HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/12/15 - Agenda Packet ACTION AGENDA
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY DECEMBER 15, 2009 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Lou Munoz Pam Stewart Corkran Nicholson
Alternates: Ray Wimberly Frances Howdyshell Richard Fletcher
CONSENT CALENDAR
NO ITEMS SUBMITTED.
PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS
This is the time and place for the Committee to discuss and provide direction to an applicant regarding their
development application. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the
Committee may open the meeting for public input.
7:00 p.m.
(Mike/Cam) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18122 - DAVID
JEFFERS CONSULTING INC. - A proposal to subdivide five (5) vacant parcels with a
combined area of about 53 acres into 76 lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, located
at the east side of East Avenue, north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APN: 0225-191-03, -
04, -13, -15, and -20. Related Files: Preliminary.Review DRC2006-00793 and Variance
DRC2009-00020.
7:20 p.m.
(Tabe) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE — PMT2008-02716 — JAVIER MENDEZ — A request to add a
3,755 square foot addition to an existing 2,174 square foot residence for a total living area of
5,292 square feet for a site located in the Low (L) Residential District at 9018 Base Line Road
—APN: 0202-231-35.
7:40 p.m.
(Steve/Cam) DEVELOPMENT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2009-00557 - TRACT 16227-1 LOTS 2, 12, 15, 66-
83, 85, 87, 89, 92, 94, 96, 99, 101-104, 121-134, 136, 140 AND 142-145 —
MERITAGE HOMES - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 52
single-family lots including the addition of a new plan (Plan 3154) to the replotting and
development of a previously approved Tract 16227-1 in the Low Residential District
(2-4 dwelling units per acre) in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the north side of
Day Creek Boulevard, east of the Southern California Edison Corridor. Related Files:
Development Review DRC2008-00064, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16227 and Development
Review DRC2005-00986. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project
covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and
#98121091 certified by the City Council on August 1, 2001) and does not raise or create new
environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Mike Smith December 15, 2009
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18122 - DAVID JEFFERS
CONSULTING INC. - A proposal to subdivide five (5) vacant parcels with a combined area of about
53 acres into 76 lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District located at the east side of East Avenue,
north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) - APN: 0225-191-03, -04, -13, -15, and -20. Related Files:
Preliminary Review DRC2006-00793 and Variance DRC2009-00020.
Site Characteristics: The project area consists of combining five (5) parcels that result in a
rectangular-shaped property, with a combined area of about 2,350,000 square feet (53 acres). The
overall dimensions of the site are about 2,500 feet (east to west) by about 940 feet (north to south). The
site is vacant. There are numerous trees within and along the property lines of the individual parcels that
comprise the project site. The eastern half of the combined property is mostly low vegetation. To the
north of the western half of the project site, there are single-family residences. To the north of the
eastern half of the site, is vacant property where a subdivision for residential lots (Tract 17651) was
recently approved. To the west, are additional single-family residences. To the south, is a vacant parcel
owned by Caltrans and used by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District for access to their
facilities further to the east. Beyond this parcel, is the Foothill Freeway (SR-210). To the east, are
vacant parcels.
The zoning of the property and all the surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District,
Etiwanda Specific Plan. The subject property is generally level with a southeasterly slope; the elevations
at the northwest and southeast corners are about 1,455 feet and 1,400 feet, respectively. A segment of
an east to west Community Trail terminates (temporarily) at the southeast corner of a completed
residential subdivision (Tract 16116) that is located across the street from the project site (shown as a
. blue line on the attached exhibit). There are no trails (Local or Community) that link the project site to the
existing trails.
The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into 76 lots for single-family residential development;
the applicant does not intend to construct the homes at this time. All lots will comply with the
development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the
Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas will range between 21,780 square feet to 36,890 square
feet, which are in excess of the minimum of 20,000 square feet that is required. The minimum average
lot area is 25,230 square feet, which is in excess of the minimum 25,000 that is required. The depth of
each lot will be at least 200 feet, and the width of each lot will meet the required 90-foot dimension. All
lots will be conventional, i.e. rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. Included
in the proposal are several streets, including one that will link East Avenue and an adjacent future
residential development at Tract 17651 to the north and the vacant parcel to the east.
