Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996/11/19 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES TUESDAY NOVEMBER 19, 1996 5:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Rich Macias Larry McNiel Nancy Fong Alternates: William Bethel Dave Barker 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. 5:00 p.m. (Nancy) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-49 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO - A review of adding one secondary wall sign for Copymax on the west elevation located within Town Center Square. 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. 5:15 p.m. (Nancy) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-21 - TEXACO - The development of a service station with a mini-market and a drive-thn for two fast food restaurants within a 6,104 square foot building on 1.15 acres of land, in the Mixed Use District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue - APN: 1077-421-42. 6:00 p.m. (Tom) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO 15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION - A residential subdivision of 29 single family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acres), located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. ADJOURNMENT 1, Mary Lou Gragg, Office Specialist 11 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on November 7, 1996, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. CONSENT CALENDAR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-49 - LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO - A review of adding one secondary wall sign for Copymax on the west elevation located within Town Center Square. Design Review Committee Action Comments: Members Present: Rich Macias, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee recommended approval for adding a wall sign on the west elevation for Copymax. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 5:15 p.m. Nancy Fong November 19, 1996 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-21 - TEXACO - The development of a service station with a mini-market and a drive-thru for two fast food restaurants within a 6,104 square foot building on 1.15 acres of land, in the Mixed Use District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue - APN: 1077- 421-42. Design Parameters: The site is vacant. It is part of a 22-acre parcel bounded by Foothill Boulevard, Church Street, Elm and Milliken Avenues. The northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue where Texaco will be located is a gateway (Type III design similar to the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue)to the Terra Vista Planned Community. A related development concept for the 22-acre parcel, Terra Vista Commons, was submitted by the property owner, Lewis Development Co., under a separate Conditional Use Permit application. Representatives from Lewis Development Co. stated that except for Texaco they do not have tenants for the other buildings nor are they ready to develop the residential parcel. The proposed 22-acre development concept is to serve as a master plan for the site so that Texaco could proceed with the project, as required by the Drive-Thru Policies. The master plan development concept will be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a later date. 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. Since Texaco will be developed first, the building design would establish the architectural program for Terra Vista Commons. Therefore, it is important that the design exhibit a level of architectural treatment and detailing that matches Terra Vista Town Center or Town Center Square. This is not to say that the building design should follow the same architectural style as the two existing centers. 2. The building design does not meet the design guidelines for the drive-thru policies for the following reasons: a. The basic form and silhouette of the building are essentially a rectangular box with colonnade attachments along portions of the drive-thru lane and a gable roof at the main building entry. b. The north (front) elevation consists of one building plane punctuated by a gable roof The size of this gable roof is massive and not in proportion to the horizontal part of the building. A smaller size roof tower at the main building entry and two other towers at the northeast and northwest sides of this elevation with a colonnade would provide vertical and horizontal variation to the building plane. The roof tower element should extend from the building entry to the south elevation and over the drive-thru lane. C. The south elevation is the back side of the building and it faces Foothill Boulevard. The elevation reads as one building plane because the design of the colonnade that is over the drive-thru lane is similar to the building wall. Roof overhang, tower elements, storefront windows and other architectural elements should be added to provide articulation to the building mass and facade. d. The building design does not have sufficient articulation to the building surface because of a lack of architectural elements or material changes. DRC AGENDA CUP 96-21 - TEXACO November 19, 1996 Page 2 e. Provide architectural treatment to the west elevation by breaking up the building plane and surface with storefront windows, tower elements, columns, trellis work, etc. 3. Expand the width of the pedestrian walkway along the north elevation to allow for tree wells, textured pavement and pedestrian amenities. Eliminate parking spaces at the main building entry and treated with a textured pavement to create a formal entry statement. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting,the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Expand the depth of the textured pavement at the project entry off Elm Avenue. Add textured pavement across drive aisles that lead to the service station. 2. Reduce the expanse of asphalt area at the northeast side of the site. I The finished grades for the building and the drive-thru lane are at least 3 feet higher than the street grades. The illustrative cross-sections do not show accurately that the drive-thru lane is screened from Foothill Boulevard view. Also,provide screening of the drive-thru lane at the southwest side of the building. 4. Create a project entry statement by providing a 15-foot wide landscape planter along the north side of the main driveway. 5. Increase the size of the columns for the canopy over the pump islands. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. The applicant proposed one wall sign for "Starmart" and two secondary signs, "Q.S.R." on the north elevation and two graphic Texaco logos on the canopy for the pump island. The current Sign Ordinance allows only one wall sign per building elevation and no signs on the canopy. Staff has recommended to the applicant that this issue.requires an amendment to the Sign Ordinance, which would need to be discussed at a full Planning Commission hearing. Once the applicant submits a letter requesting for Commission discussion, staff would forward the item to the next available meeting for their review and direction. 2. The plant species,the density and the size of the plant materials(trees, shrubs, groundcovers,etc.) will be conditioned to comply with City's standards. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant submit revised development plans that address the above identified issues for Committee review. DRC AGENDA CUP 96-21 - TEXACO November 19, 1996 Page 3 Design Review Committee Action Comments: Members Present: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Dan Coleman Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee stated that the architectural style for this project within Terra Vista Commons could be different from Terra Vista Town Center or Town Center Square, but the quality of the building design and architectural detailing should not be lesser than the two mentioned centers. The Committee agreed with staff comments and recommended that the applicant revise the project design to address all the design issues listed in the report. The Committee stated that revised plans must be submitted for their review for the December 3 meeting. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:00 p.m. Tom Grahn November 19, 1996 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO 15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION - A residential subdivision of 29 single family homes on 3.35 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acres), located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street - APN: 207-022-54 and 64. Design Parameters: To the north of the project site are single family homes and a CCWD water tank, to the east are single family homes, and to the west and south is the Cucamonga Creek Channel. The project site is roughly triangular in shape fronting onto the west side of Camelian Street. There are a number of trees located throughout the project site and a row of Eucalyptus trees adjacent to Carnelian Street, the vast majority of which are proposed for removal with development of the project. There are no known cultural resources located on the project site. Design Constraints: The small site area and triangular shape present unique design challenges. Also, additional dedication is need to realign Camelian Street to address traffic safety concerns. As a result there are multiple variances needed. Related Projects: In October 1989, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract No. 14263 which proposed the development of thirty-two condominium units on the project site. In January 1993, the Planning Commission approved a design review modification to the project site to revise the site plan and building elevations for thirty-two town homes. Both previous approvals utilized duplexes for the project design. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Development Standards - The project is required to utilize the Optional Development Standards to develop single family detached homes in the Medium District; however, the Development Code identifies a minimum project area of 5 acres for use of these standards. Therefore, the applicant has submitted a Variance to address this inadequacy. The Development Code states that "[the optional development]standards are intended to provide high standards for the development of projects of superior quality and compatibility. " The Committee should consider whether the project features a superior architectural design, site planning, and its relationship of private and common open space areas, and in its relationship to adjacent uses. 2. Architectural Style - The project proposes the development of twenty-nine units utilizing one floor plan with five elevations. These elevations utilize a variety of materials, window treatments, garage door treatments, etc. The Committee should consider whether the massing and proportion are too repetitive and do not provide enough variety when viewed from the adjacent street frontage. To breakup the repetitive nature of the project architectural style an additional floor plan could be provided that utilizes distinctly different massing, proportion, and scale. DRC AGENDA TT 15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION November 19, 1996 Page 2 3. Recreational Amenities - The project complies with the required amenities for projects of 30 units or less. 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 decorative paving at the project entry behind the public right-of-way. 2. Provide berming within the landscaped area adjacent to Camelian Street. The berming should be undulating, approximately 3 feet in height, and non-uniform in appearance. Berming must be designed taking into consideration the requirements of the drainage improvements to Camelian trees. Since no fence is proposed, a careful combination of landscaping and berming should be used to a)define the private on-site space to discourage unwanted entries,b) soften the appearance of nine garages from Camelian Street, and c) discourage children from running out onto Camelian Street. 3. The project should be designed with a trail connection to the future regional trail located along the Cucamonga Creek Channel. A lockable gate should be provided. It is not clear whether a trail connection is proposed between Units 9 and 10. 4. Revise the internal driveway to delete the extra paving beyond the 50-foot radius in the extreme northeast and northwest corners of the project site. The affected driveways,sidewalks,etc.,should be extended accordingly. 5. Delete the connections from Lot 1 and 8 to the pool/spa area. The location and size of these areas could become a security and maintenance problem. 6. Adequate on-site lighting shall be provided to ensure a safe environment while at the same time not causing areas of intense light or glare. The only lights identified are wall-mounted fixtures adjacent to unit garage doors. Lighting needs to be expanded to identify lighting driveways and recreation areas. Fixtures and poles shall be designed and placed in a manner consistent and compatible with the overall site and building character. 7. Provide decorative metal fence, with gated access, to secure the open space and tot lot area north of Unit 27. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and returned for review by the Design Review Committee. Design Review Committee Comments: Members Present: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Tom Grahn DRC AGENDA TT 15783 - G & D CONSTRUCTION November 19, 1996 Page 3 The Committee recommended that the applicant work with staff to revise the project to address the following design issues and return to the Design Review Committee for review. 1. The project Site Plan and architecture should be revised to reflect a project of superior quality and design consistent with the Optional Development Standards. 1 The Site Plan appears too tight and should be reduced in density to open up space around units and provide for more useable common open space. 3. Provide an additional floor plan with different massing, proportion, and scale. This will reduce the monotony of the streetscape when viewing the project from Carnelian Street. 4. Revise the design of the common open space areas to provide areas suitable for recreation. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS November 19, 1996 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, _ A6e�� Brad Buller Secretary