HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013/08/20 - Agenda Packet - Action THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
`h DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
L�s+J AGENDA
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA AUGUST 20, 2013 - 7:00 P.M.
;
Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center
Rains Room
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California
I. CALL To ORDER I ACTION
Roll Call 7:00 P.M.
Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X
Candyce Burnett_ Donald Granger X
•
Alternates: Ray Wimberly_ Frances Howdyshell_
Lou Munoz
H. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS
The following items will be presented by the applicant and/or their representatives.
Each presentation and resulting period of Committee comment is limited to
20 minutes. Following each presentation,the Committee will address major issues
and make recommendations with respect to the project proposal. The Design
Review Committee acts as an advisory Committee to the Planning Commission.
Their recommendations will be forwarded to the Planning Commission as
applicable. The following items do not legally require any public testimony,although
the Committee may open the meeting for public input.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW A. Accepted subject
DRC2012-01202 — LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA - A review of to completion of
291 single-family homes that will be constructed in conjunction with a revisions.
proposed subdivision of a parcel of about 3,047,614 square feet
(79.67 acres) within the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda
Specific Plan (South Overlay), locate0d about 525 feet east of
Etiwanda Avenue at the north side of Arrow Route -APN: 0229-041-09.
Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18870 and Tree Removal Permit
DRC2013-00483.
1 of 2
*Ow DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA
AUGUST 20, 2013
RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
B. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DR2013-00283 — BICKEL B. Approved as
UNDERWOOD ARCHITECTURE FOR MCDONALD'S - A review of presented.
modifications to the site and architecture comprised of revisions to the
exterior elevations, the drive-thru lanes, the parking lot, and an expansion
of the floor area by 390 square feet of an existing fast food restaurant of
3,670 square feet an exterior within the Financial (MFC) District,
Terra Vista Planned Community, located at 11198 Foothill Boulevard -
APN: 1077-422-53. Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00498
and Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2013-00590.
C. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2013-00590— PERMIT
PLACE, INC. FOR MCDONALD'S - A request to amend Uniform Sign C. Approval subject
Program #134 in conjunction with a review of modifications to the site and to to specibe fic reviewed revisions by
architecture comprised of revisions to the exterior elevations, the drive-thru staff for approval.
lanes, the parking lot, and an expansion of the floor area by 390 square
feet of an existing fast food restaurant of 3,670 square feet an exterior
within the Financial (MFC) District, Terra Vista Planned Community,
located at 11198 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 1077-422-53. Minor
Development Review DRC2013-00283 and Tree Removal Permit
DRC2013-00498.
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS I None.
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.
IV. ADJOURNMENT 18:43p.m.
The Design Review Committee has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an
11:00 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with
the consent of the Committee.
2 of 2
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Mike Smith August 20, 2013
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2012-01202 —
LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA - A review of 291 single-family homes that will be constructed in
conjunction with a proposed subdivision of a parcel of about 3,047,614 square feet (79.67 acres) within
the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan (South Overlay), located about
525 feet east of Etiwanda Avenue at the north side of Arrow Route - APN: 0229-041-09. Related file:
Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18870 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00483.
Background: The proposed project was reviewed by the Committee on April 30, 2013. At that time the
subdivision application, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18870, was accepted as submitted and
recommended for approval to the Planning Commission. However, the application for the review of the
design of the proposed homes, Development Review DRC2012-01202, was not accepted. The
Committee determined that the certain details of the architecture of each house model/plan needed to be
revised before they could forward the application. The applicant was directed to revise the proposal for a
follow-up review by the Committee (Exhibit A).
Staff Comments: Staff has conducted a side-by-side comparison of the original and revised plans and
has concluded, in general, that the applicant has completed the revisions as discussed at the Design
Review Committee meeting on April 30, 2013. The applicant has made the following changes identified
in italics. Note: Staff will provide a set of both the original and revised plans and show the changes that
were made to the Committee during the meeting.
1. All themes (all Plans) — Where a decorative stone veneer wainscot and trimcap is provided at the
front elevation, add a decorative stone veneer wainscot and trimcap to the entire width of the rear
elevation to match it. Alternate solutions such as adding stone veneer to an entire section of wall
plane may be considered. Note: At the corner of each house, where the side elevation intersects
with the rear elevation, the veneer shall wrap around the corner and terminate at a logical point
along the side elevation. At the corner of each house, where the side elevation intersects with the
front elevation, the veneer shall wrap around the corner and terminate at the return wall.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
• Added stone or brick veneer to part of the rear elevation in the area at the sliding door and/or
rear windows. The veneer will correspond with the veneer that is proposed to be on the front
elevation of each house. Where no veneer is proposed on the front elevation, such as on the
Santa Barbara Revival, Spanish, and Italian themes, no veneer has been added.
• For Plans 70-1.2 through -1.5 and 70-2.2 through -2.5, the applicant has articulated the walls
around the patio cover at the rear elevation so that this area slightly projects from the primary
wall plane.
