HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/10/31 - Agenda Packet ACTION AGENDA
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY OCTOBER 31, 2006 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: Lou Munoz Richard Fletcher Rich Macias
CONSENT CALENDAR
(All consent items heard at 7 p.m.)
Item was pulled.
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.
(Donald/Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DRC2006-00513 - ROCK-JERSEY, LLC - The development of a master plan
for an office park consisting of 4 buildings totaling 97,300 square feet on
7.36 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 6), within the
Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at the southeast corner of
Haven Avenue and Jersey Boulevard - APN: 0209-143-02. Related Files:
Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18209, Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00805,
and Preliminary Review DRC2006-00339. Staff has prepared a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
SUBTPM18209 - ROCK-JERSEY, LLC - A request to subdivide 7.36 acres of
land into 5 parcels in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 6), within the
Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at the southeast corner of
Haven Avenue and Jersey Boulevard - APN: 0209-143-02. Related Files:
Development Review DRC2006-00513, Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00805,
and Preliminary Review DRC2006-00339. Staff has prepared a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
7:20 p.m.
(Mike S./Cam) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DRC2006-00365 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A proposal to construct
a commercial center comprised of five buildings with a combined floor area of
about 120,400 square feet for a home improvement store, food service, and
various standard/medical offices in the Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park in
the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 7), located at the south side of
Foothill Boulevard at Mayten Avenue - APN: 0229-011-87-92. Related file:
DRC ACTION AGENDA
October 31, 2006
Page 2
Pre-Application Review DRC2005-01092. Staff has found the project to be
within the scope of a previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted by the Planning Commission on April
28, 1999, and June 28, 2000, respectively, and a Negative Declaration adopted
by the Planning Commission on February 13, 2002. This project does not raise
or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the previous
Negative Declarations. Related Files: DR99-11, DRCDR99-11MOD and
SUBTPM15630.
7:40 p.m.
(Mike D./Mark) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DRC2005-01060 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS FOR THE SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - Review of Site
Plan and building elevations for 40 three-bed room,apartment units on 1.75 acre
of land in the Medium High Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per acre),
located immediately east of the existing Rancho Verde Village multiple-family
residential development at the southerly terminus of Sierra Madre Avenue -
APN: 0207-254-67 and 68.
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
The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Donald Granger October 31, 2006
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00513 —
ROCK JERSEY, LLC - The development of a master plan for an office park consisting of
4 buildings totaling 97,300 square feet on 7.36 acres of land in the Industrial Park District
(Subarea 6), within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at the southeast corner of
Haven Avenue and Jersey Boulevard - APN: 0209-143-02. Related Files: Tentative Parcel
Map SUBTPM18209, Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00805, and Preliminary Review
DRC2006-00339. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental
impacts for consideration.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18209 —
ROCK-JERSEY, LLC - A request to subdivide 7.36 acres of land into 5 parcels in the Industrial
Park District (Subarea 6), within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at the southeast
corner of Haven Avenue and Jersey Boulevard - APN: 0209-143-02. Related Files:
Development Review DRC2006-00513, Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00805, and Preliminary
Review DRC2006-00339. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental
impacts for consideration.
Design Parameters: The project site is located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and
Jersey Boulevard. The site is presently vacant with sparse vegetation and annual grassland
covering the majority of the site. To the north is a gas station and car wash; to the east is
vacant land and industrial buildings; to the south, across the railroad tracks, are industrial and
office buildings; and to the west, across Haven Avenue, is vacant land and the Cucamonga
Pioneer Winery, a potential local landmark.
The Haven and Jersey Office Park development is located in the Haven Avenue Overlay
District, which requires exemplary, sophisticated urban office architecture. Architecture that
makes strong use of glass, rich materials (granite, travertine, etc.), metal, recesses, openings,
and portals is highly sought after; vertical and horizontal articulation in the wall planes is
required. The site planning must emphasize a pedestrian-oriented environment that promotes a
campus-like feeling and pedestrian circulation.
