be 5,700 square feet each (square footage for office portions has not been finalized yet). The office portions of the building are richly defined with details, glazing and raised architectural features to clearly delineate primary entry points. The portion of the building(s) that fronts onto Santa Anita Avenue and 6th Streets are richly landscaped and the strongest architectural detailing faces the avenue. The building incorporates two primary materials. The building will be concrete tilt-up painted crystal ball gray pennant, gray cliff, and white accent squares. Sandblasting is added as a second primary material to accent the office portion of the building. The project incorporates a blue reflective • glazing at the office areas to create a contrast. The building has strong 360-degree architectural details. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Staff is pleased with the outcome of the project. However additional sandblasting is needed on all side of both buildings. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Provide one outdoor employee for each of the two office ends of both building because there are potentially four tenants. 2. All wall-mounted light fixtures shall have light pointed downwards. Wall-pak type of light fixtures that produce glare must be avoided. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main building colors. ~J DRC AGENDA DR DRC2002-00328 -PARAGON August 20, 2002 • Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to the revisions noted above. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, John Mannerino, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Doug Fenn The applicant agreed to make changes and work out major issues with staff • n LJ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • AUGUST 20, 2002 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. • Respectful) submitted, Brad Buller Secretary • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING REVISED AGENDA -AUGUST 15, 2002 TUESDAY AUGUST 20, 2002 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: John Mannerino Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Dan Coleman Larry McNiel 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. (Kirt) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00618 -PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES - A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 70 single-family lots on 47.9 acres of land in the Very-Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Etiwanda and Summit Avenues in the Etiwanda Specific Plan -APN: 225-171-05, 12, 13, 20, 22, and 25. Related files: Tentative • Tract SUBTT16147, Conditional Use Permit DRC CUP00-49, and Tree Removal Permit 00-35. 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. 7:10 p.m. (Rick) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBTT16274-JUSTINDING-ATentativeTractMapto subdivide a 5.03 property into seven parcels (Parcel 1 -27,500 square feet, Parcel 2 - 24,300 square feet, Parcel 3 - 27,200 square feet, Parcel 4 - 35,500 square feet, Parcel 5 - 20,600 square feet, Parcel 6 - 20,200 square feet, Parcel 7 - 21,000 square feet) located on the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and Mayberry Avenue -APN: 1074-261-05. 7:30 p.m (Kirt) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00442-YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES-The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for two previously approved tentative tract maps consisting of 109 single-family lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street -APN: 225-161-11, 12, 45, and 50. Related Files: Tract Maps SUBTT14493 and SUBTT14522. 7:50 p.m. (Emily) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00322 -ASH - A request to construct asingle- familycustom home, totaling 11,950 square feet in the Very.:Low Residential District on 3.26 acres of land, located at the terminus of W hirlaway Street and Klusman Avenue. APN: 1061-511-06 and 07. • DRC AGENDA August 20, 2002 Page 2 8:10 p.m. (Doug) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEWDRC2002-00328 - PARAGON -A requestto constructtwo industrial warehouse buildings (Building "A" 270,544 square and Building "B" 187,760 square feet) totaling 458,314 square feet on - 24.32 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 14), located south of 6th Street, east and west of Santa Anita Avenue - APN: 229-283-48. 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, Lois Schrader, Planning Secretary for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 15, 2002, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Ce ter Drive, ncho Cucamonga. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Kirt Coury August 20, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-0061 8 -PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES - A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 70 single-family lots on 47.9 acres of land in the Very-Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Etiwanda and Summit Avenues in the Etiwanda Specific Plan - APN: 225-171-05, 12, 13, 20, 22, and 25. Related files: Tentative Tract SUBTT16147, Conditional Use Permit DRC CUP00-49, and Tree Removal Permit 00-35. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Kirt Coury C~ t. J DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:10 p.m. Rick Fisher August 20, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBTT16274 -JUSTIN DING - A Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a 5.03 property into seven parcels (Parcel 1 - 27,500 square feet, Parcel 2 - 24,300 square feet, Parcel 3 - 27,200 square feet, Parcel 4 - 35,500 square feet, Parcel 5 - 20,600 square feet, Parcel 6 - 20,200 square feet, Parcel 7 - 21,000 square feet) located on the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and Mayberry Avenue - APN: 1074-261-05. Design Parameters: Each of the seven proposed lots complies with the minimum lot size (20,000 square feet) and minimum parcel width (100 feet) required in the Very Low Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) zone of the Residential Development District. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. None Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. • 1. Most trees are proposed for removal in order to construct proposed improvements. In particular, the arborist identified 3 large Coast Live Oak trees, which should be preserved. The 3 trees are identified as #21, 23, and 24 on the Grading Plan. Located at the southeast corner of Lot 4 are #21 and #23. Adjacent to the curb is #24 on W ilson Avenue. All 3 trees conflict with proposed improvements within the drip line of their canopies; therefore, staff recommends preservation by relocation to the three street corners of the~project within the front yards of Lots 1, 4, and 5. 2. If considered "flag lots," Lots 2 and 4 will meet the 200-foot minimum lot depth. Staff supports such a consideration as meeting the intent of the 200-foot lot depth standard to provide adequate room for horse keeping. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. Construct 10-foot wide access ramps from local feeder trails to the corral area. Ramp grade shall not exceed 5:1. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above-mentioned revisions being submitted, prior to Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Rick Fisher • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:30 p.m. Kirt Coury August 20, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00442 -YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES -The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for two previously approved tentative tract maps consisting of 109 single-family lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda planned development located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street - APN: 225-161-11, 12, 45, and 50. Related Files: Tract Maps SUBTT14493 and SUBTT14522. Design Perimeters: The site falls within the Rancho Etiwanda planned development, a 1,238 residential unit development approved by the County in May 1991, and recently annexed into the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The site is part of 7 tracts currently being rough graded in the planned development. The site is bordered by vacant land (proposed for residential development) to the north, and south. To the west of the site is the Day Creek Channel, and to the east is Day Creek Boulevard. The site is approximately 500 feet north of the newly constructed 210 Freeway. Access to the site is from Day Creek Boulevard. The applicant is proposing to develop 106 single-family homes on two tracts approved under the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development Agreement (Tract 14493 and 14522). The homes will include 4 different architectural styles with 10 floor plans. The styles include, Country, Ranch, Bungalow and Santa Barbara. The siyles will include porches and side on garages. The project will be built in 4 phases. 