• For Plans 55-2.2 through -2.5, the wall plane at the right elevation has been articulated in the
area near the second floor window. However, on some other plans, the articulated wall plane
was eliminated. Staff recommends that, where applicable, these pop-outs that were originally
proposed near the second floor windows on the side elevation be restored to that location.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA
DRC2012-01012 — LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA
August 20, 2013
Page 2
2. All themes (all Plans) — On Plans that have a decorative wood siding at the front elevation, where
the side elevation intersects with the front elevation, the siding shall wrap around the corner and
terminate at the return wall.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
The applicant agreed to do this where wood siding has been proposed.
3. All themes (all Plans) — Provide additional shutters on the windows on both floors on all elevations
(it is not necessary to provide them on all windows). Note: Some Plans, for example Plans 65 and
70, already have shutters on all windows. On the plans where shutters have already been
provided, it is not necessary to add more.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
• Removed the shutters from the side elevations where, as discussed during the review
meeting, it was agreed by all participants that they would have limited aesthetic value.
• Removed the shutters at the second floor windows on the rear elevations of some two-story
plans and at the first floor windows on the rear elevation of some one-story plans. Staff
recommends that, where applicable, the shutters that were originally proposed at these
windows on the rear elevation be restored to those locations.
• Relocated the shutters from the first floor windows to the second floor windows at the rear
elevations. Staff recommends that, where applicable, the shutters that were originally
proposed at the first floor windows on the rear elevation be restored to that location, i.e. the
shutters at the second floor windows should be an addition to the shutter at the first floor
windows, not a one-to-one replacement.
4. All themes (all two-story Plans) — Add corbels beneath the areas of the second floor that project
beyond the primary wall plane. Note: Some Plans, for example Plans 65 and 70, already have
corbels or have a clearly defined trim at the bottom of the projection. On the plans where corbels
or trim has already been provided, it is not necessary to add anything.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
• Added corbels beneath the areas of the second floor that project beyond the primary wall
plane of, for example, the theme.
• Added scallops beneath the areas of the second floor that project beyond the primary wall
plane at the rear and side elevations of the Spanish and Santa Barbara Revival themes.
• Added support columns beneath the areas of the second floor that project beyond the primary
wall plane at the rear elevations. These columns also include a decorative veneer.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA
DRC2012-01012 — LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA
August 20, 2013
Page 3
• Modified the areas of the second floor that project beyond the primary wall plane so that the
projections are on both the first and second floors
5. All themes (all Plans) — Add decorative wrought iron metalwork or pot shelves at the windows (it is
not necessary to provide them at all windows). Note: Some Plans, for example Plans 70-3.2, -3.3,
-3.4, and-4.2, already have these features. On the plans where these features have already been
provided, it may not be necessary to add more.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Alternate solutions were presented during the previous Committee meeting — see the proposed
solutions discussed for Issue #4.
6. Bungalow, Ranch, and Country (all Plans) — Increase the height of the decorative stone veneer
wainscot and trimcap that is proposed at the garages to a line that is 6 feet above finished surface.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Not completed; staff recommends that this revision be completed as a condition of approval.
7. Bungalow (all Plans) — Add/increase the number of rafter tails at the eaves of the gabled roofs on
all elevations.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested; the applicant also added rafter tails where necessary to balance the
corresponding rafter tails on the other elevations.
8. Ranch (all Plans) — Increase the application of the board and batten siding so that it covers more of
the primary wall plane beneath the gabled roofs at the rear elevation of the one-story plan and both
the left and right elevations of the two-story plans so that the area of this wall plane that is only
finished with stucco is reduced.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested in limited areas; staff recommends that this revision be completed as a
condition of approval.
9. Bungalow (all Plans except Plan 70-1.3) — Increase the application of the wood shingle siding so
that it covers more of the primary wall plane beneath the gabled roofs on at the rear elevation of the
one-story plan and both the left and right elevations of the two-story plans so that the area of this
wall plane that is only finished with stucco is reduced.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested in limited areas; staff recommends that this revision be completed as a
condition of approval.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA
DRC2012-01012 — LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA
August 20, 2013
Page 4
10. Prairie (Plan 65-1.3) — Add more rectangular insets beneath the hip roof at the rear elevation so
that their number is proportional to the area where they are located.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested.
11. Santa Barbara Revival (all Plans) — Where shutters have been provided, the general shape of the
shutter shall match the general shape/outline of the window area they would enclose, e.g. arched
window openings should have arched shutters.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested; this has also been done for other themes/plans, as well, where
applicable.
12. Bungalow (all Plans) — Continue the wood siding that has been applied to the front elevation
around to the right side elevation. The wood siding shall terminate directly above where the stone
veneer terminates. Note: Both the stone veneer and the siding shall wrap and terminate at the
return wall.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested where applicable.
13. Bungalow (Plan 55-4.3) — The design of the columns/bases that support the porch cover shall
match the design of the same feature in, for example, Plans 55-2.3 and 70-3.3.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested.
14. Country (Plan 55-2.4) — The design of the columns/bases that support the porch cover shall match
the design of the same feature in, for example, Plans 55-4.4 and 70-2.4.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested.