As the subject property is located within the Equestrian Overlay, each lot will require a dedicated corral
area of 24 feet by 24 feet for horse-keeping, and equestrian trails will be provided along the rear of each
lot per Section 5.25.500 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Along the north perimeter of the project site, a
20-foot wide Community Trail will be constructed per Figure 5-18 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. From
East Avenue to a point approximately 1,200 feet to the east at the north side of Lots 47, 58, 59, 70, and
71, the alignment of the trail will be located entirely within the proposed subdivision. From that point to
the northeast corner of the subject site, the alignment of the trail shifts northward and only 8 feet of the
required 20 feet width of the trail; at the north side of Lots 22, 23, 34, 35, and 46, will be within the
proposed subdivision; the other 12 feet will be on the neighboring property to the north (Tract 17651).
The existing trees throughout the site will be removed as necessary, and new Eucalyptus trees will be
DRC ACTION AGENDA
SUBTT18122 — DAVID JEFFERS CONSULTING INC.
December 15, 2009
Page 2
planted with a spacing of 8 feet on center per Section 5.41.501 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The
perimeter wall along the south perimeter of the proposed subdivision, at the south side of Lots 1-16, is
proposed to be in excess of 6 feet in height for noise attenuation. The perimeter wall along East Avenue,
at the west side of Lots 1 and 71-76, will also be in excess of 6 feet (as seen from within the tract) for the
same purpose. This perimeter wall and associated landscaping will be constructed to be consistent with
the design shown in Figure 5-28A. At the southwest corner of the site, Etiwanda Specific Plan
Figures 5-10 and 5-12 specify that a Neighborhood Entry statement consisting of special tree planting is
required; the applicant will improve this area accordingly.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project.
1. None.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
2. None.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning
Commission for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Nicholson
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
The Committee reviewed the proposed subdivision and accepted it as submitted after concluding that the
design/layout of the tract is standard for this zoning district and area. The Committee, with staff's
concurrence, stated that the house product would be reviewed later when the developer of the site
submitted the plans; the opportunity for additional comments would occur at that time. There was some
discussion regarding the high noise attenuating wall along the perimeter of the site. The Committee
observed that this was standard for residential projects along the Foothill Freeway (SR-210). Staff
pointed out that the design and construction of the wall would be per Caltrans standard.
Mr. Munoz asked staff questions about the hiking and riding trails noting that the Trails Advisory
Committee requested several revisions/recommendations. He wanted to know the status of the changes
and if the applicant was going to do them. Staff stated that the majority of the changes could be
accomplished easily, and that the applicant would do them. The applicant later reiterated that they would
incorporate the requested changes. However, there were two recommendations regarding access by
private vehicles and the placement of the Eucalyptus windrow in the Community Trail that needed further
discussion with the Engineering and Public Works Departments. The principal concern those
DRC ACTION AGENDA
SUBTT18122 — DAVID JEFFERS CONSULTING INC.
December 15, 2009
Page 3
departments have is long-term maintenance. Staff stated that the Planning Department will meet with
those departments for their input and determine if the recommendations could be accommodated without
being contrary to any applicable standards or policies. Staff stated that if these two recommendations
could not be incorporated into the design, the applicant could employ alternate solutions that would
address the issues raised by the Trails Advisory Committee. Staff indicated that the outcome of the
meeting would be summarized in a future memorandum to the Trails Advisory Committee, and a
discussion of the recommendations would be incorporated into the staff report that will be prepared for
the Planning Commission public hearing. Also, the plans for the tentative tract map will be revised
accordingly so that at the public hearing the Commission will have the `final' draft for their review.