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 worked with staff to resolve all major design issues Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Provide 360-degree architecture by adding carrying more details from front around to side and rear elevations. The following are a few examples of suggested enhancements. Plan 1 C-Ranch add horizontal siding. Plans 1, 2 window mullions are provided on all four front elevations; however, they are not used on any side or rear elevations. Plan 4 A, B, D have corbels underneath the front windows; however, they are not used on side or rear windows. 2. Along with providing enhanced architecture on homes that back and side onto Day Creek Boulevard, Vintage Drive and Banyan Street, provide enhanced architecture on all corner side lots within the development. Corner sides should have wrap around porch elements where possible. Where elevation designs limit wrap around porches, enhance elevations using additional architectural treatments, such as more wood windowsills, banding, decorative gable end details, and stone/rock veneers. All veneers should be wrapped around on side elevations a minimum of 5 feet or to a logical stopping point (e.g., return fencing). 3. Show chimney features on all building elevations, as identified on all floor plans. Chimney's • that back and side onto Day Creek Boulevard, Vintage Drive, Banyan Street, and on all corner side lots within the development should have architectural detail, including brick, stone, or sidings as shown in the adopted architectural guidelines for Rancho Etiwanda. DRC AGENDA DRC2002-00442 August 20, 2002 • Page 2 YOUNG CALIFORNIA HOMES Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All walls visible from or facing a street should be decorative masonry on both sides. 2. All interior private yard slopes, required to be landscaped should receive ground cover, shrubs and one tree for every 150 square feet of area. A ratio of fifty percent 5-gallon and fifty percent 15-gallon shall be provided for trees. 3. All river rock should be authentic and not veneer. 4. Plot one tree in each front yard area on Landscape Plan. 5. Provide decorative and paving/treatments on driveways. To enhance streetscape, decorative paving/treatments should be varied throughout tracts. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above-mentioned revisions being submitted prior to Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: • Staff Planner: Kirt Coury n U DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:50 p.m. Emily Wimer August 20, 2002 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00322 -ASH - Arequest toconstruct asingle-family custom home, totaling 11,950 square feet in the Very Low Residential District on 3.26 acres of land, located at the terminus of Whirlaway Avenue and Klusman Avenue - APN: 1061-511-06 and 07. Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to construct an 11,950 single-family residence on a very isolated property. The two-story home proposed has significant movement proposed in the footprint, resulting in strong articulation in the main story. A rotunda is featured as a single story on the entry (south elevation) of the home. Concrete balustrades are illustrated in all four elevations, as well as deep balconies which add a dramatic effect. Concrete columns are also utilized on all four elevations, which extend to the Porte-cochere illustrated on the west elevation. A 360-degree architecture is accomplished with the following accent features on the elevations: decorative window moldings, divided light windows, and cornice trim. Stucco treatment is proposed on all four sides and illustrated the Mediterranean architectural style. This section should be used to explain the site context and those major issues or constraints, which affect the project's design. The house is setback over 265 feet from curb face along W hirlaway Street. The lot, located at the terminus of Klusman Avenue and Whirlaway Street is in the process of a lot line adjustment to merge three lots into one, 3-acre parcel. The proposed iwo story house and attached garage (and two-story RV garage) is designed with a minimum of 5 stepped pads that have a total elevation change of 5 feet over native terrain with a grade change of 10 feet across the pad of the house. The proposed house and garage requires a vertical cut of 6 feet and a vertical fill of 7 feet, and has • combined earthwork quantities of cut to equal 7,150 cubic yards and fill to equal 5,960 cubic yards. As a side note on the grading plans, the site will be balanced with excess volume being used for the landscape area to include the 275-foot setback area. Under Hillside Development Regulations, projects, which exceed the 5-foot cuUfill maximum OR 1,500 cubic yard minimum, require review by the Design Review Committee and by the Planning Commission. The purpose of this review is to ensure that the proposed project meets the intent of the Hillside Regulations. 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: Grading: The primary issue is whether the proposed project substantially meets the intent of the Hillside Development Ordinance. The purpose of the Hillside Ordinance is to minimize the impacts of grading and preserve the natural topography. The major concerns are the quantities of earthwork, primarily comprised of 7,150 cubic yards of cut and 5,960 cubic yards of fill. In contrast to conventional "flat pad" design, staff believes the proposed house meets the guidelines of the Hillside Development Ordinance by reducing earthwork quantities through the use of multiple stepped building pads that permit the house to follow the natural terrain. Also, the effects of grading have been minimized through contouring of slopes use of variable gradients to soften their appearance. The stepped property line walls are consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance as well. C~ DRC AGENDA DR DRC2002-00322 -ASH August 20, 2002 • Page 2 Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Provide additional trim, or other accent feature required with 360-degree architecture on the west elevation. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: If a double wall condition will result, the developer should make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. The developer shall notify by mail, all contiguous property owners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fencing along the project's perimeter. 2. All walls exposed to public view, including retaining walls and return walls, shall be decorative (i.e. stucco, split-face or slump stone). 3. Sloped area of 2:1 or greater between 5 and 8 feet in vertical height must be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control per Standard Conditions. 4. Retaining walls are limited to a height of 4 feet in the Hillside area. Terraced retaining walls are strongly recommended as mitigation for large slopes in the front and rear of property. • Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that with secondary issues being addressed, the proposed project meets the intent of the Hillside Development Regulations and recommends approval. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Emily Wimer • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:10 p.m. Doug Fenn August 20, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00328- PARAGON - A request to construct iwo industrial warehouse buildings (Building "A" - 270,544 square feet and Building "B" 187,760 square feet) totaling 458,314 square feet on 24.32 acres of land in the General Industrial (Subarea 14), located south of 6th Street east and west of Santa Anita Avenue - APN: 229-283-48 Design Parameters: The 24.32-acre site is vacant and is bordered by the proposed extension of 6 Street to the immediate north followed by vacant land, Day Creek Channel to the immediate west followed by vacant land, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Co. drill track to the immediate east followed by a manufacturing facility (Meeder Equipment), and astorage/distribution facility (Weber Distribution) and vacant land to the south. Site development will occur in a single phase. No tenant(s) have been identified for the project. Each building will have two office sections(s) that could roughly be 5,700 square feet each (square footage for office portions has not been finalized yet). The office portions of the building are richly defined with details, glazing and raised architectural features to clearly delineate primary entry points. The portion of the building(s) that fronts onto Santa Anita Avenue and 6th Streets are richly landscaped and the strongest architectural detailing faces the avenue. The building incorporates two primary materials. The building will be concrete tilt-up painted crystal ball gray pennant, gray cliff, and white accent squares. Sandblasting is added as a second primary material to accent the office portion of the building. The project incorporates a blue reflective • glazing at the office areas to create a contrast. The building has strong 360-degree architectural details. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Staff is pleased with the outcome of the project. However additional sandblasting is needed on all side of both buildings. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Provide one outdoor employee for each of the two office ends of both building because there are potentially four tenants. 2. All wall-mounted light fixtures shall have light pointed downwards. Wall-pak type of light fixtures that produce glare must be avoided. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main building colors. • DRC AGENDA DR DRC2002-00328 -PARAGON '~ August 20, 2002 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to the revisions noted above. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Doug Fenn • • v DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES • TUESDAY AUGUST 6, 2002 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: John Mannerino Pam Stewart Dan Coleman Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias Larry McNiel CONSENT CALENDAR The following items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Typicallythey 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 ariy public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:00 p.m. (Tom) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00318 - PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP -A request to construct one 6,200 square foot building and one 3,800 square foot building on 1.93 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Foothill Boulevard, Subarea 2), located at the northwest cornerof Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue -APN: 207-102-24 and 25. 7:20 p.m. (Doug) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEWDRC2001-00772 -PREMIER HOMES -The design review of building elevations and details site plan for a previously approved and recorded tentative tract map (TR10246) consisting of 15 lots on 7.5 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (2 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Hillside Road - APN: 1074-291-16 thru 30. Related File: Tract 10264. 7:40 p.m. (Emily) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP -The development of a 25,622 square foot warehouse in the Industrial District, Subarea 13, located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue -APN: 229-283-02. 8:00 p.m. (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002- 00290 -CALVARY CHAPEL -The proposed development of a 115,563 square foot multi-purpose building and master plan for future 63,033 square feet worship center for Calvary Chapel located on 4.10 acres of land on the west side of Elm Street • between Town Center Drive and Church Street within the Terra Vista Business Parkin the Office Park (OP) district of the Terra Vista Community Plan -APN: 1077-422-14. DRC AGENDA August 6, 2002 Page 2 • 8:20 p.m (Warren) TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16301 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD. - A residential subdivision of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00280 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD. -The development of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. 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. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn August 6, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00318 -PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP - A request to construct one 6,200 square foot building and one 3,800 square foot building on 1.93 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Foothill Boulevard, Subarea 2), located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-102-24 and 25. Design Parameters: The proposed project will occupy the two remaining pads approved with the application to develop the 10-acre shopping center at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue; approved under Conditional Use Permit 97-19 as a Master Plan for development of the site. The Master Plan included a 68,355 square foot supermarket; two satellite pads totaling 5,000 square feet each, and two drive-thru pads totaling 2,500 and 3,500 square feet. The Master Plan addressed conceptual building locations, overall circulation, access points, parking layout, landscaping, and provided conceptual elevations to establish an architectural style, and the form, bulk, and height of certain architectural elements. The master Conditional Use Permit was approved in 1997, and the supermarket and two drive-thru pads have been developed (i.e., Albertson's, Jack In The Box, and Albertson's Express). 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: There are no major design issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. On tower elements and below the trellis element of both buildings, expand the use of river rock on the column elements to include the entire column, and not stop as a wainscot. 2. On all other columns (i.e., Building C north and west elevations, and Building D east and south elevation), include the use of a river rock wainscot. 3. Incorporate a river rock wainscot to Building C (north, south, and east elevations) and Building D (north, south, and west elevations). 4. All stone shall be native river rock; the use of faux stone is not permitted. 5. Special decorative paving should be used for the entire pedestrian sidewalk system, consistent with the approved Master Plan. 6. The site plan for Pad C deleted the existing landscaping in four planter areas located adjacent to the parking spaces west of the proposed building. This landscaping includes Queen Palms and shrubs planted with the shopping center. This landscaping does not interfere with building location and should remain in place. • DRC COMMENTS DR DRC2002-00318 -PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP • August 6, 2002 Page 2 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: All trash enclosures shall be designed for compatibility with the City Standard Drawing. 2. All signs shall be designed to comply with the centers Uniform Sign Program. 3. The metal railing used on the east elevation of Building C shall be painted to match the remainder of the center. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee approve the project subject to the modifications listed above. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Tom Grahn The applicant at the meeting showed revised plans that incorporated Secondary Issues 2, 3, 4, and 5. The Committee reviewed the revised plans and recommended approval of the project subject to • the following conditions: 1. Extend the river rock treatment to include the entire column for all tower elements for the two buildings. 2. Add spendrel storefront glass treatment to the south and east elevations of Pad C. 3. Pad C -The Committee agree to move the 4 tree wells along the west elevation to the plaza area at the southwest side of the building. The Committee required the placement of a minimum of four 36-inch planter pots with irrigation and to be planted with small flowering trees along the west elevation. 4. The applicant agreed to incorporate all items under Policy Issues. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:20 p.m. Doug Fenn August 6, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00772-PREMIER HOMES -The design review of building elevations and details site plan for a previously approved and recorded tentative tract map (TR10246) consisting of 15 lots on 7.5 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (2 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Hillside Road - APN: 1074-291-16 thru 30. Related File: Tract 10264. Design Parameters: The site is vacant with partial improvements, which reflect recorded tentative tract map (TR 10246); the site has been previously rough graded. The site is located within the Hillside Overlay District because it slopes to the south at 8-10 percent grade. The applicant is proposing a single phased development. The site is surrounded bysingle-family residences and a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to the north. The applicant is proposing to develop 15single-family homes in the previously approved recorded tract map (TR 10246). The homes will include 2 floor plans (with options) and 5 different architectural styles. The square footage of the homes ranges in size from 4,207 to 5,571 square feet. The architectural styles of the project include Spanish Eclectic, Tuscan, French Eclectic, Spanish Colonial, and Monterey. The homes will also include porches on corner lots, side on garages, and additional enhanced architecture on elevations, which back and side and front Hillside and Haven Avenues. 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: Grading: Redesign project to eliminate the proposed conventional "flat pad" and 2:1 slope design, which does not conform to the City's Hillside Development Ordinance. In short, the project has not been designed to work with existing landform; rather, the landform is being completely altered to work with flat floor plans. Slope heights range from 5.5 feet to 25 feet. The Hillside Development Ordinance requires special architectural and design techniques to conform to the landform, such as split level foundations of greater than 18 inches, stem walls, and stacking. Stacking the home above a basement is proposed on only 3 of the 15 lots. The Hillside Development Ordinance also limits the "flat pad" to the area of the building footprint and a 15-foot flat area at rear of home. 2. Architecture: The applicant has worked diligently with staff to resolve major design issues. Staff is pleased with the 360-degree architecture on all elevation. The applicant responded to staff's recommendation and added architectural details such as: surrounds, sash windows, dormers, rafter tails, arches, shutters, stone work and other elements, which adds richness to all side of the residences. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Taper driveways to 16 feet at right-of-way line. • 2. Provide pilasters along Haven Avenue at each lot corner. Minimum pilasterwidth should be 24 inches. DRC COMMENTS DRC2001-00772 -PREMIER HOMES August 6, 2002 • Page 2 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All walls visible from or facing a street should be decorative masonry on both sides. 2. All river rock should be authentic and not veneer. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and return to Committee for review. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Doug Fenn The Committee directed the applicant to work with the Grading Committee in designing the project to comply with the Hillside Development Ordinance. The Committee recommended approval of the house design and directed the applicant to resolve the grading issues prior to forwarding the project for Planning Commission review. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:40 p.m. Emily Wimer August 6, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP -The development of a 25,622 square foot warehouse in the Industrial District, Subarea 13, located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue - APN: 229-283-02. Design Parameters: The project site is situated on the east side of Charles Smith Road on approximately 1.25 acres of land. The property is bordered to the east by the 1-15 freeway, to the south by Cardlock filling station, and to the north is an industrial warehouse building. The 25,622 square foot speculative warehouse building also includes a 5,104 square foot mezzanine. The property is generally flat with less than a 2 percent slope. The proposed project is a speculative building targeting warehouse distribution tenant with limited office space. A total of four loading docks, two of which are small truck loading only, and two 14-foot by 50-foot loading docks on either side. A total of two truck parking spaces are proposed. Additional parking for expansion of the office space has been included in the parking calculations. Finish materials for the building exterior include Greylite glass, beige Travertine stone, and painted tilt-up concrete. The applicant will be providing a range of hue tones for the tilt-up concrete at Design Review Committee. The landscape setback of 25 feet will allow for bench seating at the front of the building. The applicant will also provide a model at the Committee meeting. 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 issues: Colors: The Committee should review the proposed materials sample board and color chips, which are different than the colored elevations. Green is proposed on the majority of the building with gray accent stripes. The applicant has provided samples of at least a half dozen shades of green for your consideration. The Travertine stone color should compliment the main material of the building (although both gray and beige tones will work with green, the accent stripes should match the Travertine stone color). The Industrial Districts architectural guidelines state that, "building materials, colors, and textures shall be compatible with those of adjacent or nearby buildings." Photographs of the adjoining buildings will be provided at the Committee meeting. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: All doors and roll-up dock doors shall be painted to match the building. (Doors on freeway elevation are called out as the color of gray glass.) Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project with incorporation of modifications. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong • Staff Planner: Emily Wimer DRC COMMENTS DRC2002-001 1 6 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP August 6, 2002 • Page 2 The Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide a minimum 8-foot by S-foot color test panel on the building for Design Review Committee review and approval. If the Committee does not approve the color, the applicant shall submit a different color for the building, subject to Design Review Committee review. 2. The raw edges of the travertine material shall not be exposed. 3. The perimeter wall (east property line) will be constructed of split face block with a decorative cap. 4. Grooved concrete walls will be provided on all screen walls as illustrated on the elevations. 5. Additional trees will be required on site on the east elevation, facing the freeway. 6. Solar gray glass will be provided on all windows. C~ C~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:00 p.m. Debra Meier August 6, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00290 - CALVARYCHAPEL -The proposed development of a 115,563 square foot multi-purpose building and master plan for future 63,033 square feet worship center for Calvary Chapel located on 4.10 acres of land on the west side of Elm Street between Town Center Drive and Church Street within the Terra Vista Business Park in the Office Park (OP) district of the Terra Vista Community Plan - APN: 1077-422-14. Design Parameters: The Terra Vista Business Park (Conditional Use Permit 86-20) was approved as athree-phased project, however, since the time of approval only two phases of the project have been constructed. The east portion of the block constitutes the third phase (4.10 acres) and is the site of the proposed Calvary Chapel. The entire perimeter of the block bound by Church Street, Elm Street, Town Center Drive, and Terra Vista Parkway were completed with the initial phases of the project. The Terra Vista Greenway Trail Type B, which includes the parallel bicycle and pedestrian paths within the parkway, was developed along the Elm Avenue frontage. The Business Park currently includes such businesses as Madole and Associates, Central School District, Mountain Faith Community Church, San Joaquin Valley College, and an assortment of professional and medical offices. Seven suites within the businesses park are currently vacant. The proposal by Calvary Chapel would complete the development of the Terra Vista Business Park. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Architectural Issues: Minor modifications to the architecture of the proposed church would provide greater compatibility and sense of completion to the business park. Photographs of the existing business park will be available at the meeting for comparison: The proposed multi-purpose building shall incorporate the use the architectural patterns of the existing business park, including the use of glass, awnings and decorative file insets. The use of stone can be used to set the church apart from the remainder of the business park. 2. Eliminate the brow over the arch on the east elevation and over the doorways on the north and south elevations, which are not in keeping with the architectural scheme. Site Planning Issues: Minor modifications to the phasing of the Site Plan would provide a more logical progression of development of the site: The parking for Phase 1 should complete the improvements around the Multi-purpose building along both sides of the drive aisle, so that future construction does not further disrupt this portion of the site. 2. All landscaping and walkways around the Multi-purpose building and the volleyball/basketball courts and play area should be completed with Phase I. • 3. The walkways from the corners of Elm/Town Center and Elm StreeUChurch Street should be continued across the drive aisle using decorative/colored pavement. Eliminate the offset shown at the connection at Elm StreeTlTown Center Drive. ' DRC COMMENTS CUP DRC2002-00290 -CALVARY CHAPEL August 6, 2002 • Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review staff's comments with the applicant along with appropriate revisions, prior to forwarding the project to Planning Commission for review and approval. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Debra Meier The Committee concurred with the applicant's revisions to the site plan and phasing plan, which now includes all improvements surrounding the multi-purpose building including parking, landscaping and hardscape. The Committee made the following recommendations in response to the architectural style and theme as presented in the staff comments and modifications as presented by the applicant: 1. The extended height elements that distinguish the church from the business park shall project away from the building no less than 24-inches. Where walkways are present, they shall extend out over the walkway as an arcade. 2. Each of these same extended architectural elements shall have a return of no less than • 36-inches, to avoid the "false front" appearance. 3. The church shall incorporate the use of the awnings that match the existing Business Parkin place of the straight metal awnings shown on the plans reviewed by DRC. 4. The darkest "salmon" color shall be replaced with a warm gray tone that compliments the existing color scheme, as well as the stacked stone proposed at the primary focal points. The modifications shall be reviewed by staff prior to Planning Commission review and approval. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:20 p.m. Warren Morelion August 6, 2002 TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16301 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD. - A residential subdivision of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00280-J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD. -The development of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. Design Parameters: The site is vacant and slopes southerly at approximately 3 percent. The site is surrounded by residential development to the north, the Gardens banquet facility to the south, and vacant land to the east and west. The property to the west has been approved for future Victoria Arbors (American Beauty) single-family development. One 25-foot Palm tree and two Eucalyptus trees exist at the east end of the site in the Etiwanda Avenue right-of-way. A Eucalyptus windrow, with a Walnut tree at the west end, runs just south of the property boundary. An arborist report has be prepared that shows 11 trees in the Etiwanda Avenue and "B" Street right-of-ways that will have to be removed or relocated as part of development of the site; however, the report does not make a recommendation for removal or relocation of the trees. The frontage along Etiwanda Avenue is under the special development criteria of the Etiwanda Overlay District that requires a Conditional Use Permit (see attached). • 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: A number of lots along the southern property boundary have been designed with 2:1 slopes that slope down to a proposed 8-foot high wall. As proposed, the design will create "out-of-sight, out-of-mind" slopes that are hard to maintain, and will allow visibility into the rear yard of lots from adjacent properties to the south, as well as allow visibility from the lots to the adjacent properties. The Committee may wish to discuss the design of the lots and the possible need for fencing to reduce the negative impact. Per Development Code requirements, all walls that exceed 6 feet in height shall require review and approval of a Minor Exception. Elimination of this slope with a retaining wall will result in walls approximately 14 feet high and would require a Variance. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: To be consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements and past development in the area, the lots along Etiwanda Avenue should be designed to have homes that front the street with garage access from the rear or side. This comment is provided to assist future developer in designing their home product for these lots. No homes are proposed at this time. • 2. To further enhance community character and flavor, the perimeter wall along Etiwanda Avenue should be designed to be open with a combination of real river rock and wrought iron fencing. All river rock pilasters should be a minimum of 30 inches by 30 inches in size to match the residential development to the north. DRC COMMENTS TT SUBTT16301 & CUP DRC2002-00280 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD August 6, 2002 • Page 2 3. Enhanced landscaping should be provided for lots with street frontage along Etiwanda Avenue to further enhance the character of the community. 4. The construction of perimeter block wall/retaining wall along south property line may remove portions of root system of Eucalyptus windrow located approximately 10 feet to the south. Arborist Report should be revised to address this issue and make appropriate recommendations. If removal of roots would damage or undermine stability of this windrow, then it should be removed and replaced subject to permission of property owner. If property owner will not give permission, then project must be redesigned to save trees. 5. The south and east perimeter walls should be made of a decorative material. If the project is . developed prior to the "Victoria Arbors" development to the west, the perimeter wall along the west property boundary should also be made of a decorative material. The decorative wall along the south side of Lot 41 through 46 should incorporate river rock pilasters with a cap. The pilasters should be a minimum of 30 inches by 30 inches in size. 6. The 25-foot Palm tree located at the northeast end of the site in the Etiwanda Avenue right-of-way should be preserved and relocated on-site along Etiwanda Avenue. The exact location of the tree shall be to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: • 1. River rock curbing is required along Etiwanda Avenue per Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project subject to the above-recommended modifications. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Warren Morelion The Design Review Committee reviewed the project and directed the applicant to revise the project to address the above mentioned major design issue. The Committee determined that having 2 to 1 slopes with the property line at the bottom of the slopes would create nuisance problems where the slopes become "no mans land" at the rear of the lots and/or would lead to unsightly, tall retaining walls. The Committee also felt that the design as proposed would adversely affect the future development of properties to the south in that it would lead to the need for retaining/free standing walls in excess of 10 feet along the property boundary when developed. To resolve the problems, the Committee directed the applicant to work with the adjacent property owners to the south, W illiam Lyon Company, and "The Gardens" banquet facility to jointly resolve any site design issue that would benefit all parties and meet City requirements before coming back for further Committee review. The applicant agreed. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • August 6, 2002 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary • ,.~ • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING . TUESDAY AUGUST 6, 2002 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: John Mannerino Pam Stewart Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Rich Macias CONSENT CALENDAR Dan Coleman Larry McNiel 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. (Tom) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEWDRC2002-00318 - PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP - A request to construct one 6,200 square foot building and one 3,800 square foot building on 1.93 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Foothill Boulevard, Subarea 2), located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue.-APN: 207-102-24 and 25. 7:20 p.m. (Doug) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEWDRC2001-00772 -PREMIER HOMES-The design review of building elevations and details site plan for a previously approved and recorded tentative tract map (TR10246) consisting of 15 lots on 7.5 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (2 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Hillside Road - APN: 1074-291-16 thru 30. Related File: Tract 10264. 7:40 p.m. (Emily) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEWDRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP -The development of a 25,622 square foot warehouse in the Industrial District, Subarea 13, located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue -APN: 229-283-02. 8:00 p.m. (Debra) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002- 00290 -CALVARY CHAPEL -The proposed development of a 115,563 square foot multi-purpose building and master plan for future 63,033 square feet worship center for Calvary Chapel located on 4.10 acres of land on the west side of Elm Street between Town Center Drive and Church Street within the Terra Vista Business Parkin the Office Park (OP) district of the Terra Vista Community Plan -APN: 1077-422-14. • DRC AGENDA August 6, 2002 Page 2 8:20 p.m. (Warren) TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16301 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD. - A residential subdivision of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00280 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD. -The development of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-OS and 07. 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 II for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 1, 2002, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Secfion 54954.2 at 10500 Civi~cJCe er Drive, R ho Cucamonga. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn August 6, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00318-PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP - A request to construct one 6,200 square foot building and one 3,800 square foot building on 1.93 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (Foothill Boulevard, Subarea 2), located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue- APN: 207-102-24 and 25. Design Parameters: The proposed project will occupy the two remaining pads approved with the application to develop the 10-acre shopping center at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue; approved under Conditional Use Permit 97-19 as a Master Plan for development of the site. The Master Plan included a 68,355 square foot supermarket; two satellite pads totaling 5,000 square feet each, and two drive-thru pads totaling 2,500 and 3,500 square feet. The Master Plan addressed conceptual building locations, overall circulation, access points, parking layout, landscaping, and provided conceptual elevations to establish an architectural style, and the form, bulk, and height of certain architectural elements. The master Conditional Use Permit was approved in 1997, and the supermarket and iwo drive-thru pads have been developed (i.e., Albertson's, Jack In The Box, and Albertson's Express). 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. There are no major design issues. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: On tower elements and below the trellis element of both buildings, expand the use of river rock on the column elements to include the entire column, and not stop as a wainscot. 2. On all other columns (i.e., Building C north and west elevations, and Building D east and south elevation), include the use of a river rock wainscot. 3. Incorporate a river rock wainscot to Building C (north, south, and east elevations) and Building D (north, south, and west elevations). 4. All stone shall be native river rock; the use of faux stone is not permitted. 5. Special decorative paving should be used for the entire pedestrian sidewalk system, consistent with the approved Master Plan. 6. The site plan for Pad C deleted the existing landscaping in four planter areas located adjacent to the parking spaces west of the proposed building. This landscaping includes Queen Palms and shrubs planted with the shopping center. This landscaping does not interfere with building location and should remain in place. DRC COMMENTS DR DRC2002-00318 -PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP August 6, 2002 • Page 2 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All trash enclosures shall be designed for compatibility with the City Standard Drawing. 2. All signs shall be designed to comply with the centers Uniform Sign Program. 3. The metal railing used on the east elevation of Building C shall be painted to match the remainder of the center. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee approve the project subject to the modifications listed above. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Tom Grahn n U C~ J DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:20 p.m. Doug Fenn August 6, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00772-PREMIER HOMES -The design review of building elevations and details site plan for a previously approved and recorded tentative tract map (TR10246) consisting of 15 lots on 7.5 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (2 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Hillside Road - APN: 1074-291-16 thru 30. Related File: Tract 10264. Design Parameters: The site is vacant with partial improvements, which reflect recorded tentative tract map (TR 10246); the site has been previously rough graded. The site is located within the Hillside Overlay District because it slopes to the south at 8-10 percent grade. The applicant is proposing a single phased development. The site is surrounded bysingle-family residences and a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to the north. The applicant is proposing to develop 15single-family homes in the previously approved recorded tract map (TR 10246). The homes will include 2 floor plans (with options) and 5 different architectural styles. The square footage of the homes ranges in size from 4,207 to 5,571 square feet. The architectural styles of the project include Spanish Eclectic, Tuscan, French Eclectic, Spanish Colonial, and Monterey. The homes will also include porches on corner lots, side on garages, and additional enhanced architecture on elevations, which back and side and front Hillside and Haven Avenues. 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: ` Grading: Redesign project to eliminate the proposed conventional "flat pad" and 2:1 slope design, which does not conform to the City's Hillside Development Ordinance. In short, the project has not been designed to work with existing landform; rather, the landform is being completely altered to work with flat floor plans. Slope heights range from 5.5 feet to 25 feet. The Hillside Development Ordinance requires special architectural and design techniques to conform to the landform, such as split level foundations of greater than 18 inches, stem walls, and stacking. Stacking the home above a basement is proposed on only 3 of the 15 lots. The Hillside Development Ordinance also limits the "flat pad" to the area of the building footprint and a 15-foot flat area at rear of home. Architecture: The applicant has worked diligently with staff to resolve major design issues. Staff is pleased with the 360-degree architecture on all elevation. The applicant responded to staff's recommendation and added architectural details such as: surrounds, sash windows, dormers, rafter tails, arches, shutters, stone work and other elements, which adds richness to all side of the residences. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Taper driveways to 16 feet at right-of-way line. • 2. Provide pilasters along Haven Avenue at each lot corner. Minimum pilaster width should be 24 inches. DRC COMMENTS DRC2001-00772 -PREMIER HOMES August 6, 2002Page 2 • Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All walls visible from or facing a street should be decorative masonry on both sides. 2. All river rock should be authentic and not veneer. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and return to Committee for review. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Doug Fenn C~ • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:40 p.m. Emily Wimer August 6, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00116 -EAGLE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP -The development of a 25,622 square foot warehouse in the Industrial District, Subarea 13, located at 9275 Charles Smith Avenue - APN: 229-283-02. Design Parameters: The project site is situated on the east side of Charles Smith Road on approximately 1.25 acres of land. The property is bordered to the east by the 1-15 freeway, to the south by Cardlock filling station, and to the north is an industrial warehouse building. The 25,622 square foot speculative warehouse building also includes a 5,104 square foot mezzanine. The property is generally flat with less than a 2 percent slope. The proposed project is a speculative building targeting warehouse distribution tenant with limited office space. A total of four loading docks, two of which are small truck loading only, and two 14-foot by 50-foot loading docks on either side. A total of two truck parking spaces are proposed. Additional parking for expansion of the office space has been included in the parking calculations. Finish materials for the building exterior include Greylite glass, beige Travertine stone, and painted tilt-up concrete. The applicant will be providing a range of hue tones for the tilt-up concrete at Design Review Committee. The landscape setback of 25 feet will allow for bench seating at the front of the building. The applicant will also provide a model at the Committee meeting. 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 issues: Colors: The Committee should review the proposed materials sample board and color chips, which are different than the colored elevations. Green is proposed on the majority of the building with gray accent stripes. The applicant has provided samples of at least a half dozen shades of green for your consideration. The Travertine stone color should compliment the main material of the building (although both gray and beige tones will work with green, the accent stripes should match the Travertine stone color). The Industrial Districts architectural guidelines state that, "building materials, colors, and textures shall be compatible with those of adjacent or nearby buildings." Photographs of the adjoining buildings will be provided at the Committee meeting. Policv Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: All doors and roll-up dock doors shall be painted to match the building. (Doors on freeway elevation are called out as the color of gray glass.) Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project with incorporation of modifications. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: • Staff Planner: Emily Wimer DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 5:00 p.m. Debra Meier August 6, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00290 - CALVARYCHAPEL -The proposed development of a 115,563 square foot multi-purpose building and master plan for future 63,033 square feet worship center for Calvary Chapel located on 4.10 acres of land on the west side of Elm Street between Town Center Drive and Church Street within the Terra Vista Business Parkin the Office Park (OP) district of the Terra Vista Community Plan - APN: 1077-422-14. Design Parameters: The Terra Vista Business Park (Conditional Use Permit 86-20) was approved as athree-phased project, however, since the time of approval only two phases of the project have been constructed. The east portion of the block constitutes the third phase (4.10 acres) and is the site of the proposed Calvary Chapel. The entire perimeter of the block bound by Church Street, Elm Street, Town Center Drive, and Terra Vista Parkway were completed with the initial phases of the project. The Terra Vista Greenway Trail Type B, which includes the parallel bicycle and pedestrian paths within the parkway, was developed along the Elm Avenue frontage. The Business Park currently includes such businesses as Madole and Associates, Central School District, Mountain Faith Communiiy Church, San Joaquin Valley College, and an assortment of professional and medical offices. Seven suites within the businesses park are currently vacant. The proposal by Calvary Chapel would complete the development of the Terra Vista Business Park. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Architectural Issues: Minor modifications to the architecture of the proposed church would provide greater compatibility and sense of completion to the business park. Photographs of the existing business park will be available at the meeting for comparison: 1. The proposed multi-purpose building shall incorporate the use the architectural patterns of the existing business park, including the use of glass, awnings and decorative file insets. The use of stone can be used to set the church apart from the remainder of the business park. 2. Eliminate the brow over the arch on the east elevation and over the doorways on the north and south elevations, which are not in keeping with the architectural scheme. Site Planning Issues: Minor modifications to the phasing of the Site Plan would provide a more logical progression of development of the site: 1. The parking for Phase 1 should complete the improvements around the Multi-purpose building along both sides of the drive aisle, so that future construction does not further disrupt this portion of the site. 2. All landscaping and walkways around the Multi-purpose building and the volleyball/basketball courts and play area should be completed with Phase I. 3. The walkways from the corners of Elmlfown Center and Elm StreeUChurch Street should be continued across the drive aisle using decorative/colored pavement. Eliminate the offset shown at the connection at Elm Street/Town Center Drive. DRC COMMENTS CUP DRC2002-00290 -CALVARY CHAPEL • August 6, 2002 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee review staff's comments with the applicant along with appropriate revisions, prior to forwarding the project to Planning Commission for review and approval. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Debra Meier • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 8:20 p.m. Warren Morelion August 6, 2002 TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16301 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD. - A residential subdivision of 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00280-J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD.-The developmentof 46 single-family lots on 13.03 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue approximately 800 feet south of Base Line Road -APN: 227-171-05 and 07. Design Parameters: The site is vacant and slopes southerly at approximately 3 percent. The site is surrounded by residential development to the north, the Gardens banquet facility to the south, and vacant land to the east and west. The property to the west has been approved for future Victoria Arbors (American Beauty) single-family development. One 25-foot Palm tree and two Eucalyptus trees exist at the east end of the site in the Etiwanda Avenue right-of-way. A Eucalyptus windrow, with a W alnut tree at the west end, runs just south of the property boundary. An arborist report has be prepared that shows 11 trees in the Etiwanda Avenue and "B" Street right-of-ways that will have to be removed or relocated as part of development of the site; however, the report does not make a recommendation for removal or relocation of the trees. The frontage along Etiwanda Avenue is under the special development criteria of the Etiwanda Overlay District that requires a Conditional Use Permit (see attached). • 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: A number of lots along the southern property boundary have been designed with 2:1 slopes that slope down to a proposed 8-foot high wall. As proposed, the design will create "out-of-sight, out-of-mind" slopes that are hard to maintain, and will allow visibility into the rear yard of lots from adjacent properties to the south, as well as allow visibility from the lots to the adjacent properties. The Committee may wish to discuss the design of the lots and the possible need for fencing to reduce the negative impact. Per Development Code requirements, all walls that exceed 6 feet in height shall require review and approval of a Minor Exception. Elimination of this slope with a retaining wall will result in walls approximately 14 feet high and would require a Variance. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: To be consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements and past development in the area, the lots along Etiwanda Avenue should be designed to have homes that front the street with garage access from the rear or side. This comment is provided to assist future developer in designing their home product for these lots. No homes are proposed at this time. 2. To further enhance community character and flavor, the perimeter wall along Etiwanda Avenue should be designed to be open with a combination of real river rock and wrought iron fencing. All river rock pilasters should be a minimum of 30 inches by 30 inches in size to match the residential development to the north. • • DRC COMMENTS TT SUBTT16301 & CUP DRC2002-00280 -J.D.R. PROPERTY, LTD August 6, 2002 Page 2 3. Enhanced landscaping should be provided for lots with street frontage along Etiwanda Avenue to further enhance the character of the community. 4. The construction of perimeter block wall/retaining wall along south property line may remove portions of root system of Eucalyptus windrow located approximately 10 feet to the south. Arborist Report should be revised to address this issue and make appropriate recommendations. If removal of roots would damage or undermine stability of this windrow, then it should be removed and replaced subject to permission of property owner. If property owner will not give permission, then project must be redesigned to save trees. 5. The south and east perimeter walls should be made of a decorative material. If the project is developed prior to the "Victoria Arbors" development to the west, the perimeter wall along the west property boundary should also be made of a decorative material. The decorative wall along the south side of Lot 41 through 46 should incorporate river rock pilasters with a cap. The pilasters should be a minimum of 30 inches by 30 inches in size. 6. The 25-foot Palm tree located at the northeast end of the site in the Etiwanda Avenue right-of-way should be preserved and relocated on-site along Etiwanda Avenue. The exact location of the tree shall be to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: River rock curbing is required along Etiwanda Avenue per Etiwanda Specific Plan requirements. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project subject to the above-recommended modifications. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Warren Morelion u • x• rH '°' ~ Jl r J • ROUTE ]0' / ~Jc i; /. r i - / ~ i ~' / v 10 a avE. ~ •~ //~nua:r ~l ~~ ~- 0 •c ~ ~--~~ Special Studies "+ ~I /~y~-~ Overlay Dlatrlct ~ ~ (seismic) ~' Etiwanda Avenue ~ ~I f ;) Overlay Dlatrlct ~ ^ Communityy Service Overlay DIStrICt (v~r Fio. s-61 i~5 ~~~.,,, } ,$:~'g j~ ® Equestrian ~~' sfJ''U~ Overlay District iz ;~. / , ~ i Foothill blvd. S.P. J 1 ~i title figure ~'~' ~ ;;~~ ,OVERLAY 5' of !DISTRICTS ~ Etiuruuya .Sprcrjrc Plmr Par! !I. Chaplrr J .200 Application The provisions of this article shall apply to all properties located within the Overlay Districts, in addition to the provisions of the Base District in which the property is located. In case of conFlicts, the Overlay District provisions shall prevail. - 300 E/OL -Etiwanda Avenue Overlav District .301 Purpose: In addition to meeting the provisions of Chapter 3, it is the intent of the E/OL District to protect and enhance the visual and historical character and the quality of Etiwanda Avenue and its immediate surroundings. 302 E/OL District Boundaries: E/OL District provisions shall apply to all properties located within 200 feet of the centerline of Etiwanda Avenue, between Foothill Boulevard and 24th Street. 303 Conditional Use Permit Required: All proposed developments shall be subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, except as follows: (a) Single or two family residences developed in accordance with the provisions of the ER or VL Districts. (b) Single family residences constructed on existing legal lots of record. .304 Special Requirements: Etiwanda Avenue Setback: 30 feet average, 25 feet minimum. Structures facing Etiwanda Avenue shall be separated by a minimum of 25 feet All structures shall be designed to enhance and reinforce the visual and historical character and quality of Etiwanda Avenue. While no specific architectural style is required, the style selected shall reflect the traditional architectural styles found along Etiwanda Avenue. The use of field stone as a major design element is strongly encouraged. Residential structures containing more than one dwelling shall be designed to present an image of large single family structures. Careful attention to the placement of entrances, garages and private open space areas shall be required to reinforce the single family image. Front yard landscaping shall be consistent with the streetscape theme for Etiwanda Avenue, Figure 5-26. All such landscaping and associated irrigation shall be installed prior to occupancy. 5-23 4/96 • Eriu•nndcr Specific Plnn Pnrr I/. Chnprrr .i All new development shall be required to restore and/or reconstruct the stone curbing along Etiwanda Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and the City limits in conformance with adopted City standards acceptable to the Historic Preservation Commission. Photographic documentation of the condition of the curbing shall be provided prior to issuance of construction permits. • C~ FROM RNDRESEN ~~!i:i31 FRX N0. 909-7681667 Jul. 22 2002 06: 21 PM P8 cvnolc alamlw u~a+o a ~t+s wu~. rel. tiot~l~ ~+o t3e~t d.~~ ~5 19A 1~.~U4 79~1~ Waehingtonia tillt'e-a: 25 R tKdm trunk measulemetR ~~~ a9l~ (i47~ /tRr•1aY1 ~~ Eucalyptus: 45 ft. x 35 R. x a5 Inches combined yZ87 a'r~l .ftlD ~~ l~ffli Eucalyptus; 40 R x 45 R. x 27 inches 42$2 af~ll ~~ ttQne~9Q t>77,11 tJgustntm: 74 R x 10 R. ~{z.85 ~ t~ytPA tAA.OMti ~~ I.igustrum: 10 R x B R yi9o ~0 ~--,1~ f~ql 1~~p LFgusdum: 9 R x 8 R x 4 inches y Z91 a9st 04lJ91.i2~o ls103,d9Q1 Y17f;7 Eudyptus: 50 R x 30 R x 61 inches eomttinea 'i1.`i'- 49ii9 OK7-pV /dtlw7p2 19T7.li Citrus: 12 R. x 8 R x 8 indees yz53 4~ t7/a70.Mya 16lt4.066i ly0.A Eucalyptus: 50 R x 20 R. x 23 inWles 4294 •9M titn{1/>I6 /dI11SL! t?fl.N Eucalyptus: 90 R. x 2S R x 26 inches `12-95498 d~7~'iq! t6/04.Q>I/{ 1$x,90 EucalypWs: 50 R x 35 R x 34 inches H27b ~! 5t2/SOMS t00h.7l02 t7J7Ai Eucalyptus: 25 R x 20 R. x 28 Mch¢s combined y2y149i7 Er,Z1f.791lO 1lD1t1ap02 t7er-.991 Euplyptus: 508 x 36 R x 47 Inches combined y29 tigp~. 01ltti.Nlb tm9.DA! 17pT,Q Eucalyptus: 35 R x 20 R x 4S inches combined X299 1~ E~ktTI.RM? ~~ ~'~ Eucalyptus: 50 R x ~ R. x 39 inches `lTja> ~ 6f~,4t1! tat~t771ti 1~7~8 Eucalyptus: 4t: ft. x 20 R x 49 inches oomtairwd `l3o i •A7 E{'~y.~tl ~~~ 197f.47 Eucalyptus: Dead `I3aZ Hq4 bIQ111.HA t+tYA.~O t,R0.1i Eucalyptus: 5o R x YO R. x 21 inches 43c3 L1A Q4aT974R 14ig4+R41 1~ Eucalyptus: 50 R. x 25 R x 28 Inches 43e`/~ '~ft~ UNafA! '1277.10 EucalypWs: 50 R. x 30 R. x 27 inches ~~ ~•~ Utlp,~ '~~ Eucalyptus: 45 R x !6 R. x 24 inches 43a~F4~ St7J'!.lS7! '•4lmA172 t2AM Eucalyptus: 4S R x 40 ft. x A Inches oombitted 4~ 7a~or t~t278.7is4 1ati7t.19l6 ' 19'm.M Eumlyptuo: 12 R. x 6 ft. x e inches K3a° a706 54970l04t: iafilti,0t~ 1~.0! Eucalyptus: Dead 't~o`~ ~10i 6{970.1006 tasltor~s t9l12.ts Eucalyptus: ao R. x 3o R x 13 Inches 'i3w 4a/0 6tl713At taB10.1ZtX1 t9917J5 Ela:alyptus: 40 ft. x a0 tt. x 98 inches `l3i i as/t Ot2-6~lOs t16~etAS t~90Jt Eucalyptus: ao R x 3o R x 38 inches 4312 aS1Z 61276.~Q6 1a660.189ie l21b.d2 Walnut: 90 ft. ^ 25 ft. 22 inches C~ 3(1N3~d Y/aNdMll3 ~ m. r--- i i I I I I l -- X -- J X