HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011/04/05 - Agenda Packet ACTION AGENDA
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY APRIL 5, 2011 7:00 P.M.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER
RAINS ROOM
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Committee Members: Lou Munoz Ray Wimberly James Troyer Donald Granger
Alternates: Frances Howdyshell Richard Fletcher Francisco Oaxaca
CONSENT CALENDAR
7:00 p.m.
Tom/Carlo CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00045 - PEP BOYS AUTO - A request to
establish an automotive repair and auto parts retail store within an existing building in the
Regional Related Commercial (FB/RRC) Foothill Boulevard District, located in an existing
shopping center at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue.
APN: 0229-031-27.
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.
7:10 p.m.
(Mike/Carlo) MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2010-00400 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
for ARCO -A request to construct a self-service carwash of 940 square feet at an existing
automotive fueling services center on a parcel of 2 acres in the Industrial Park (IP) District
(Subarea 6) Haven Overlay, located at 9280 Haven Avenue - APN: 0209-262-20.
Related files: Development Code Amendment DRC2010-00399 and Conditional Use
Permit CUP99-53.
7:30 p.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE WORKSHOP TRAINING DRC2011-00159 - CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A presentation by staff and workshop training on
Hillside Design Review requirements and Design Policies for single-family custom homes
in the Hillside Overlay District. The report and workshop qualifies under State CEQA
Guideline Section 15061(b)(3) because the report is for informational purposes and will
not result in an intensification of environmental impacts.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:03 p.m.
CONSENT CALENDAR
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn April 5, 2011
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00045 - PEP BOYS AUTO - A request to establish an
automotive repair and auto parts retail store within an existing building in the Regional Related
Commercial (FB/RRC) Foothill Boulevard District, located in an existing shopping center at the southwest
corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. APN: 0229-031-27.
Background: On September 11, 1996, the City Planner approved Development Review 96-23 for the
development retail pad for Hollywood Video in the Foothill Market Place shopping center, located at the
southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. The project site is located within an
existing shopping center and contains the existing 6,550 square foot building and 35 parking spaces.
The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing building but will modify the floor plan to include
2,525 square feet of retail/stock and 3,954 square feet of auto service, including 6 vehicle service bays.
Staff Comments: The application proposes minimal changes to the buildings exterior and site plan.
Changes to the building exterior are proposed on the west elevation where the existing storefront window
will be replaced with overhead garage doors to access the service bay. Changes to the site plan are
proposed to the west of the building to establish a drive aisle to the service bay and the removal of
3 parking spaces and minimal landscaping.
Major Issues:
1. None.
Secondary Issues:
1. The building is located directly south of and adjacent to Foothill Boulevard. The existing glass
storefront windows are located along the easterly half of the building allowing unobstructed views of
the future service bay area. Staff has concerns with the visibility of the service bays from
Foothill Boulevard and suggests the use of opaque glass or other material to shield views into the
service bay.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the project and
forward the project to the Planning Commission for final review and approval.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee reviewed the project and expressed a concern regarding the possible views of the
service bay area from Foothill Boulevard. The Committee recommended the installation of screening to
block all views into the service bay for the windows adjacent to Foothill Boulevard. The applicant
indicated he would submit material samples for staff's consideration. The Committee also recommended
that the trash enclosure adjacent to the southeast corner of the building to be revised to meet the current
design standards.
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger
Staff Planner: Tom Grahn
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:10 p.m. Mike Smith April 5, 2011
MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2010-00400 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES for ARCO - A
request to construct a self-service carwash of 940 square feet at an existing automotive fueling services
center on a parcel of 2 acres in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 6) Haven Overlay, located at
9280 Haven Avenue - APN: 0209-262-20. Related files: Development Code Amendment
DRC2010-00399 and Conditional Use Permit CUP99-53.
Background: A proposal for a carwash was formally submitted to the City for review on June 1, 2010.
The initial proposal was substantially similar to this proposal with the exception of the plotting of the
carwash building on the site. The applicant originally proposed to plot the carwash building in the
parking and landscaped area near the southwest corner of Building B. Staff was concerned about the
proximity, orientation, and general compatibility of the proposed carwash relative to Building B. The
applicant subsequently proposed an alternate solution which is the subject of this review. There are
related applications pending — Development Code Amendment DRC2010-00399 to allow carwashes
within the Haven Overlay and a modification of Conditional Use Permit CUP99-53 (a previously approved
gas station/convenience market) as described below. To ensure that all applications are processed in an
efficient and timely manner, staff is presenting it to the Committee to determine if the project, specifically
the location of the carwash, is acceptable as proposed.