•
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:20 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag December 15, 2009
•
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE — PMT2008-02716 — JAVIER MENDEZ — A request to add a
3,755 square foot addition to an existing 2,174 square foot residence for a total living area of
5,292 square feet for a site located in the Low (L) Residential District at 9018 Base Line Road —
APN: 0202-231-35.
Site Characteristics: The existing 2,174 square foot home is located on a 14,160 square lot at the
northeast corner of Base Line Road and Garnet Street. The existing garage on the site was legally
converted to living space in 1969 under a permit from San Bernardino County and is within the required
45-foot setback from Base Line Road.
Project Overview: The applicant proposes adding a 3,755 square foot two-story addition to the existing
2,174 square foot single-story home for a total living area of 5,929 square feet. The remodel will include
a 462 square foot two-car garage, along with covered and uncovered patios and decks. The proposed
addition will meet all City setback requirements, except that the existing garage conversion does not
meet the 45-foot building setback as measured from the curb face on Base Line Road. The City allows
for legal non-conforming additions to remain as long as the portion of the residence that is
non-conforming is not enlarged. The lot coverage for the completed house will be 39 percent, which is
just below the 40 percent maximum permitted in the Low Residential District.
Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on November 11, 2009. Notice of
the meeting was sent to all property owners within 660 feet of the site. Five residents attended the
meeting and two residents contacted the project planner by telephone. The neighbor's major concerns
were that a two-story residence is out of place with the surrounding neighborhood which is primarily
developed with single-story homes. They were also concerned that there would be insufficient off-street
parking for a house with 8 bedrooms. The neighbor's stated that they would support the applicant
increasing the size of the existing house as long as it was limited to a single-story.
Staff Comments: Section 17.08.050 of the Development Code directs staff to consider neighborhood
compatibility when reviewing residential development. Neighborhood compatibility is defined as
development that is sensitive to the immediate environment of the site and neighborhood related to
architectural design, including scale, bulk, and size. Additionally, the new General Plan update explicitly
states that new development will be required to compliment and reinforce the unique character of each
neighborhood through sensitive'infill and transitions in scale. Staff is concerned that the proposed
two-story addition is out of proportion in relation to the immediate neighborhood. The surrounding area is
dominated by single-story residences that are approximately 2,000 square feet in size. The applicant's
5,929 square foot residence would be more than two times the size of other residences in the
neighborhood.
Major Issues:
1. The proposed two-story addition is out of proportion to the existing neighborhood that is dominated
by much smaller single-story residences.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
PMT2008-2716—JAVIER MENDEZ
December 15, 2009
Page 2
Secondary Issues:
1. The house lacks a cohesive architectural style. It is recommended that the applicant choose an
architectural style and select architectural details that emphasize the chosen architectural style.
Staff Recommendation: Staff requests that the Design Review Committee review the proposed
two-story addition for compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. If deemed to be incompatible,
staff seeks direction on the scale and bulk that would be acceptable.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Nicholson
Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag
Both Commissioners, Wimberly and Munoz, felt that the scale and bulk of the proposed two-story
residential addition was out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. They informed the applicant
that they would only support a design that was more in keeping with the single-story homes in the
surrounding area. They did not limit the applicant to a single-story design, though they emphasized that
the house must conform to the scale and bulk of the neighborhood. The Committee also stated that they
felt that the proposed design lacked a unifying design theme and was a hodgepodge of architectural
styles.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:40 p.m. Steve Fowler December 15, 2009
DEVELOPMENT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2009-00557 - TRACT 16227-1 LOTS 2, 12, 15, 66-83, 85, 87,
89, 92, 94, 96, 99, 101-104, 121-134, 136, 140 AND 142-145 - MERITAGE HOMES - The design review
of building elevations and detailed site plan for 52 single-family lots including the additions of new plan
(Plan 3154) to the replotting and development of a previously approved Tract 16227-1 in the Low
Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the north
side of Day Creek Boulevard, east of the Southern California Edison Corridor. Related Files:
Development Review DRC2008-00064, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16227 and Development Review
DRC2005-00986. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior
Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the
City Council on August 1, 2001) and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already
considered in that Environmental Impact Report.
