HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998/05/05 - Agenda Packet DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES
1
TUESDAY MAY 5, 1998 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Bill Bethel Rich Macias Nancy Fong
Alternates: Peter Tolstoy Dave Barker Larry McNiel
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.
(Rebecca) UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 130 - AUTO NATION: Design review of a sign
program for a regional automobile sales center on a 20-acre site located at 9629
Buffalo Avenue in Subarea 12 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan -APN: 229-263-19,
20, 21, & a portion of 18.
7:40 p.m.
(Cecilia) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-40 FOR TRACT 13812 -WEALTH V LLC - The review
of detailed site plan and building elevations for a previously approved subdivision map
consisting of 107 single family lots on 31.47 acres of land in the Low Residential
District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located west
of Etiwanda Avenue between Highland and Summit Avenues.
8:40 p.m.
(Brent) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15072 - VILLAGE OF
INDEPENDENCE, LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY-A subdivision of 90 acres of
land into 533 single family lots, a 1.3 acre private open space lettered lot, a 1.3 acre
future service station site, and a 5-acre public park site; and the design review of
building elevations, site plan, grading plan, and landscape plan for the construction of
533 single family homes in the Low-Medium and Medium Residential Districts (4-8
dwelling units per acre and 8-14 dwelling units per acre, respectively) of the Terra Vista
Community Plan, located at the southwest corner of Rochester Avenue and Base Line
Road -APN: 227-151-35, 36, and 37.
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.
NO ITEMS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED
DRC AGENDA
May 5. 1998
Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the
Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may
receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes
per individual.
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 April 30, 1998, at least 72 hours prior to the
meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Cent e Drive, Rancho Cucamonga.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Rebecca Van Buren May 5, 1998
UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO 130 -AUTO NATION: Design review of a sign program for a regional
automobile sales center on a 20-acre site located at 9629 Buffalo Avenue in Subarea 12 of the
Industrial Area Specific Plan -APN: 229-263-19, 20, 21, & a portion of 18.
Background:
The Planning Commission discussed signage for Auto Nation on several occasions:
March 26, 1997 workshop
May 14, 1997 public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit
October 8, 1997 public hearing on a modification to the Conditional Use Permit.
At the workshop and subsequent hearings, the Commission noted the conceptual sign program was
generally consistent with a regional auto sales center adjacent to a freeway, but directed the applicant
to revise the sign program as follows:
1. Monument signs should incorporate native river rock cobble in the support structures.
2. Any pole signs should be modified to present a more aesthetic appearance.
3. On-site overhead directional signs should be modified to be consistent with the overall
campus-like appearance of the project.
The Resolution of Approval includes a condition that a uniform sign program "consistent with the
design direction given by the Planning Commission" be submitted for City Planner review and
approval. The Resolution further authorizes a freeway-oriented sign in participation with a multi-tenant
sign provided by the City. If the City sign is not available or offered within 6 months after opening the
business, Auto Nation may request its own freeway sign for consideration.
Design Parameters
AutoNation sign program includes building, monument, and display area signage. Signs are designed
to mimic freeway signs in their color and form. The proposed signs are similar to the signs presented
to the Planning Commission in conceptual format. The proposed sign program is attached.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding
this project:
1. The Redevelopment Agency continues to offer Auto Nation a participation agreement to implement
a multi-user "community" freeway sign. The Redevelopment Agency prepared a Memorandum of
Understanding and is awaiting a response from Auto Nation. The conditions of approval establish
the community sign as the preferred sign, and a single-user sign as a fall-back. Staff recommends
that a freeway sign exclusively for Auto Nation only be considered if the community sign effort
becomes infeasible. The request for a freeway sign should be postponed until the community sign
offer is resolved.
DRC COMMENTS
USP NO. 130 - AUTO NATION
May 5, 1998
Page 2
2..The proposed monument signs along Buffalo Avenue (primary entrance and service entrance) do
not incorporate native river rock cobble as directed by the Commission. The signs use steel pipe
supports. The monument signs should be revised to utilize rock as previously recommended.
3. The service building sign is shown as an internally-illuminated can sign. This sign should be revised
to be channel letters.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. The bright yellow address line/lower panel on monument signs should be revised to be green to
match the sign face or another non-contrasting color.
2. Interior directional signs utilize steel pipe supports characteristic of freeway signage, except for two
parking directionals which have perforated green steel rail supports. The parking directionals should
have steel pipe supports for consistency.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Directional signs and the service building's lane markers shall not be internally-illuminated. Any
external illumination shall be subject to approval of the City Planner.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends the sign program be approved subject to the modifications recommended above, and
that the freeway sign be deferred indefinitely.
Attachments: Planning Commission Minutes dated March 26, May 14, and October 8, 1997
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Rebecca Van Buren
At the meeting, the applicant presented an alternative design for monument signs which incorporated
native river rock cobble. The Committee (Bethel, Macias, Fong) reviewed the proposed project and
recommended approval subject to all of the above items identified by staff as well as the following:
1. Provide an introduction which clarifies the sign program related to a "regional automobile sales
center" per the Sign Ordinance and differentiates this sign program from other retail commercial
uses.
2. Provide a cap between white river rock base and the sign face.
3. Work with staff to replace the bright yellow tag lines on monument and interior signs to a less
contrasting color, such as brown, matching green, or opaque.
