Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005/05/03 - Agenda Packet ACTION AGENDA • DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY MAY 3, 2005 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Committee Members: Cristine McPhail Pam Stewart Dan Coleman Alternates: Rich Macias Richard Fletcher 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. (Doug/Willie) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17424—HUNSAKER&ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. - A request for a condominium map related to 414 multi-family apartments (including live work units) on 17.3 acres in the Haven Overlay District, located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard-APN: a portion of • 0208-331-37. Related File: Development Review DRC2000-00079, Development Review DRC2002-00720, General Plan Amendment DRCGPAA01-01B, Development District Amendment DRCDDA01-01, Development Code Amendment DRCCA01-01, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16179, and Pre- application Review PAR-07. 7:10 p.m. (Donald/Mark) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17277-G & L COMMERCIAL, LLC-A request for a single parcel subdivision for Industrial Condominium Purposes in the General Industrial District (Subarea 4), located at 9201-9299 Archibald Avenue - APN: 0209-211-14. Related File: Development Review DRC2004-01251. This project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Class 1 Exemption - Existing Facilities). PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. 7:20 p.m. (Emily/Willie) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT17009 - WILLIAMS CHIAO ARCHITECTS - A request to subdivide one common lot for • residential condominium purposes on 1.08 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at 8565 Madrone Avenue - APN: 0207-262-02. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-01062. DRC ACTION AGENDA May 3, 2005 Page 2 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-01062-WILLIAMS CHIAO ARCHITECTS- A request to develop 8 residential condominium units on 1.08 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at 8565 Madrone Avenue - APN: 0207-262-02. Related File: Tentative Tract SUBTT17009. 7:40 p.m. (Vance/Vicki) HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00254 — RODRIGUEZ — A request to construct one single-family residence on an existing lot, located at the northwest corner of Hillside Road and Ram Court -APN: 1061-381-17. 8:00 p.m. (Vance/Willie) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-01151 -CRESTWOOD CORPORATION - The review of site plans and elevations for 47 single-family detached homes on 10.8 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Hellman Avenue - APN: 0210-062-05 and 06. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16311 was previously approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 03-147. On October 22, 2003, a Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map 16311. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of • a previous Negative Declaration. 8:20 p.m. (Mike/Mark) HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00659 - PETE VOLBEDA (for B IRDW ELL)-A request to construct a single-family residence of 4,434 square feet combined (1 st/2nd floors, patios/decks, and garage)on a lot of 20,175 square feet in the Very Low Residential District, located at the intersection of Reales Street and Beryl Place -APN: 1061-801-21. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. • CONSENT ITEM . DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Doug Fenn May 3, 2005 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17424—HUNSAKER&ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. -A request for a condominium map related to 414 multi-family apartments (including live work units) on 17.3 acres in the Haven Overlay District, located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard -APN: a portion of 0208-331-37. Related File: Development Review DRC2000-00079, Development Review DRC2002-00720, General Plan Amendment DRCGPAA01-01 B, Development District Amendment DRCDDA01-01, Development Code Amendment DRCCA01-01,Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16179, and Pre-application Review PAR-07. The applicant proposes the subdivision of the apartment project into condominium units. Because of the accelerating housing prices in our city and the surrounding communities, this subdivision propose will be beneficial to the community and in the spirit of the City's housing element in our General Plan. Staff believes that this would be an opportunity for first time homebuyers with the option of owning a residence. Design Review Committee Action: • Members Present: Fletcher, Stewart, Coleman Staff Planner: Doug Fenn The Committee recommended approval. • • CONSENT ITEM DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Donald Granger May 3, 2005 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17277-G & L COMMERCIAL, LLC-A requestfora single parcel subdivision for Industrial Condominium Purposes in the General Industrial District (Subarea 4), located at 9201-9299 Archibald Avenue-APN: 0209-211-14. Related File: Development Review DRC2004-01251. This project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Class 1 Exemption - Existing Facilities). Background: The applicant is proposing to subdivide five existing buildings for condominium purposes,thereby, allowing individual ownership of units. The proposed subdivision is for interior air space only, and will not create any new, real property lines. The applicant is concurrently processing an administrative Minor Development Review DRC2004-01251 that proposes an exterior modernization of the storefronts of the buildings. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the • condominium map to the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Stewart, Coleman Staff Planner: Donald Granger The Committee recommended approval. • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Emily Cameron May 3, 2005 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT17009-WILLIAMS CHIAO ARCHITECTS -A request to subdivide one common lot for residential condominium purposes on 1.08 acres of land in the Medium Residential District(8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at 8565 Madrone Avenue -APN: 0207-262-02. Related File: Development Review DRC2003-01062. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-01062 - WILLIAMS CHIAO ARCHITECTS - A request to develop 8 residential condominium units on 1.08 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at 8565 Madrone Avenue - APN: 0207-262-02. Related File: Tentative Tract SUBTT17009. Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to construct eight duplex condominiums approximately 600 feet south of Arrow Route, on the east side of Madrone Avenue. The site is currently vacant and is relatively flat. The project is bordered to the north and south by single-family residential homes. The homes to the south have fieldstone detail on low walls facing Madrone Avenue. The project is bordered to the east by apartments, and to the west by townhomes. The project will consist of two floor plans and two elevations, ranging in square footage from 1,549 • for Plan A and 1,587 for Plan B. The units will resemble four duplexes attached at the interior walls. Both plans provide a two-car garage, and incorporate split faced block, siding, and stucco as main materials of the units. The applicant has incorporated shutters,window surrounds, and potshelves to the design. All plans have a split face block base with craftsman style windows and siding as a secondary element on all four sides of the units. The proposed walls consist of split face block on the interior, stucco walls with split-faced pilasters along the entry and facing Madrone Avenue. 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 Development Code requires 360-degree architectural treatment to all elevations with a specific architectural style. Although the proposed architectural styles are not completely out of style to the surrounding area, the elevations could be enhanced with a strong Craftsman bungalow style, including additional materials and architectural features. See attached examples for architectural details that would be consistent with the adjacent properties. Staff suggests that the following enhancements be made to be consistent with the surrounding homes: • Extend the siding on the north and south elevations across the second story where the windows are placed. • Omit split-faced block on all entries and replace with native river rock on columns and • wrapped around front entry. Replace stucco columns with wood beams. Repeat field stone detail on all chimneys. Omit the decorative bands across the chimney. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2003-01062 —WILLIAMS CHIAO ARCHITECTS • May 3, 2005 Page 2 • Because split-face block does not fit the character of the residential area, replace split- face walls with river rock and pilasters to include a decorative trim cap. • Continue siding on all chimneys and delete horizontal trim across the chimney. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Repeat mullion style windows on all sides including the rear elevations. 2. Add exposed rafter tails below the roof to create a craftsman style roofline. 3. Introduce planter boxes with a useable ledge, a minimum of 12 inches. Provide additional corbels below the windows at a larger scale. 4. Provide the following landscape requirements per the Development Code: 45 trees per gross acre, 10 percent 36-inch box, 10 percent 24-inch box, and 80 percent 15-gallon sized trees. Also provide additional trees in the recreation area. 5. Revise the Landscape Plan to include the trees shown on the elevation. A small accent tree shall be provided on the front elevation between each garage as shown on the elevation. • Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. No wood fencing is allowed. With the type of siding proposed, two-toned PVC style fencing is recommended. 2. Where fieldstone is used, it shall be real and from a local source. River rock veneers are not permitted. 3. Where a double wall condition exists, the developer is required to work with the adjoining property owners to create a single wall. 4. Vary the window design of the garage doors to incorporate an architectural style which compliments the proposed homes. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the project be revised and return to the Design Review Committee prior to being scheduled for Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Stewart, Coleman Staff Planner: Emily Cameron • The Design Review Committee discussed the Major and Secondary issues and determined that the applicant will need to return for further review to address all issues. The following comments must be addressed prior to scheduling the project for further review: DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2003-01062 — WILLIAMS CHIAO ARCHITECTS • May 3, 2005 Page 3 1. Because of the prominent placement of the garages, a trellis feature or similar feature shall be incorporated to soften the front elevation. 2. Provide stonework all the way around the chimneys. The applicant may use the veneer brick presented at the meeting, as conceptually approved. 3. Provide additional detail on the sliding glass doors to include mullions or a similar upgrade to the rear (north) elevation. 4. Revise elevations to incorporate additional color palettes for the brick veneer. Additionally,the Committee would like further contrast in the overall color palette for the homes. 5. Provide additional rafter tails to all four sides of the homes. The roof eaves shall incorporate large beams at the end of the roofline. 6. Revise the window above the front entry to incorporate, and additional design and detail to, support the architectural theme. Additionally, accent features such as vents and louvers should be incorporated. 7. Provide details on all of the lighting fixtures. Fixtures which reflect the design of the homes will add impact to the overall architectural theme. 8. On the west elevation,extend the siding from the roofline down to terminate at the window trim for additional architectural detail. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Vance Pomeroy May 3, 2005 HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00254—RODRIGUEZ—A request to construct one single-family residence on an existing lot, located at the northwest corner of Hillside Road and Ram Court-APN: 1061-381-17. Design Parameters: The proposed project is a single-family home subject to design review by the Design Review Committee because it is located on a "hillside" parcel with a slope of 8 percent or greater. The owner of the property has worked closely with staff to work out all the technical and design issues. The project has improved the level of quality and compliance; however, further attention to materials and massing is necessary. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee ' discussion. Maior Issues: Staff considers the design consistent with the design context of the neighborhood and the design guidelines in the Development Code. 1. Provide a distinct architectural style, and consistently carry that theme throughout the • development. The home appears to have elements from several styles unsuccessfully mixed together. 