Background: On February 22, 2006, the Planning Commission approved Development Review
DRC2005-00986 for the development of 145 homes on a 52.54-acre site within the 632-unit Master
Planned Community of Rancho Etiwanda Estates. Because of a shifting demand in the housing market,
the applicant, Meritage Homes, came in and requested modifications of their previously approved
building elevations and the Planning Commission approved a new Development Review
DRC2008-00064 on May 28, 2008. That approval was for 55 of the 93 homes that were left to build in
this development. This request is for the remaining 38 homes to complete the build-out and changing
14 of the homes in the last Development Review DRC2008-00064 approval to the new plan that is being
proposed (Plan 3154). The applicant is required to develop within substantial compliance with the
Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP), incorporating the architecture and design details of the Etiwanda
area. Requirements include side-on garages, recessed garages, exterior siding, and specific
architectural styles.
A Development Agreement was approved in 2001 which required the Low Residential standards for all
lots within this tract. The property was rough graded in June of 2004. The area was mass graded and
the infrastructure was installed. The master developer has installed the main access of the gated
community, as well as the slope landscaping and decorative perimeter walls. These walls will be
consistent throughout the entire master planned community. The site is bordered by vacant land to the
west; by single-family homes to the north, by Day Creek Boulevard to the south; and by a portion of
Tract 16227, built by K. Hovnanian, to the east.
Design Parameters: The project site is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood which has its
own unique architectural design guidelines per the ENSP. The ENSP requires that a mix of the following
primary architectural styles be used for at least two-thirds of the units: Bungalow, Ranch, Monterey, or
San Juan. Up to one-third of the units may use these styles: Country, Victorian, or Santa Barbara
Revival.
The proposed modifications are consistent with the required architectural styles and include the
previously approved downsized floor plans with a new floor plan that is 450 square feet larger than the
previously approved 2,704 square foot plan and still provides larger yard areas to meet the demand of
the current housing market. The previously approved plans along with the new plans are a combination
of one- and two-story homes and range in size from 2,194 square feet to 3,154 square feet of livable
area. A total of 6 (11.6 percent) of the proposed house product will be single-story. The two-story plans
have been designed with two floor plans and four architectural styles. The proposed architectural styles
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2009-00557— MERITAGE HOMES
December 15, 2009
Page 2
are San Juan, Santa Barbara Revival, Monterey, and Ranch. The San Juan elevation incorporates
wrought iron details, recessed windows, decorative shutters, and arched patio/entryway. The
Santa Barbara Revival incorporates built-up eaves, louvered shutters, and recessed windows. The
Monterey style incorporates oversized rafter tails, brick veneer elements, hardboard detailing, and
recessed tile features. The Ranch style incorporates board and ban siding, louvered shutters, wood
kickers, and louvered hardboard details.
All four sides of all homes have articulation and incorporate decorative garage doors and optional
chimneys to match the architectural style of the home. Each of the four plans feature covered porch
entries which range in size dependent upon the style. The developer is proposing to construct the
52 homes in fourteen phases.
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project:
1. The applicant has worked diligently with staff. Together with the Development Agreement and
discussions with staff, there are no 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. The applicant has worked diligently with staff. Together with the Development Agreement and
discussions with staff, there are no secondary issues.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. Boulders from the project site shall be utilized and integrated as part of the front yard Landscape
Plan, per the Master Plan Resolution of Approval.
•
2. Driveways shall be colored and scored in a diagonal pattern for additional entryway detail.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend approval of
the project subject to the above revisions.
Design Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Nicholson
Staff Planner: Steve Fowler
The Committee members approved the project as presented; item to be forwarded to the Planning
Commission for approval.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
December 15, 2009
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
RR snp ctfully submitted,
1�tted,
mill &M. it) . U to
Corkran W. Nicholson
Assistant Planning Director