4. Renumber the inventory of signs to avoid numerical skips.
5. The freeway sign was deferred as recommended by staff.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
March 2"0, 1997
Vice Chairman McNiel called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission to order at 7:40 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga
Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: William Bethel, Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, PeterTolstoy
ABSENT: David Barker
STAFF PRESENT: Miki Bratt, Associate Planner; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman,
Principal Planner, Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil
Engineer
NEW BUSINESS
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-32 - AUTO NATION - A request to construct an automotive
sales business consisting of a 32,092 square foot showroom, 23,864 square foot service
building, and 2,190 square root car wash with an outdoor display area on a 20-acre parcel
located on the northeast comer of Fourth Street and Buffalo Avenue in the Industrial Park area
(Subarea 12) or the Industrial Area Specific Plan - APN: 229-263-19, 20, 21, and a portion of
13. Related File: Parcel %Aap 15012.
The Commission expressed strong support for the project design subject to minor changes with the
consensus being as follows:
1. In general, the proposed signs, including size and color, are appropriate for a regional auto
sales center adjacent to a freeway. Building sign size is well integrated into the architecture of
the building. Monument signs should incorporate native river rock cobble in the support
structures. Pole signs should be modiried to present a more aesthetic appearance. The on-site overhead direction signs should be modified to be consistent with the overall tasteful, campus-
like appearance of the project.
_. The sales building design is excellent; however the two primary building materials policy should
be maintained.
3. The design materials of all secondary buildings should incorporate the same design materials
used for the primary building.
4. Landscaping along Fourth Street and in the display area should be strengthened.
5. The pedestrian element linking Fourth Street to the sales building should be strengthened.
S. The design concept of the canopies is appropriate.
/Fi
C. =NVIRONM=NTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-32 - AUTO NATION -
A request to construct an automotive sales business consisting of a 32,092 square foot
showroom, 23,834 square_ foot service building, and 2,190 square foot ear wash with an outdoor
display area on a 20 acre parcel located on the northeast corner of Fourth Street and Buffalo
Avenue in the Industrial Park area (Subarea 12) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan -
-:APN: 229-203-19, 20, 21; and a portion of 18. Staff has prepared a mitigated Negative
Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related file: Parcel Map 15012.
Miki Bratt;Associate Planner, presented.the staff report.
Commissioner Bethel asked if the applicant had presented new conceptual plans for the pole signs.
Ms. Bratt responded that the applicant had indicated they were working on it.
Commissioner Bethel stated he was concerned that staff might be put on the spot.
Brad Buller, City Planner, stated he thought he had a good idea of what the Commission was looking
for and h=would 'bring it back to the full Commission if he did not feel comfortable with what the
applicant proposes.
Chairman Barker opened the public hearing.
Pat Donnelly, Staub-:Ch Retail Services, 2010 Main Street, Suit=_ 020, Irvine, stated they are the real
estate development arm of Auto Nation. He expressed appreciation for the assistance of staff during
the processing of the application. He said they were in general agreement with the conditions except
that he had concerns about the minimum Nvo-building materials policy. He noted they had presented
a materials board with the grey concrete textured with TexCote contrasting with painted green
concrete and hoped that the Commission would agree that their proposal meets the intent of the
policy. He also indicated that do not normally use security fencing around their lots and only provide
pipe rails to prevent the cars from being removed. He stated they have 24-hour security on site and
he requested they not be required to provide security fencing. He said they intend to work with staff
: n regards to the sign program. He stated the civil architect and zoning consultant were available
:p answer questions.
Commission McNiel stated he had recently noticed a news oaper article about a similar organization
pl=anning to locate in Ontario. He asked if that organization would be complimentary or if the two
users would be in a foot race to see who could open first.
r. Donnelly felt the competition was good but also felt there would be an advantage to opening first.
Chuck Buquel, Charles Joseph Associates, 10581 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 205, Rancho
Cucamonga, presented a letter indicating he was representing the owner of a parcel north of the
project. He requested that approval not be granted without submission of a traffic study addressing
Cie vacation of Charles Smith Avenue. He stated there would be a reduction of the use and value_
of his client's 5-acre parcel because there would be no secondary access to the property and it
would lose approximately 200 to 300 feet of roadway frontage. Mr. Buquet indicated his client, Jerry
_a:rd. was available in the audience to ans.ver any questions.
H=aring no further testimony, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing.
Mr. Buller stated that the Commission has a policy that requires two separate materials for industrial
buildings. He noted that the applicant had presented a good point that the movement of the
architecture itself is far different from what is normally provided on a big box building. He observed
Thai the aoolicant has tyro separate textures of concrete and stared that star( relt the Commission
could approve the prObosal as not settine a precedent because the building is different from what
a �ing Commission iviinute_s -3- May 14, 1997
the policy was intended to —dress. Mr. Buller stated the Police DeP, riment requested the lot be
fenced. He believed the applicant was aware that some type or fencing or hedge would help to
rotect from wind damn suggested p damage. He_ that star coulc work with the applicant. He observed that '
the Commission had already aoproved the parcel map: hat defined the land configuration and the
vacation of Charles Smith Avenue. He noted that the Industrial Area Specific Plan calls for making
Charles Smith Avenue a cul-de-sac street but the parcel mao provided for the cul-de-sac to be
further nosh than originally envisioned. He commented that the parcel map was not before the
Commission this evening:
Chairman Barker noted that the applicant indicated there would be a 24-hour security guard on the
premises. He asked if that was a condition of approval.