Design Parameters: The project site is located within an automotive fueling services center that is part of
a commercial/office development that was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on
July 12, 2000 (related file: Conditional Use Permit DRCCUP 99-53). The overall commercial/office
development is comprised of two (2) parcels with a combined area of approximately 174,000 square feet
(4 acres). The site is approximately 659 feet (north to south) by approximately 264 feet (east to west)
and is comprised of three (3) buildings with a combined floor area of 40,000 square feet. The buildings
are, from south to north, an ARCO gas station/convenience store with a Subway restaurant (Building A),
an El Ranchero restaurant (Building B), and a multi-tenant office building (Building C). To the north and
east of the development are offices; to the south is an automotive trade school; and to the west is a
warehouse/storage/distribution building. The zoning of the center and all surrounding properties is
Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 6). With the exception of the property to the west, the site and all
surrounding properties are also within the Haven Overlay.
The applicant, on behalf of ARCO, proposes to construct a freestanding, automated self-service carwash
building of 880 square feet. The car wash is proposed to be situated between the west property line and
a north to south drive aisle that extends along the entire length of the west property line of the site. The
area of work is presently developed with parking stalls and landscaping. The primary axis of the carwash
will be north to south and parallel to the previously mentioned drive aisle. The entrance and exit will be
on the north and south sides, respectively. To ensure safe exiting from the carwash, an area is proposed
at the exit of the carwash that is sufficient in length to allow a vehicle to pause before proceeding into the
drive aisle. Similarly, a drive aisle leading to the carwash is proposed that will allow up to three vehicles
to queue without blocking or otherwise interfering with traffic circulation in the existing, adjoining drive
aisle. Ten parking stalls and nearby landscaping will be removed to accommodate the new building.
The width of the building is 20 feet, and the drive aisle width adjacent to the building is only slightly wider
than the minimum 26 feet required by the Fire Department. As a result, the landscape planter along the
east side of the building will be only 1 foot in width. There will be landscape planters separating the drive
aisle for the carwash and the existing parking lot drive aisle that will be about 8 feet wide.
The architecture of the carwash building (Exhibit A) will match the design and general appearance of the
existing buildings (Exhibit B) and include matching finish, colors, trim, and materials. No revisions to the
existing buildings are proposed.
•
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2010-00400— CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
April, 5, 2011
Page 2
Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Ma(or Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this
project.
1. The carwash building will have a zero setback from the west property line. Per
Section 17.30.040(D)(3)(b) and (d) of the Development Code, the minimum setback along the west
property line is 5 feet. If the Committee determines that a zero setback is acceptable, then the
submittal of a Variance application is required for review by the Planning Commission.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
1. Replacement light standards shall not exceed 15 feet in height measured from the adjacent
finished surface or finished grade. This height includes the base, pole, and the fixture.
2. If it is possible, the existing trees that are displaced by the construction of the carwash shall be
relocated to another location on the property. Otherwise, replacement trees shall be planted on a
one-to-one basis for each existing tree that is removed.
3. Shrubs of a minimum 5 gallon size shall be planted at an interval of 18 inches on center in the
1-foot wide planter located along the east side of the building.
4. The vine trellises proposed to be placed on the east wall face of the building shall be rectilinear in
design and the height of both increased to match the height of the horizontal overhead trellises as
shown on the full set of plans.
5. The windows on the east elevation of the car wash building shall be one-way vision glass that
restricts visibility of the interior of the car wash from the outside.
6. The tile on the support columns for the horizontal overhead trellises shall match the tile on the
existing support columns on-site.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
1. All doors (roll-up, emergency access, etc.) shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall.
2. All downspouts on all elevations of the building shall be routed through the interior of the building.
Note: the downspouts shall be relocated to the east side of the building so that water drains onto
the subject site and not onto the adjacent property to the west (as currently proposed).
3. All signs shall comply with the applicable provisions of the City's Sign Ordinance and Uniform Sign
Program No. 204. Signs identifying products, advertising services, or identifying the car wash
building as "car wash" are not permitted. Signs required by Federal, State, or local agencies are
exempt.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2010-00400— CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
April, 5, 2011
Page 3
Staff Recommendation: Staff requests direction from the Committee to determine if the project is
acceptable as proposed. Staff recommends that the architecture of the proposed carwash be approved.
If the location of the carwash is acceptable as proposed, then processing of the applications will continue
and will be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. If the location of the carwash is
not acceptable as proposed, then Staff will coordinate with the applicant to revise the proposal.
Revisions will be presented to the Committee for review prior to forwarding to the Planning Commission
for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee reviewed the proposal and discussed with staff and the applicant the technical
challenges of having the carwash located at the west side of the project site between the west property
line and the north to south drive aisle. The applicant discussed the general background of the project
and agreed to incorporate the features identified in the secondary issues and policy issues listed above.