2. While the balconies are strong elements for the design,some of the masses in the design are bulky and need to be alleviated with different roof shapes or a change in the Floor Plan. The drop of rooflines as the pitch changes would provide a reduction in the perception of bulk. 3. The introduction of other exterior materials will greatly enhance the design. The architectural design should better reflect the prevailing richness of materials and features in the surrounding neighborhood. 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 choice of the primary color(i.e., blue) is a distracting characteristic of the design. 2. Add more shutters flanking windows. 3. Add surround at window header on all windows and sliding glass doors: such as, Bedroom 4 window above garage, Bath 3 window, Master Bedroom slider, and Bedroom 5 slider. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. This project will be conditioned to plant slopes per City standards: All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope, shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 square foot of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 square feet of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2004-00254 — RODRIGUEZ • May 3, 2005 Page 2 excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 square foot of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting shall include a permanent irrigation system. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that project be redesigned and return to the Design Review Committee. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Stewart, Coleman Staff Planner: Vance Pomeroy The committee continued the item (as a future consent item)to give the applicant an opportunity to work with planning staff to address the following design concerns: 1. Color: The use of blue is not in keeping with the design style or compatible with the neighborhood. Use of earth tones is generally more appropriate. Accent colors will be helpful. . 2. The entry turret/tower element is very successful and should be made more prominent. 3. The roofline should be broken by dropping it in some places to create a variety in the roof shapes. 4. Tile must be used on the roof. 5. The elements used to depict the architectural style should be more definite and consistent. 6. Extend the roof elements over the decks. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:00 p.m. Vance Pomeroy May 3, 2005 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-01151 -CRESTW OOD CORPORATION-The review of site plans and elevations for 47 single-family detached homes on 10.8 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Hellman Avenue - APN: 0210-062-05 and 06. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16311 was previously approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 03-147. On October 22, 2003,a Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map 16311. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. Design Parameters: The 10.8 acre lot is generally square in shape with two entrance streets and a central circulation path that also leads to property abutting on the south that is owned by a different developer. The lots range from 5,105 to 10,224 square feet in area and most are sufficient to accommodate the houses proposed while meeting the development standards. Grading of the tract has eliminated some of the existing drainage issues that previously required open swales through "The Hawthorns" development of the south by having all lots drain toward the street. There are six Floor Plans proposed (not counting reverses), of which one is a 1-story, lending considerable architectural variation to the tract. 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 applicant has worked closely with staff on the designs of the houses. The architecture has improved significantly over the designs originally submitted. However,the massing is still lacking meaningful modulation across the side and the rear elevations. The"boxy"feel is still evident from all but the front elevation. A Floor Plan that begins with a box and adds partitions to the interior is not successful. An external exhibition of the spaces inside through articulation and creative use of fenestration is a better avenue. Walls that go straight up for two stories right up against the minimum setback are inappropriate. A second floor that steps back in such cases provides a better design solution and more pleasant livability for the neighborhood. 2. The City strongly stresses 360-degree architecture in materials and features on all sides. The descriptions provided for each design style provide clues as to those features and materials that can be used to expand the richness shown on the front elevations: a. The Craftsman Bungalow is the most successful of the four. The listing of the features is a good example of the richness needed in the other design styles. b. For the Tuscany Villa, the"stacked stone"and"heavy columns"can be employed on the . other elevations and use "heavy wood overhead trellis" and "decorative corbels" as major accent features on the sides and the rear. DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2004-01151 — CRESTWOOD CORPORATION • May 3, 2005 Page 2 C. The success of Santa Barbara Revival will partly rely on creative workmanship in the stucco treatment, but will do well to expose dark wood (false)structural elements, along with more extensive use of wrought iron work around windows. d. The French Country is appropriately somewhat eclectic and would benefit from extending the use of the wood siding found in the gable ends and more liberal application of the stone. 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 conceptual streetscape elevations are a helpful device to illustrate design relationships. However, those submitted are deceptive in that they do not accurately depict an actual set of houses in this proposal either in Floor Plan mix or spatial (side yard setback) relationships. Provide a real depiction of a proposed streetscape, with at least six houses, with the correct setbacks and lot number labels. Provide a 1/8-inch or 1/4-inch scale on a long scroll sheet if necessary. 2. Replot the tract to use single-story Plan 1 on corner lots. Of the nine corner lots, only Lot 1 is too narrow to accommodate Plan 1. • 3. Front porches should be increased in depth to a minimum 6 feet. Three plans have 4-foot porches and one plan has a 5-foot porch. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be redesigned and return to the Design Review Committee as a full item. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Stewart, Coleman Staff Planner: Vance Pomeroy The Committee continued the item to give the applicant an opportunity to work with Planning staff to address the following design concerns: 1. Increase the single-story plans in the mix of plans to nine houses (-20 percent). It appears that this plan can fit on Lots 15 and 38. 2. Need more front setback variation, especially along the westerly stretch of homes. The mix of home may have something to do with a solution to this situation, but altering the Floor Plans may also be necessary. • 3. For further review, provide a streetscape elevation for both 6th Street and Hellman Avenue. 4. Further revision of the house designs is needed. Work with staff on ways to alter the Floor Plans to provide less bulky structures and on ways to improve the 360-degree application of design features and elements. • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:20 p.m. Michael Smith May 3, 2005 HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00659 - PETE VOLBEDA (for BIRDWELL)-A request to construct a single-family residence of 4,434 square feet combined (1 st/2nd floors, patios/decks,and garage)on a lot of 20,175 square feet in the Very Low Residential District, located at the intersection of Reales Street and Beryl Place -APN: 1061-801-21. Background: The lot is in the Hillside Overlay District. The intent of the Hillside Development Regulations is to minimize grading and ensure that the form, mass, profile, and architectural features of the house are designed to blend with the natural terrain, preserve the character and profile of the slope, and give consideration to the size and configuration of the lot. Recommendations by the Design Review Committee will be forwarded to the City Planner for review and action. Design Parameters: The surrounding neighborhood is comprised of a mix of single-family residences and vacant land; the parcel to the west is vacant while to the east there is a two-story single-family residence under construction. The topography of the site slopes in a generally north to south direction. At the front property line, the existing elevation is about 2,254 feet and decreases to about 2,227 feet at the rear property line. • Architecturally, the structure will be consistent with other homes in the neighborhood with similar colors, materials, finishes, and trim. From the north (street)elevation, the home will appear to be a one-story structure. However,the house will have a three-car garage and recreation room below the rear half of the first floor. With this design, the house will be more compact and will utilize the area beneath the first floor that might otherwise be fill. There will be a driveway leading to the garage along the east property line;the garage doors will face south. Wherever there is not a second floor beneath the first floor, a raised floor will be used instead of fill. There will not be any stepped floors in the house. The depth of excavation or fill for this project will be 5 feet or less, and the earthwork quantity will not exceed 1,500 cubic yards. Section Z-Z indicates 6 feet of cut; therefore, Planning Commission review and approval is required according to the Hillside Development Ordinance (Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.24.020.B.2). The overall height of the structure will not exceed 30 feet measured from the finished grade. In order to minimize the visual bulk of the structure at the side property lines as seen from the rear,the applicant has incorporated planters at the southeast and southwest corners of the house. The lot coverage will be about 18.1 percent;the maximum permissible in the Very Low Residential District is 25 percent. The project complies with the design and technical requirements of the Hillside Development Regulations. Staff believes that the applicant has made a good faith effort to satisfy the intent of this ordinance. 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 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 grading, utilize architectural design techniques that allow buildings to follow the natural terrain, and preserve the natural topography. The Hillside Development Ordinance standard is to excavate DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2003-00659 - PETE VOLBEDA (for BIRDWELL) May 3, 2005 Page 2 underground or utilize below grade rooms to 'reduce effective bulk and to provide energy efficient and environmentally desirable spaces." Staff believes that the proposed design, including the 6 feet of cut for the 'basement," is consistent with this standard and the surrounding area. 2. The retaining wall heights of 4 feet along the east and west property lines (see Section X-X) exceed the allowable 3-foot height. Redesign the retaining walls to terrace with a 3-foot planter between the walls as required by the Hillside Development Ordinance(RCMC Section 17.24.070.G.10). 3. The proposed 6-foot garden walls on top of the 4-foot retaining walls along the east and west property lines would result in an overall height of 8 feet as measured at the center of the retaining wall. Even after reducing the height of the retaining walls to 3 feet(see Comment#2 above), the overall height would be 7.5 feet. A Minor Exception is required for any wall between 6 feet and 8 feet in height (RCMC Section 17.04.050.B.1.a.). The applicant shall either reduce overall wall height or submit an application for Minor Exception. The Site Plan indicates a 5-foot garden wall, which contradicts the Grading Plan; however, that would still require a Minor Exception. 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 project will require Landscape Plans to be submitted by a licensed Landscape Architect prior to receiving Building Permits. The front yard landscaping and the slope planting are required by the Hillside Development Ordinance. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All of the walls exposed to public view, including retaining walls, shall be decorative (i.e. stucco, split-face, or slumpstone with a trim cap). Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to redesigning retaining walls and overall wall height prior to scheduling for Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Stewart, Coleman Staff Planner: Michael Smith The Committee recommended approval. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS May 3, 2005 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Br Buller Secretary • •