Mr. Buller indicated it was not, it was merely the aoplicanl's plan.
Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, stated a tragic study was not required for the vacation of Charles
Smith Avenue because the intent is shown in the Industrial Area Specific Plan. He observed that
the Industrial Area Specific Plan shows an east-west street and stated there is still room for an
east-west street on the approximate 22 acres to the north of this project. He commented that if the
owners or the property north of the present project wish to delete the east-vvesf street, they would
have to process an amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan. He observed storm drain
mprovements are being installed in connection v:ifh the construction or the Charles Smith
cul-de-sac. He stated the street vacation will be acted upon by the City Council.
Commissioner Ma_ias vves not sure v:hat a traffic analysis :•:ould accomplish. He stated the purpose
of a traiffiic analysis is to determine if there will be a change in the level of service and he observed
that the area is largely undeveloped. He did not think a traffic analysis would provide any information
not already considered in the original environmental impact report. He preferred that the fencing be
insta=lled.
Com-nissioner V:Nial felt it would be 2 mUt2ke not t0 have a fence because of the winds
experienced in the area. Fie commented that TexCote is a thick: paint with sand mixed in to give the
appearance of stucco and is vr2rrantied for a long time. He observed the two-material policy had
been adopted to give variety to buildings which are ctundane. He did not think this building is
�ndane and he supported the 2pplicanl's propos=_I. He supported the vacation of Charles Smith
.venue. tNth reseed to Mr. Buquet's assertion that his client ,.viii lose economic value of his land,
CommissionerNici!iel commented that land banking is a speculative business. He stated that land
Uses are in flux. He felt it is in the best Interest of the community and safety for Charles Smith
."venue to be v2za_ ed.
Commissioner Tolstoy concurred with Commissioner ivlcNiel that the building is not an industrial
building and has a lot of architectural movement. He ur^_ed that the fence be built because o the
::in_'s and potential for sand storms. He also agreed with Commissioner ivIcNiel with respect to
Cha=rles Smith Avenue.
Cc-missioner Be:hel felt the building has enough movement so that the intent of the tv:o-material
policy is being met. He noted that the application before the commission is a conditional use permit,
no: a parcel map so fell there could be no decision regarding vacation of Charles Smith Avenue.
He concurred with the Police Department that the fence should be required.
'.:orlon: Moved by Bethel, seconded by i`laei2s, to issue_ a mitigated Negative Declaration and adopt
the resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 93-32. ?Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, PMACIAS, iVICNIEL, T O'_STOY
NOES: NONE
°SENT: NON= carried
Pia ..n!ny Cammi;s�cn PAlnutes May 14, 1997
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
i
Regular Meeting
October 8, 1997
Chairman Barker called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho
Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman
Barker then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, L;illiam Bethel, Peter Tolstoy
ABSENT: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel
STAFF PRESENT: Miki Bratt, Associate Planner; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman,
Principal Planner; Michael Estrada, Deputy City Attorney; Tom Grahn,
Associate Planner, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Gail Sanchez, Planning
Commission Secretary
ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were no announcements.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairman Barker observed that the minutes of Seotember 10, 1997, and the Adjourned Meeting of
September 10, 1997, could not be acted upon because of the absence of Commissioners Macias
and McNiel. _
Motion: Moved by Bethel, seconded by Balker, tamed 2-0-2-1 (Macias and McNiel absent, Tolstoy
abstain), to approve the minutes of September 24, 1997.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-32 MODIFICATION 1 - AUTO NATION - A request to modify
an approved automotive sales business, reducing the floor area by approximately 8,000 square
feet, reducing the outdoor display area, and reserving a 3.796 acre area for future expansion
on a 20-acre site located north of Fourth Street between the 1-15 on/off ramo and Buffalo
Avenue in the Industrial Park Area (Subarea_ 12) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan -
APN: 229-253-19, 20, 21 and a portion of 18.
Miki Bratt, Associate Planner, presented the star r=_ ort.
Commissioner Bethel commented that Auto Nation had com.Pliedv/ith all requests from the Design
Review Committee.
Chairman Barker opened the public hearing.
Pat Donelly, Staubach Retail Services, 2010 Main Street, Suite 620, Irvine, stated the modifications
were necessitated because of Auto Nation's experience in opening offices throughout the country.
He said they found they had more office space than necessary and approximately 150 too many
spaces on the display lot.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he supported the modification because it did not change any of the
landscaping.
Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Bethel, to adapt the resolution approving Modification 1
to Conditional Use Permit 96-32. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, TOLSTOY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: MACIAS, MCNIEL - carried
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-19 - CASTILLO
COMPANY. INC. - The development of a commercial shopping center consisting of a 68,355
square foot grocery/drug store, two satellite buildings totaling 5,000 square feet each, and two
drive-thru pads totaling 3,500 square feet and 2,500 square feet on 9.82 acres of land in the
Community Commercial District (Subarea 2) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at
the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-102-03, 05, 03,
09, 15, 20, 21, and 49. Associated with this request is Tree Removal Permit 97-14,
Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He stated the applicant had requested
that the Initial Study be modified to indicate that an Archaeologist would not need to be on site during
grading if the Final archaeological investigation is completed prior to issuance of grading permits.
He noted the resolution did include that wording.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked where the shopping cart storage will be located.
Vr. Grahn replied that there are cart corrals at both ends of the building by the two entrances to the
store.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked about provisions for recycling. He thought there is a California
provision that recycling must be available within a certain distance of a market.