Staff noted that the architecture of the car wash is consistent with the existing buildings within the
commercial/office development and that no revisions or corrections to its design were necessary — the
Committee agreed. The Committee's principal concerns with the proposed location of the carwash
building were as follows:
1. Variance for the property line setback: the Committee understood the reasoning for plotting the
carwash building at the west property line with a zero setback but did not think the findings for the
Variance were present. The Committee indicated that this was a situation where the applicant was
proposing a structure on a property where there is not enough room to do so and that all of the
physical constraints were self-imposed.
2. Vehicle circulation: the plotting of the carwash building relative to the north to south drive aisle
results in entrance and exit drive aisles to the carwash that require turning movements that are
potentially hazardous because they are not perpendicular to the drive aisle. Also, the functionality
of the north to south drive aisle could be negatively affected because of the queue of vehicles
extending into it.
3. Maintenance: a legal agreement/easement with the property owner to the west would be required.
If this were not possible, the applicant would be required to provide a means to ensure that the
west side of the building would be satisfactorily maintained.
4. Landscaping: the minimal separation between the carwash building and the north to south drive
aisle limits the amount of landscaping that could be provided.
5. Visibility: the plotting of the carwash building relatively close to 6th Street results in limited options
for screening the opening of the carwash and the corresponding equipment inside. For example,
the height of a landscaped berm would, at most, only screen the lower 3 feet of the carwash.
The applicant acknowledged these concerns and potential solutions to each issue were discussed with
the Committee. Although each solution could be acceptable in isolation, each introduced another
challenge that would need to be addressed.
DRC ACTION AGENDA
DRC2010-00400 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
April, 5, 2011
Page 4
The applicant suggested evaluating the previous location for the carwash, i.e. the location near the
restaurant. Staff provided the Site Plan showing this alternate location (north of the pump canopy, west
of the restaurant). The Committee and the applicant discussed the merits and constraints of this
location, including the fact that this alternative addressed many of the Committee's concerns presented
above but also was encumbered by site constraints, such as adequate queue space, screening
challenges, and impacts to the existing restaurant. The Committee indicated that they would be willing to
further consider this option. They requested the following for additional discussion:
a) a proposal for screening (aesthetic and noise) between the carwash and the restaurant;
b) an analysis of the queuing requirements for a typical carwash; and
c) documentation from the proprietor/owner of the restaurant acknowledging and accepting the
carwash at the proposed location.
The applicant agreed and will coordinate with staff the development of an acceptable screening solution.
The item will be scheduled for a future meeting for review and action by the Design Review Committee.
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
Tr 71,I,-.,
1 ..1=I ,S..., , ,...,
I .114.,11 0,' 11
i li a 1 1 CV
414101111111,8 111S•141411.10.VMMI03 : .
I .htilf.:'. Iti 44C
1 NMI 10011 a 4
1111111I-Kleil Va.VON/0:1 -., I I , i O. '
.., #
1 ,,'''1 i I
I II g g
/1191114.5 MER HMOS hill ,
■ $ 't.4, 1
r
S.
1
t"1- "1-Eli I-it1-i_itL+t-_L_.1-
• -I-
,
I
H 1-- -
-t, I ,
... !
, I-- - ■
.14. f i-
' lit 1
=--4-1--■- 1
-7-7-1:-f-
___
-:-- a ---
,
"4
il .__ .._--,_.• -
---1-1-.-1.--1-1 .
4---1-1---'--- r I-
.r 4
i 1
t, 4
11 ri
_, ..,
1 _i."-t
L--; '_
-f- -
1 a
i _ -1-1:-
_1 ,__t___1_- -
'4-4-,--■ -i-4--L
I- I hi- 1-4- • _ 4-
I r
. , ' . 1111
C')
EXI-IIBIT A
.........111 401.101,4 1M WI 2110\••••*•-■1•PRINd MA.
O 4 ° i O
s F
` N
\/r II . . E`x k•,- $ a
7
•
...i7
It
�.a0 44N
e
h
r.k...41"H"'
1
iir II
I g
s
1-tII11 N
I
r
C 9
C.:).....r..4
��;1A
r•-• ,H1.44S4:i
I, . i i'r
1 _ • .��
i !r i.4EYDitA■
1i i it vitt
,.......1_
.. , _ „I i.. I I #,�l1 o i
1311 1
111E 1.� • ■.It
iiiiiiliiiiii
ars' .±f;i.1
Iii sri_ - I A '
IC.) i
EXHIBIT B 1
Al
tT
,,..-
i, t t
• : 7 3 3. i '
L. .
-,
•
r • — • MN' I
1 r IMN ,_ aim I IIIIIMI I
. . . ... MEMO
C:Q
I . III
),....,-------1
, r -
g ,
_. .