The applicant is proposing to construct 4 two-story buildings consisting of one medical building
(Building 1) and three office buildings (Buildings 2-4). All buildings have been designed under
one architectural concept, utilizing a two-tone paint scheme on concrete tilt-up panels. The
entry way of each building includes a metal canopy supported by ledge-stone columns, and all
elevations use ledge-stone for a base treatment. Accent features include decorative sconce
lighting and horizontal and vertical reveals. The fenestration patterns are appropriate to the
Haven Avenue Overlay District and utilize reflective glazing. Both driveways and entry throats
into the project have been designed with texture colored concrete and decorative bands. The
project includes three employee outdoor eating areas with landscaping, benches, and enhanced
concrete paving. The staff is pleased with the design concept of the buildings.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
.discussion.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2006-00327 — ROCK-JERSEY, LLC
October 31, 2006
Page 2
Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion
regarding this project.
1. None. The applicant has worked diligently with staff to resolve all major issues.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Staff recommends the following enhancements to the Site Plan:
• Colored concrete should be used for all handicap parking stalls.
• The employee outdoor eating area between Buildings 2 and 3 should be revised to
include lighted bollards.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. The project will require review and approval of a Uniform Sign Program.
2. Outdoor furniture shall be provided in the outdoor employee eating area.
3. All outdoor furniture (tables, benches, trash receptacles, bollards, etc.) shall be uniform.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the secondary
issues outlined above being resolved to the satisfaction of the Committee.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Fletcher, McPhail, Coleman
Staff Planner: Donald Granger
The Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval, subject to the following
conditions:
• Colored concrete shall be used for all handicap parking stalls.
• The employee outdoor eating area between Buildings 2 and 3 shall be revised to include
lighted bollards.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:20 p.m. Mike Smith October 31, 2006
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00365
CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A proposal to construct a commercial center comprised of
five buildings with a combined floor area of about 120,400 square feet for a home improvement
store, food service, and various standard/medical offices in the Rancho Cucamonga Corporate
Park in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 7), located at the south side of
Foothill Boulevard at Mayten Avenue - APN: 0229-011-87-92. Related file: Pre-Application
Review DRC2005-01092. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of a previously
adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted by the
Planning Commission on April 28, 1999, and June 28, 2000, respectively, and a Negative
Declaration adopted by the Planning Commission on February 13, 2002. This project does not
raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the previous Negative
Declarations. Related Files: DR99-11, DRCDR99-11 MOD and SUBTPM15630.
Background: This project was last seen by the Planning Commission at a Pre-Application
Review workshop on January 25, 2006, (see attached Minutes Exhibit A). Although the Site
Plan of the project and building plotting as shown in the formal submittal is substantially similar,
there have been architectural revisions and another building has been incorporated into the
original proposal.
Design Parameters: The subject property is located within the 140-acre Rancho Cucamonga
Corporate Park, generally located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and
Milliken Avenue. The project will be constructed on the last remaining vacant parcels that
comprise this master planned area. Immediately to the west of the subject site is Lowes Home
Improvement specialty retail warehouse; to the south are several warehouse distribution
buildings; to the north is Union Bank of California, Carrow's Restaurant, and two pad buildings
(one of which is under construction); and to the east is the Masi Plaza. The applicant proposes
to construct five tilt-up concrete buildings: 4 two-story buildings (Buildings Al, A2, C, and D)
and 1 one-story building (Building B). Although there is no specific design theme that prevails
within the Corporate Park, the buildings of this project will incorporate relatively similar design
attributes. The applicant hopes to lease to home improvement retailers on the first floor and
offices on the second floor of Building Al; Buildings Al, B, and C are also intended for home
improvement retailers; and Building D will be dedicated to office and medical uses. Food
service uses are also contemplated for a small part of Buildings At and B.
Architecture:
• Building Al: The architecture of this two-story building is characterized by four (4)
significant tower elements, undulating parapets, extensive use of glass at high visibility
areas, a colonnade on the first floor, and, unique among the two-story buildings proposed,
a second story exterior walkway on the second floor. Additional features include a large
central courtyard with a decorative fountain, metal awnings, and wood trellises. Additional
definition will be provided along each wall plane with a varying paint scheme. The details
and features on the east and west elevations generally match the north elevation. The
second floor walkway continues around to all elevations. Extensive amounts of glass are
proposed at the north elevation (the primary elevation of the building) and to the east and
west elevations. Glass has also been applied to the south elevation, but is limited to the
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2006-00365 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
October 31, 2006
Page 2
second floor; the first floor does not have any glass. Staff does not believe that it is
necessary as this side will be dedicated to loading/unloading.