Brad Buller, City Planner, confirmed there is such a law. He stated there are a variety of ways of
handling the recyclable materials. He indicated a Minor Development Review would be required if
they wish to place a recycling facility on the exterior of the building. He stated the applicant had not
requested any vending machines along the front of the building or in the parking lot.
Commissioner Tolstoy recalled that the City has asked that vending machines be located in recessed
areas and not obstruct walkways.
Mr. Grahn pointed out that provision is contained within the standard conditions.
Commissioner Tolstoy hoped that Code Enforcement would enforce that provision. He felt a plaque
should be located on site denoting that a Post Office commissioned by President Lincoln once stood
there.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- October 8, 1997
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Cecilia Gallardo May 5, 1998
DESIGN REVIEW 97-40 FOR TRACT 13812 -WEALTH V LLC: The review of the detailed site plan
and building elevations for a a portion of a previously approved subdivision map consisting of 107 single
family lots on 31.47 acres of land in the Low Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (2-4
d.u. per acre) located west of Etiwanda Avenue between Highland Avenue and Summit Avenue.
Design Parameters:
The project includes only the westerly one-half of Tract 13812. The project site was previously graded
in 1990, and perimeter and retaining walls constructed. The site has since been left undisturbed. The
31.47 acre site lies within the Day Creek Neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP).
The ENSP recognizes architecture as a dominant visual element within the built environment and an
important element in establishing the neighborhood identity of a given community. The ENSP calls for
new home design to consist of primary and secondary architectural styles that recall the architectural
and cultural heritage of the Etiwanda area. Recommendations for the use of architectural style is based
on an assessment of those styles which best compliment five "neighborhood" themes. Several historic
themes of California architecture within the Day Creek Neighborhood have been established including
Victorian, Country, Bungalow, Ranch, Monterey, San Juan, and Santa Barbara Revival. The applicant
has chosen a mix of these styles for the exterior treatments.
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.. Architecture: The applicant is proposing 4 basic floor plans of 2,057, 2,405, 2,650, and 3,439 sq.
ft., each with four model elevations. With reverse floor plans and one side-on garage
variation, there are at least nine possible floor plan configurations. Generally, staff
believes the various model elevations incorporate the architectural styles selected for
the front elevations. The side and rear elevations, however, do not exhibit sufficient
front elevation details to satisfy 360 degree architecture policy. The following
treatments are recommended to improve the overall designs:
a. Plan 1: Architectural details provided on front elevation should be carried over
to sides and rear. Embellishments such as additional window shutters, pot
shelves, multi-pane windows, and projecting wall dormers should be used to
help in providing a complete 360 degree architectural treatment.
Victorian: Provide horizontal siding and/or shingles on all sides,
• Country: Provide more stone accents, and consider arched multi-pane
windows throughout.
• Bungalow: Incorporate front porch railing on plan 1C. Increase the size of
the front porch columns, or provide slightly larger, squared piers for Plan
1 CR.
• Santa Barbara: Provide arch over garage doors.
b. Plan 2: The right and rear elevations of this plan appear identical. Add roof or
projecting wall dormers, varied window treatments, and changes in the roof line.
Continue stone base treatment, and stucco band along garage wall, on left
elevation. Add multi-pane windows to all elevations. Carry window shutters
and pot shelf details to side and rear elevations.
DRC COMMENTS
DR 97-40 - WEALTH V. LLC
May 5, 1998
Page 2
• Victorian: Provide larger front window on Plan 2A. Consider arched second
story windows on front elevation.
Country: More use of stone is recommended. Add shutters to front window
to match front second story windows.
• Santa Barbara: Add elements to incorporate more of the Santa Barbara
style including recessed windows, decorative window grills, and balconies.
Upgrade rear elevation to provide greater variation in the building plane.
C. Plan 3: The side and rear elevations of this plan are similar. Provide additional
details to differentiate plan types. Architectural styles proposed are reflected
in front elevation, but are not reflected in side or rear elevations. Add chimney
accents, vary window treatments, provide variation in roof line with projecting
wall or roof dormers, rear balconies, or movement in the building plane with
enhanced pop-outs.
d. Plan 4: Make changes in side and rear elevations to provide variations in plan
types. Carry front elevations details such as shutters, multi-pane windows,
arches, gables, recessed windows, and pots shelves with corbels to side and
rear elevations, particularly the Country, Santa Barbara, and San Juan styles.
2. Materials: Staff had requested that the applicant revise the building materials sample
board to provide more detailed information on color and material types. In
addition, the color palettes chosen are inconsistent with the design themes.
The applicant will provide a revised materials sample board at the meeting.
3. Landscaping: The applicant has submitted a master plan for street trees, and will be required
to verify with the City Engineer if the proposed trees are appropriate for use in
publicly maintained landscape area. Flowering vines are to be located along
perimeter theme walls and entry areas to soften the appearance. Front yard
landscaping of all units is a requirement of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan.
Please refer to the attached examples from the Etiwanda North Specific Plan for architectural
detailing of the proposed architectural themes.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Accent base treatments used on front elevations such as rock, brick, stucco banding, etc.,
should be wrapped around to the side elevations to the point where it is anticipated the return
wall will be constructed.