,§
1 .
. ..
--..1
.. , .
..
- .
.. ,,..,
Q1Q
rI
..!r4.4 "4 '
Ii
.. . .
WISOMAIIMMIUMMM
11 ; IgNOMMINI
.. ..
1 111
.11 NM- • 7......r..4
! 40 •, .., -. ,,
,. .... . .:. _{.
. . .
(72.0....N.4
. .
,..
....
•
• ii.-- \I***41.4.4
--, [-
i i.............1)
1 _ r...,
Fis."1
==MMI7
—....-I
"b4C4
..e -
ME . i
,
IN=
1
N 1
., —
I Iffiamem 1
i 111 .TNFA
111,„.. IN Imo
III.
aim 1 • AM
. . N !summer g
. I i na=a2samann
,...
- • MN 1
.Mk
. i •411. ,.. 1----
r . •
! :1 7 .
. 8
. 1 . 11
• 8 i '•' `•• .. , c‘i
•
li ;
=• i . 4:i
t I I 1 i i i
•• .•••.-. :-. r .. :.
_1 .. •I -
. .• ' 1 ' lir 1 son MIIIIIE
, r ItiptElmiEt:
. ' ---. • ... •Amok
• --- •
- •:,— - ) ,, omit ......)
tut ommmg
.. ......„..,__ En.' ....,.....,
.11.1 - 01.111 ii-a.
. Immum . .1ml Hot
.... hishi
.....
. .
1
1- A
ic
@
.. •
•
1 .,
I-
i — i
.:, ,. ..,
• F:' ,,:
.,Hil
ri.., IIIIIMIIIIr
... III Ai ...' .
. .,.. 11'.... 111.1111 W :
1641.4r......
. • PI i 111 Mil I ' '' "'L li I IIIIII 111"
,l•
• .- '..;I
R.1.111'i2 1
L..-E.F.....*:TIT-argetnt-- MINIM .E.
)........_ ,
iii :11111 m
ra•ANIIIIIII'.,1, Er
gruisi lo r.....\--,
•
. ;L .....iii.
,,....,.,=......,
idimizqp-ms.
r,...\\...)
filliriiiiiiils - 1:.: • •Aim
. enimiimit •
• • • '7110
" 4111• 1.....i
-- 1N4 ei 11 ,
r III Er'.. .1j
F 1 1 l'im,.. • El ri. 71. •--...'
• ,I
,
• . _ 11. ,_ ,I.,„..,, •,1 • ii,..
, .1,. „„; . ...,, •.4 • IN
, 0 0
• • .
, ,.
. ,,
•,, 11 ,
, ;,.......
II 7 - ...0 .
'-'7;
;,:,.1
,. im 111VARIII i
;;
.. . 1
•,- _ .
. . . , •
... I. : 11111111111I,
IN IIIIIIIIP ,-, • .
Of. ....
II 7ii1j1.11 A irjulammouili
MM.
MEV: f
solum f lElligliEF
1 r fAimemo ludslonn IM
-zirairiw..-:::
1
airiF='-
immillilliii
10.-.W.111111111111 •
'lilt !;
!I I tF1111111111111 INIIV
r$limn 'Er
Ellmulmw
i— 6111111
. rarinal 11!
.-'
rco r • •zr
. ' 1
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:30 p.m. Donald Granger April 5, 2011
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE WORKSHOP TRAINING DRC2011-00159 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A presentation by staff and workshop training on Hillside Design Review requirements
and Design Policies for single-family custom homes in the Hillside Overlay District. The report and
workshop qualifies under State CEQA Guideline Section 15061(b)(3) because the report is for
informational purposes and will not result in an intensification of environmental impacts.
Background: At the March 1, 2011, Design Review Committee meeting, Chairman Munoz directed staff
to prepare a workshop training session for single-family dwelling units in the Hillside Overlay District.
Chairman Munoz directed staff to present an overview of the key Design Policies and Code requirements
applicable to single-family dwelling units in the Hillside Overlay District. Staff will present a training
session at the Design Review Committee meeting.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee receive the training, provide input, and
ask questions as needed.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee received the Powerpoint presentation by staff, thanked staff, and asked several clarifying
questions. Staff answered the Committee's questions and the training session concluded.
Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger
Staff Planner: Donald Granger
•
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
April 5, 2011
ADJOURNMENT •
The meeting adjourned at 10:03 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Da-
James R. Troyer, AICP
Planning Director