• Building A2: Incorporates architectural features similar to those used on Building Al, with
matching materials, finishes, and colors. This building has three (3) entrances with
corresponding tower elements on the west elevation. Glass dominates the west elevation
but is limited on the north and south elevations. Trellises and awnings have also been
provided but are limited to the west elevation and the northwest and southwest corners;
the east elevation and the easternmost three-fourths of the south and north elevations are
relatively simple and require revisions.
• Buildings B and C: Both buildings are similar in elevation, with the exception of a second
floor on Building C, and incorporate the same architectural features used on the other
buildings. Both buildings have four (4) entrances with corresponding tower elements,
extensive use of storefront glazing, and trellises/awnings on their respective primary
elevations. To a lesser extent, glass, decorative trellises, and awnings have been
provided on the other elevations, as well. Vertical vine trellises have been provided at
various locations. Unique to both buildings will be their respective trash enclosures that
are integrated into a tower element which projects from the building plane about 12 to
16 feet.
• Building D: This building will be primarily office and medical uses and will incorporate the
same architectural features used on the other buildings. There will also be extensive use
of glazing on all elevations consistent with other office buildings in the City.
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. Building At:
a. Eliminate the stylized 'F icon at the top of all tower elements, and replace with the
glazing as shown on previous submittals.
2. Building A2:
a. On the east elevation, between the southeast and northeast corner 'towers,' provide
trellis elements and continuous, 2 feet high glazing to match those on the west
elevation.
b. Provide glazing on the north and south sides of the northeast corner and the
southeast corner 'towers,' respectively.
C. Provide stack stone veneer at the southeast and northeast corners.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2006-00365 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
October 31, 2006
Page 3
d. Provide vertical vine trellises at the east side of the southeast and northeast corner
'towers.'
3. Building B:
a. Provide glazing at the south side of both the southeast and southwest corner tower
elements to match their corresponding east and west elevations. Doing this will
address the lack of features on the south elevation which is highly visible as seen
from interior parking lot at the approximate center of the project site.
4. Building C:
a. Provide glazing at the west side of both the northwest and southwest corner tower
elements and their corresponding north and south sides. Shift the vine trellises
currently proposed to other locations along the west side.
b. On the west elevation, provide horizontal wood trellis elements to match those on the
east elevation.
C. Both comments noted above are to address the lack of features on the west
elevation that is highly visible as seen from the Lowes Home Improvement
warehouse.
5. Building D:
a. Enlarge the horizontal trellis element at the stairway balconies located at the north and
south elevations; match the trellises provided on the second floor walkway at the north
elevation of Building A.
6. All Buildings:
a. Increase the application of the stack stone veneer at the base of all columns and
tower elements. The height of this veneer does not have to be the same but should
be increased above the 4 feet that has been provided.
b. The color schemes used should be uniformly applied on all elevations of all
buildings.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
1. All horizontal trellis members immediately over pedestrian areas shall have a maximum
spacing of 24 inches on center; the beams shall have a minimum dimension of 4 inches by
12 inches. The smaller decorative trellises located elsewhere are acceptable.
2. Provide decorative light fixtures on all buildings. Also, provide decorative tile inserts
matching those located on the Lowes Home Improvement warehouse.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2006-00365—CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
October 31, 2006
Page 4
3. Provide a direct pedestrian connection between Buildings Al and A2; C and D along the
drive aisle to the east of Building D that will connect the sidewalk at Millenium Court to the
walkway which currently terminates near the northeast corner of Building D. Also, provide
sidewalks between Building A1/A2 to the east west driveway that separates the project
site and the properties to the north.
4. All landscape areas, planters, and tree 'diamonds' shall have a minimum width of 5 feet
and include a 6-inch curb.
Technical Issues: The following technical issues are Code requirements, which must be
satisfied before the project can be approved. As City Ordinances, they are not negotiable
design elements.
1. Banner Signs — The applicant's colored elevations propose 3 feet by 15 feet projecting
vertical banner type signs mounted on the upper sides of the towers of Building A. This
type of sign is prohibited by the City's Sign Ordinance within industrial zones.