2. Provide extra deep corner side setbacks for two-story houses on corner lots.
3. One story massing is preferred on corner side yards.
4. Design chimney stacks with accent materials used on house such as stone.
5. Taper garage driveways down to a standard two-car width at the street.
6. Provide return walls between houses.
DRC COMMENTS
DR 97-40 - WEALTH V. LLC
May 5, 1998
Page 3
7. Return walls and corner side walls to be composed of a decorative block material or have a
decorative finish such as stucco.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Driveway treatments should vary, with some driveways incorporating decorative paving
consisting of various patterns/textures of concrete, as well as walkway leading to the front
door.
2. Provide a minimum 5-foot setback between fencing on corner side yards and sidewalk to allow
for landscaping (including trees).
3. Provide decorative perimeter fencing at tract edges.
4. Retaining walls exposed to public view to be decorative masonry.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends the applicant revise the project to address all design issues. Revised plan should
be submitted for further committee review.
Attachments: Excerpts of Design Guidelines of North Etiwanda Specific Plan
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Cecilia Gallardo
At the meeting, the applicant presented revised building elevations that displayed enhanced side and
rear elevation architecture. The revisions incorporated additional details recommended by staff with
front elevation features carried over to side and rear elevations. The Committee agreed that the
changes satisfied the City's 360 degree architecture policy and were pleased with the modifications.
The outstanding issue for this application is the color palette presented by the applicant. The
Committee directed the applicant to work with staff to develop a revised color scheme consistent with
the architectural themes selected.
The Committee recommended approval of the project subject to submission of revised elevations
incorporating the changes presented to the Committee, and a requirement that the applicant work
with staff to revise the color scheme prior to scheduling for Planning Commission.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:40 p.m. Brent Le Count May 5, 1998
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15072 - VILLAGE OF
INDEPENDENCE, LEWIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY-A subdivision of 90 acres of land into 533
single family lots, a 1.3 acre private open space lettered lot, a 1.3 acre future service station site, and
a 5 acre public park site; and the design review of building elevations, site plan, grading plan, and
landscape plan for the construction of 533 single family homes in the Low-Medium and Medium
Residential Districts (4-8 dwelling units per acre and 8-14 dwelling units per acre respectively) of the
Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the southwest corner of Rochester Avenue and Base Line
Road -APN: 227-151-35, 36, and 37.
Background: The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission as a Pre-Application Review
on July 23, 1997, and by the Design Review Committee (conceptual only) on August 19, 1997. The
minutes from both meetings are attached for reference. The Commission toured the Independence
project under construction in Irvine in September of 1997.
Design Parameters: The 533 homes would be organized into four"neighborhoods" within the gated
community. The neighborhoods will have access to a main spine street (Street A) with gated
entrances on Mountain View Drive and Church Street and a third entrance off of Rochester Avenue.
Street A includes a community trail. A five acre future public park site is proposed at the western
edge of the site next to an existing elementary school. A 1.3 acre private open space/park area is
proposed roughly in the center of the project. Lewis' design intent is to provide "individual scale and
diversity, capitalizing on streetscape (different species of street trees)to convey an identifiable image
and character" for each of the four neighborhoods. Three of the neighborhoods are proposed to
have three different plans each with three alternative front elevations with floor areas ranging
between 1,500 square feet and 2,948 square feet. The fourth neighborhood is proposed to have two
different plan types each with two alternative front elevations. These would be large homes with
3,345 square feet to 3,683 square feet of floor area. The project has been designed with the
"innovative"development standards of the Terra Vista Community Plan which allows certain flexibility
in lot size, setbacks, etc., in exchange for provision of upgraded design methods.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding
this project.
1. The various home designs have a boxy appearance with minimal visual interest and variation
from home to home. All homes are proposed to have front-on garages which tend to dominate
the streetscape. Provide increased variation in plane and visual interest. Front entries and
porches should all have significant depth (such as Plan 519). Side and rear elevations should
be further articulated to avoid singular, flat stucco walls. Suggest use of differing color
schemes to visually identify the various neighborhoods.
2. The service station use will have a significant impact upon adjacent homes. Provide a
substantial physical buffer between the service station and proposed homes. This would likely
involve pulling the cul-de-sac bulb for Street N westerly, away from the service station site.
3. Note the attached annotated excerpts from the Terra Vista Community Plan Design Guidelines
and the Residential Design Guidelines. Marked items are those staff feels are deficient in the
project.
- DRC COMMENTS
TT 15072 - LEWIS DEV. CO.
May 5, 1998
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. Limit the number of steep (in excess of 10%) driveways to provide more useable driveway
area. Note that the City's Residential Design Guidelines suggest provision of a minimum of 18-
foot area in front of garages of no more than 5% slope.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Revise gate designs at entry points for Street A to allow public access to trail along Street A.
Otherwise, the trail cannot function as a link between Base Line Road and Rochester Avenue
per the Terra Vista Community Plan.
2. River rock veneer shall consist of real or natural river rock cobble as opposed to a
manufactured product. Other types of rock veneer (i.e., slate, etc.) can be manufactured
product.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the project be revised in light of the above comments and brought back
before the Committee prior to being forwarded to the Planning Commission.
Attachments: Planning Commission Minutes dated July 23, 1997
Design Review Comments dates August 19, 1997
Excerpts of Residential Design Guidelines of Terra Vista Community Plan and
Citywide Residential Design Policies
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Macias, Nancy Fong
Staff Planner: Brent Le Count
The Committee (Bethel, Macias, Fong) reviewed the project and requested that the project be
brought back before the Committee with the following changes:
1. Reduce the dominance of the garages on the street scape. This should include expanding
front porches and bringing porches out in front of garages, add patio courtyards to entries and
front porches (include pilasters, hard scape, wrought iron fencing to frame courtyards),
textured driveway treatment (take advantage of steepness of driveways/tile towards street),
increase front yard landscaping, use sectional garage doors with windows.
2. Increase level of detail on side and rear elevations, especially those elevations visible from
streets and school/park sites. This should include color changes between first and second
floor levels, provide key elements from front but not limited to elevations on side and rear,
provide more substantial trellis structures in rear yards and provide more homes with trellises.
3. Increase the area of the decorative paving within the gated entry areas.
4. Provide gates for access to park site from rear of lots adjacent to park.
5. Prefer installation of park improvements at earliest possible phase of home construction.
DRC COMMENTS
TT 15072 - LEWIS DEV. CO.
May 5, 1998
Page 3
6. Not necessary to provide signs at neighborhood entry points with name of neighborhood.
7. Recommend eliminating third elevation and replacing with upgraded street scape design
features as recommended above.
8. Incorporate lettered lot open space (remnant parcels) areas into home sites.
9. Prefer service station over replacement with homes. Revise street layout per staffs
recommendation if site is replaced with homes.
10. Revise Lots 122 and 230 to be better oriented relative to adjacent intersection/avoid having
driveways so close to street intersection.
While not specifically discussed at the meeting, staff recommends the following items also be
addressed with revised plans:
1. Provide special landscape treatment for the main interior spine street, street sides, exterior
streets (Base Line Road, Rochester Avenue, Church Street, Terra Vista Parkway, and
Mountain View).
2. Create sizable and usable landscape noes that are interlinking with the green ways, park,
school, and open space.
3. Provide a hierarchy and uniformity of decorative walls - exterior streets, interior main spine
streets, corner side streets, etc.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAiMONGA
PLANNING COiNINIISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting
July 23, 1997
Chairman Barker called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Commission to order at 9:15 p.m. The meeting was held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga
Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, William Bethel, Rich Macias, Peter Tolstoy
ABSENT: Larry IMcNiei
STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Dan James, Senior
Civil Engineer
N PY 3 U S I N E S S
A. PRE-APPLICATION P,EVIEW 97-05 - LEWIIS DEVELOPMENT CO. - The review of conceptual
plans for the Village or Independence vii thin the Terra Vista Planned Community, consisting of
541 dwelling units on 84 acres of land, located south of Base Line Road, west of Rochester
Avenue, north of Church Street, and east of Terra Vista Parkway East and Mountain View Drive.
grad Buller, City Planner, explained the purpose and goals of the Pre-Application Review process.
a; Lay, Levis Homes, gave a presentation of the village concept. He Provided a statistical analysis
e village concept compared to three multi-family projects ,within Terra Vista.
Ca,i Co!eman, Principal Planner, commented upon the overall concept. ne indicated that staff felt
Z. the applicant was on the right track and appreciated the benefits of 'being able to plan for an
entire village_ all at once as Opposed to tract-by-tract review. H=_ staled the; the_ overall concept was
sound, particularly the four distinct neighborhood units arranged along a central circulation spine.
indicated that the major issue is the land use compatibility of the gas station. He explained that
concept plan proposes a local interior residential street across most of the common property line
:;n the gas station and that only ,;:o lots vrould share a common property line. He noted that during
e Commission's original deliberations regarding the station, there was great concern with buffering
reside=nces from this intense commercial use with its attendant traffic, noise, glare, and loitering. He
ed that up to 50 feel of landscape buffer was discussed between the planned apartments and the
pas station. He said that the buffer`,vas not adequate in the village_ concept plans. He identified the
follo`aing minor issues that staff felt could be addressed through the continued refinement of the
village concept plans:
Site Plan/Circulation
a. The central spine needs further study to address adequ=ate sight lines on the inside of the
curve. The `.v=st side c.` the spin=_ should be upgr=aded to a Trail Type 'E' with a o foot
sidewalk.
b. The village common is surrounded by Sir'_eis and has multiple intersections in close_
proximity which is a traffic safely concern. AIso, staff suggested eliminating front-on lots
on the street west of the village common to avoid drivers 'backing gui of drive•:iays onto the
stfee_t near intersections.
c. Plotting of units appears to be very uniform with a minimum 18 root driveway. The intent
was to create a variety of front yard= setbacks.
,nape; or varied s..,oacks.
2. P=ark - The oar,; concept was last reviewed by the Park and Recre=ation Commission in 1990.
City requirements for certain park features have changed. For example, a 90 foot baseball field,
full court basketball, and at least 25 parking spaces should be provided. Since this is the last
—. park within Terra Vista; an analysis of park.land dedication for the entire planned community is
needed and adjustments to park acreage as necessary.
3. Architecture
a. The elevations are not consistent with Lewis' stated intent "that each neighborhood area
express its own unique character which could include a variety of architectural styles and
scale." A11 of the houses appear to be the same architectural style.
b. All of the houses are bulky 2 story with str=aight walls that may overwhelm the street.
C. Eight out of the nine floor plans have the garage in the same location which is closest to
the stree:. The garages will dominate the streetscene.
d. Side and rear elevations need architectural treatment. In some cases there is no feature
other than, a small window or two cn a side elevation to break up the straight 2 story walls.