Section 14.20.110.2. only allows wall and monument signs. The proposed signs do not
comply with Section 14.08.370 definition of a wall sign as "a sign attached to or erected
against the wall of a building or structure with the exposed face of the sign parallel to the
plane of such wall" because the proposed sign faces are mounted perpendicular to wall
plane. The placement of the signs also violates the limitation of Section 14.20.110.2.a.
that "No wall signs may be placed on other structures such as silos or towers." The
content of the signs (i.e., identifying the name of the project) does not comply with
Section 14.20.110.2.a. only allows wall signs that "identify the individual businesses."
Lastly, the signs do not comply with Section 14.20.110.2. which limits identification of a
development to a monument sign or site directory (monument) sign.
2. Icon Signs — The applicant also proposes 4 foot high stylized 'F' icon at the top of Building
A's towers. This type of sign is prohibited by the City's Sign Ordinance within industrial
zones. The content of the signs (i.e., identifying the name of the project) does not comply
with Section 14.20.110.2.a. only allows wall signs that "identify the individual businesses".
These signs exceed the maximum number of wall signs allowed. Lastly, the signs do not
comply with Section 14.20.110.2. which limits identification of a development to a
monument sign or site directory (monument) sign.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
1. Decorative paving shall be provided at all vehicular access points on to the site, including
at the driveway at Millenium Court. Existing decorative paved octagonal areas shall be
protected in-place or reconstructed as necessary.
2. Decorative paving shall be provided at sidewalks located along the primary elevations of
each building and in the plaza areas immediately in front of each primary entrance of the
building.
3. All roof equipment shall be screened by parapet walls.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2006-00365 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
October 31, 2006
Page 5
4. All loading areas shall be screened with landscaping or, where possible, a combination of
landscaping and walls.
5. All walls shall be constructed of decorative block or incorporate a decorative finish/veneer.
6. All trash enclosures, except at Buildings B and C, shall be constructed per the City's
design standard for commercial projects.
7. An amendment to the existing Uniform Sign Program that governs the Rancho
Cucamonga Corporate Park (USP#140) is required. Amendments are subject to the City's
Sign Ordinance, and all signs will require review and approval of a sign permit application
prior to installation.
8. Bicycle racks should be provided per City standard.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applicant revise the proposal as noted
above and resubmit for Committee review as a Consent item prior to scheduling for Planning
Commission review and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Fletcher, McPhail, Coleman
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
The Committee conceptually approved the application subject to the following:
• Add more stackstone veneer to the corner tower elements of each building. Specifically,
the height of the stackstone veneer should be increased to the full height of the columns,
stopping at the trim detail already provided (located about 15 feet above the finished
surface) at each respective corner. .
• Provide a 3 to 4-foot high screening for the loading area at the south elevation of
Building B, comprised of a combination of pilasters and landscaping.
The applicant/client is to work with staff and have the revisions completed prior to Planning
Commission review.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Mike Diaz October 31, 2006
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2005-01060 -
PITASSI ARCHITECTS FOR THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION - Review of Site Plan and building elevations for 40 three-bedroom apartment
units on 1.75 acre of land in the Medium High Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per
acre), located immediately east of the existing Rancho Verde Village multiple-family residential
development at the southerly terminus of Sierra Madre Avenue - APN: 0207-254-67 and 68.
Design Parameters: Southern California Housing Corporation is proposing to develop 40 new
affordable apartment units and a 10,300 square foot community center/laundry building adjacent
to the east side of its existing apartment complex. The project is intended to tie in with the
existing complex owned and operated by Southern California Housing Corporation. The
existing complex is a combination of market rate and affordable units.
The project site is a field adjacent to the east side of the existing complex. There is an existing
house and trees that are proposed for removal. The primary access to the subject site will be
from Grove Avenue through the existing complex, with emergency fire department access being
gained from the north via a gated entry and new cul-de-sac at the southern terminus of
Sierra Madre Avenue. To the north and east are single-family residences, and to the immediate
south is the BSNF/Metrolink rail line. The property has a gradual slope to the southwest and
contains no significant vegetation.