The plans should provide 350 degree architecture_.
Development Standards - The proposed concept is consistent with the existing standards
except ror one product which is proposed with a 3,000 square root minimum lot area: whereas,
the Terra Vista Community Plan currently requires a 3,500 square foot minimum lot area.
: ,1mmissioner Tc!s:oy =asked where the public community trail v:ill be located.
...r. Coleman repli?d that the trail will continue around the perimeter of the village from the terminus
'he "12jor Green,.-;ay Trail easterly along Terra Vista Parkway and Church Street to Rochester
-ommi;;ioner B?,.,e_I asked what type of fencing v✓ould be provided along the school and park
,dary.
Buller replied that o foot block walls are standard. nowever, in some cases a combination of low
all; viith wrought iron view fencing has been used near public parks.
Loy indicated :hat Lewis is considering installing gates to provide direct access for each
,,,?comer that bac'<s up to the park.
._m,missioner Macias inquired about what policy exists regarding gated communities in terms of
.eir function, loca5on, and compatibility.
Buller explained that in the oast it was considered inappropriate for 10 acre in-ill sites
:.-round+ed by non-gated neighborhoods, but could be appropri=ate for larger sites. He stated that
-erra Vista has one existing gated community at the comer of Haven Avenue and Base Line Road.
:�orn,missione_r Tolstoy reminded the Commission that the City's General Plan encourages flexibility
ai!c-.v different housing products.
C-.mmissioner iv12cias felt uncomfortable with the gated community concept. ,He expressed a desire_
.�� a serse Or community. He felt that this dated community Is a divisive l2nd use mechanism. He
?d vAne-n the oar'< would be built.
,-_,ncd A:iin -2- July 23, 11997
Mr. Buller replied that the public park phasing would be tied to occupancy release of a certain, as
houses.
`
yet'lb be de,=rmined, number or ous=s.
Commissioner Macias thought the Park should be built in the first phase as a concession for gaud
community. He asked how the village construction will be phased.
—...
' Mr::Coy indicated that no decisions have been made by Lewis regarding phasing; however, they will
Probably initially offer all four housing products.
.-Commissioner Macias agreed with staff's concerns regarding the gas station land use compatibility
and buffering. He stated that the architecture is not impressive. He said the elevations appear
interchangeable, plain. He felt that the overall village impression is favorable. He indicated
confidence that the same quality can be achieved without gating the community.
Ernie Gorrill, Lewis Homes, indicated that the elevations were French and Italian Mediterranean
style. He stated that textural variations could be included to distinguish the products.
Commissioner Bethel said that he agreed with staffs concerns regarding circulation conflicts around
the village commons. He asked when it would be built? .
Mr. Loy replied that phasing had not been determined yet.
Steen Bell, Lewis Homes, indicated that it will probably be within firs, or second phase.
Commissioner Bethel stated that the village commons had potential danger of children chasing balls
rolling out onto streets. He felt that the gas station would hinder sales of nearby lots. He questioned
noa a gas station would be buffered. He observed that the streelsc=_ne would be nothing but
garage doors. He was concerned about the separation or homes from the school and park. He said
he liked the separate neighborhoods and different housing products.
Commissioner T clstoy stated that flexibility is important. He supposed gating the community. He
;ndicated that Rochester Avenue should be completed from Base Line Road to Foothill Boulevard
.:::h ,his d=_veloPrnent. He said he was opposed to a eas station with the concept as presented due
;o inadequate 'put:=ring. Ha stand Ghat the public par; should be built in the earliest phases and
noted that the configuration may change to meet City's latest criteria. He felt that the product was
good provided that the garage door issue is addressed. He suggested that side entry garages were
a possibility. He st=ated that architectural treatment on all sides of the houses is extremely important
because of proximity to neighbors' homes, even when not visible from the street. He saw the village
concept as a great opportunity for an alternative to the apartments and condominiums that could be
aui!t on this site. He expressed concern with potential for Lewis Homes to attempt transferring Gtis
density somewhere_ else within Terra Vista. He questioned what the solution might be. He was
pleased that the Project does not include auto courts because he felt neighbors sharing a common
driveway does not work.
Chairman Barker indicated that it seas mandator :hat Lewis use all their design skills, particularly
in the architecture_, to address the Commission's concerns with the small lot product. He slated that
he liked the vill=age common as a good focal Point, the entry statements, and the ability to
comere_ne_nsibly Plan this large of an area. He indicated that vie-,-/ fencing has not always been
successful along public park edges, but that he supports the idea, as well as the use of gates into
each backyard. He said that he was not opposed to a gas station, but that the design must mitigate_
;he compatibility and buffering issues. He felt that c=race doors should not dominate the slreelscen=_
and encouraged iiie applicant to offer creative solutions. He expressed concern with small lot area
and how units will fit. He indicated that attention should be paid to designing the streets so they
don't appear as a parking lot. He recommended building the Public park as early as possible. He
said that the front yard landscaping concept is eocd. He suggested creative_ landscape designs,
such as curvilinear entry walks and plant differences between lots. He recommended that the four
=.diourned 41i te; July 23, 1987
products be distinct in their design, yet not clashino. He stated that trails should be useful and
identiriabie. He indicated that Lewis Homes has a good reputation as a property manager and he
hcoed they would use that experience in setting up =_ homeowners 2sspc12tion:' He stated that the
Village must be the highest standard of quality possible.