The new units will be located in 4 "L" shaped, three-story buildings arranged into two pairs so as
to form a sizable courtyard between them, plus 4 units above the Community Center. Each new
unit will have 3 bedrooms and a floor area ranging from approximately 1,100 to 1,300 square
feet. Required parking for the project is 90 spaces (10 for visitors), and a total of 89 parking
spaces are provided as follows: 42 in detached garages, 40 in carports, and 7 for required
guest parking spaces. The garages spaces will be located against the south and east
boundaries of the site in buildings with 7 single-car garages each. The carports and guest
parking spaces are located on the north property line and around the interior of the site.
The design of the new units is a contemporary interpretation of the Spanish/Mediterranean
architectural style. However, unlike the design of the existing units, the new building design
features clay tile hip roofs and trimmed out windows and door openings. The exterior walls are
clad in stucco typically associated with the proposed style. The landscaping and recreational
amenities appear to be well distributed around the site.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
Background: When plans were submitted for review in late 2005, staff identified the various
areas where the project did not meet the development standards of the underlying district: a
deficiency in the required minimum lot size for development at the density requested, setbacks
from adjacent single-family properties, visitor parking, private open space for each unit,
drainage, access, and street improvements, etc.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2005-01060 — PITASSI ARCHITECTS FOR THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
October 31, 2006
Page 2
Under State law, cities are required to provide development incentives for the development of
affordable housing units within its jurisdiction. Typically, these incentives included extra density
and/or relaxed development standards in exchange for the creation of affordable units. With
this particular project, the applicant is not requesting a density bonus but is requesting
incentives such as relaxing specific development standards applicable to the property, in order
to make the proposed project economically feasible for creating the 40 affordable units.
The applicant has submitted an application requesting City approval of a proposed Affordable
Housing Incentive Agreement (hereafter the Agreement) to specifically address the issues
raised in staff's Incompleteness Letter. The request will be considered by the City Council. If
the Agreement is approved by the City Council, the project will be able to proceed as proposed.
If Council does not approve the Agreement, the project will have to be revised or abandoned.
Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion
regarding this project.
Notwithstanding the issues discussed above, staff finds the Site Plan and general architecture
of the new buildings to be complimentary with the architecture of the existing buildings.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
1. Select a more decorative garage door design for the enclosed garage units. The garage
doors shown on the plans are not appropriate for a residential development. A catalog cut
of the door is requested for the Design Review Committee.
2. Demonstrate why a 12 and 16-foot high wall along the south and east boundaries of the
site is necessary. Staff believes the proposed height, particularly along the east property
line, is excessive and unlike anything else in the area. Unless the proposed height along
the south property line can be justified (by a noise study) as the only feasible means for
ameliorating noise from the rail way, staff believes the walls should be lowered in height to
between 8 to 10 feet. Regardless, the wall should include a darker base color for the
lower 6 to 8 feet to help soften the appearance of the wall.
3. Revise the design of all perimeter walls to provide visual interest to the street and avoid
the appearance of a long a monotonous looking wall. In addition, indicate any design
features that will discourage graffiti on those portions of the wall that are exposed.
4. Indicate how HVAC equipment will be accommodated for the units. Plans do not indicate
the use of mechanical wells or the location of any window, wall, or ground mounted
equipment. Staff does not recommend the placement of any equipment in the balcony as
it will likely decrease the already small private open space areas further.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2005-01060 — PITASSI ARCHITECTS FOR THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
October 31, 2006
Page 3
1. On-site fences or walls shall be constructed of a material more durable than wood.
Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, decorative block, wrought iron and
PVC. All gates and fences will be constructed of powder-coated metal.
2. All HVAC equipment shall be screened from view.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Secondary Issues identified in this report
and those identified by the Committee be discussed with direction being given to the applicant
as to what should be addressed to obtain a recommendation of approval to the Planning
Commission.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Fletcher, McPhail, Coleman
Staff Planner: Mike Diaz
The project was conceptually approved. The Committee found the Site Plan, landscaping, and
the design of the new buildings to be well done. In addition, the Committee found the architect's
response to the issues raised in the report to be appropriate, including the design for the garage
doors, the revised design for the garages, and the height of the adjacent perimeter walls.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
October 31, 2006
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8- p.m.
R pectfully s bmi d,
Dan Coleman
Principal Planner