Commissioner Tolstoy indicated that one of the best features of this village is its large size. He said
that he was not opposed to a gas station, but couldn't see how it ',vill be buffered. He recommended
that each product neighborhood should be noticeably different. He suggested entry signs. He
recommended that porches be large enough to be functional.
Commissioner Bethel stated he would prefer the village to appear as a single neighborhood. He
explained the importance of providing architectural treatment around all sides of the homes. He
stated he did not want to see any flat rear elevations.
Mr. Loy requested Commission comments regarding the proposed lot sizes.
Chairman Barker referred to a field trio of small lot projects that the Planning Commission took in
Orange County. He said that he had not seen anything that sufficiently addressed the Commission's
concerns with small lots. He indicated that he was very concerned with small lot sizes. He stated
that he would also be concerned with large_ homes being proposed on small lots.
Nlr. Buller explained Ghat only one half of the units would be on sma!I lots . He asked the Commission
if that was generally acceptable.
The Commission agreed that it vas.
Commissioner Sethel asked ho:; big the backyards ate.
Mr, Gorrill replied that they .vouid be 15 feet deep across the full �::idlh of he lot.
Commissioner T olstoy recommended cre2tiVe front yard design, such as curling entry %val%s,
erent porches, and different cop-out elements.
Commission agreed to ano'.ner %vorFshop as design evolves.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There , ere no public comments at this time.
IDURNMENT
10:30 p.m. - The Planning Commission adjourned.
Pesp_ecifully submitted,
i
Brad Buller
Secretaary
,_rued i`Ai,.u'e_s
July 23, 19?7
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
8:00 p.m. Dan Coleman August 19, 1997
VILLAGE Or INDEPENDENCE LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO - The discussion of conceptual
development plans for the Village of Independence within the Terra Vista Planned Community,
consisting of 541 single family dwelling units on 84 acres of land, located south of Base Line Road, west
of Rochester Avenue, north of Church Street and east of Terra Vista Parkway East and Mountain View
Drive.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, opened the meeting and stated that Lewis Homes this meeting %vas a
continuation of the dialogue with the Planning Commission which started with the Pre-Application
Review on July 23, 1997.
Pat Loy, Lewis Homes, gave an overview of the "value to customer" concept behind the Village of
Independence. He explained that part of the concept is to offer a great house with only those features the
buvers feels have value. Buyers can choose from a long list of options to include or not include certain
features or upgrades. Copies of literature from Independence at Rest Irvine.
Leon Swales, Lewis Homes, indicated that in their Independence at West Irvine project in the Tustin
Ranch area the average buyer has spent S 15,000 on options.
Commissioner vtacias stated he needed to understand how far City could modify exterior elevations
2i%en the economic realities of the project.
Ernie Gorrill, Lewis Homes, presented the renderings and photographs of the Independence at Nest
fr% ine. He invited the Commissioners to tour their product in Irvine to experience how, the value is
reflected in the interior spaces and features. He indicated that they were willing to treat the sides and rear
of these houses consistent with their other projects in Rancho Cucamonga, such as Renaissance, but did
no: .%ant to resort to heroic efforts, such as pop-outs. He stated that Lewis was proposing to upgrade the
product to meet the Cip of Rancho Cucamonga's design goals, including:
I . Adding a third elevation (Plan C).
?. Exoanded color palette.
3. Larger lot sizes.
Trim around all windows on side and rear elevations.
5. -adding architectural details to front elevations, such as stone or brick veneer, corbels, and railings.
Brad Buller. City Planner, summarized that the developer was asking the Commission to embrace interior
%a!ue in exchange for exterior value. He asked the developer to illustrate the exterior shell amenity
pa6lage for the village. He asked if the side and rear elevations gave a sense of value? He noted that no
e:cerior options were offered in West Irvine. He suggested that the developer consider offering exterior
upgrades.
M,. S%4ales said they %could be willing to offer shade structures as an option because many buyers have
asked for them.
Commissioner Macias stated that he would have difficulty accepting interior value instead of those design
e1-Mf:nts the City would normally require on exterior.
Commissioner Bethel agreed and stated that he was concerned with individual neighborhoods becoming
isolated.
'DRCCOi INTENTS
LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO.
August 19, 1997
Page 2
Nir. Gorrill said that Lewis Homes was not asking the City to violate their design policies. He explained
how the village concept was intended to create an innovative and unique project which emphasized the
perimeter treatment. He said that since in Rancho Cucamonga the public could not drive through this
sated community that addressed concerns about public views of design; hence, Lewis Homes felt that
the project would be consistent with the City's 360 degree architectural treatment policy.
Mr. Swales asked the Commission to identify a Lewis Homes project in Rancho Cucamonga, such as
Renaissance, as a good example of 360 degree treatment for them to follow.
Commissioner Macias indicated that Bates did not abrogate the developer from complying with the Ciry's
360 degree architectural treatment policy. He asked in what phase the park would be built?
Mr. Loy said that it was too early in the process to identify phasing; however, indicated that it would be
constructed in the earlier phases.
Commissioner Macias said that the park should be built as early as possible.
There was discussion about possible dates for a Commission tour of Independence at West Irvine. The
consensus was to call all Planning Commissioners regarding a tour on a Saturday morning in September,
preferably' September 6. The tour would return to Rancho Cucamonga at noon.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
MAY 5, 1998
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT '
The meeting adjourned at 10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
Secretary