15. Italian (all Plans) — The belt-line at the front elevation and part of the left elevation shall be
continued along all elevations.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
The Committee did not deem this necessary; the applicant did not make this revision.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA
DRC2012-01012 — LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA
August 20, 2013
Page 5
16. Italian (Plan 65.4.5) — The sets of square corbel pairs at the front elevation beneath the area of the
second floor that projects beyond the primary wall plane shall be repeated on the similar
projections located at the rear and left elevations.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested.
17. European (Plan 65-1.4) — The application and design of the decorative stone veneer projection
beneath the front window shall be duplicated on the rear elevation.
Proposed revision(s) by the applicant:
Completed as requested; also, the edges of the projection have been modified slightly so that it is
more distinctive.
18. General Comment: The applicant has also curved the top edge of some of the shutters to match
the curve of the adjacent windows and the top edge of the decorative trim above the windows and
doors have been curved. In some instances, the size of the shutters has been enlarged.
19. General Comment: On the side elevations of some themes, projections beyond the primary wall
plane have been added. For examples, see Plans 55-2.2, -2.3, -2.4, and -2.5.
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues.
None.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved, with the above-noted
revisions incorporated by the applicant, and those recommended by staff, and forwarded to the Planning
Commission for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee accepted the proposal as submitted, subject to the satisfactory completion of revisions
that the Committee requested during the meeting and recommended approval to the Planning
Commission. The applicant is to coordinate the revisions with staff to verify compliance with their
direction prior to Planning Commission review and action
Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Mike Smith August 20, 2013
MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DR2013-00283 — BICKEL UNDERWOOD ARCHITECTURE
FOR MCDONALD'S-A review of modifications to the site and architecture comprised of revisions to
the exterior elevations, the drive-thru lanes, the parking lot, and an expansion of the floor area by
390 square feet of an existing fast food restaurant of 3,670 square feet an exterior within the
Financial (MFC) District, Terra Vista Planned Community, located at 11198 Foothill Boulevard -
APN: 1077-422-53. Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00498 and Uniform Sign
Program Amendment DRC2013-00590.
Design Parameters: The project site is an existing restaurant, McDonald's, located at the north side
of Foothill Boulevard between Milliken Avenue and Elm Avenue on a parcel of 62,290 square feet
(1.43 acre). The restaurant is a pad building of 3,670 square feet and is part of a partially
constructed, master-planned commercial complex approved by the Planning Commission on
January 12, 2001 (Related file: Conditional Use Permit CUP99-25)that is bound by Church Street,
Milliken Avenue, Foothill Boulevard, Elm Avenue on the north, east, south, and west sides,
respectively. The restaurant building was approved separately by the Planning Commission on
July 25, 2001. Related file: Development Review DRC2001-00231. (Attachment A-July 24, 2001,
Staff Report and excerpts). A gas station and a multi-tenant retail building are located to the west of
the restaurant. As construction of the commercial complex is not complete, the properties to the
north and east of the restaurant are undeveloped/vacant. The restaurant has direct access to and
fronts Foothill Boulevard.
The commercial complex was approved with a "Tuscan" architectural theme that is similar to the
other contemporary shopping centers in the City and, in particular, the Terra Vista Planned
Community. Consistent with this theme, the subject building (and the other two buildings) have
prominent tower features, exterior walls finished with light-colored stucco/plaster, pitched roofs with
barrel tile roofing, and common details such as tile wainscots and small decorative details (tiles
patterned in the shape of a diamond). As a result, the architecture only minimally reflects the
corporate identity, or branding, of any specific tenant.
The applicant proposes to renovate the exterior of the restaurant in order for it to be consistent with
an updated corporate identity that is being applied to all McDonald's restaurants. The renovation
primarily entails refinishing the exterior with a new stucco/plaster finish, removing the tile wainscot
and tile "diamonds", installing tile to the full height of wall planes at various locations, and
reconstructing the roofline of the building (with an emphasis on horizontal lines). The wood trellises
located over the drive-thru lane will be replaced with aluminum trellises and metal canopies will
replace the pitched roofs over the windows and metal coping along parts of the top edge of the roof
line will be installed. Lastly,the outdoor patio will be removed and replaced with added interior floor
space, and the parking lot and the drive-thru lanes will be redesigned.
Although the exterior of the building will be significantly revised,the building will continue to have the
tower features at the original locations, an undulating roofline, variations in the wall plane, and
projections/features that will provide either aesthetic and/or functional purposes. The proposed
renovation will result in a departure from the approved architectural theme of the commercial
complex. However, it is not significant as it has become common practice to allow individual pad
tenants such as restaurants to have signature architecture. For reference, recent instances where
this has been permitted are: Lazy Dog Café (Development Review DRC2011-00456) at the north
side of 4th Street between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue; Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor &
Restaurant at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Aspen Avenue (Minor Development
Review DRC2011-00689); Taco Bell at the southeast corner of Base Line Road and
Archibald Avenue (Development Review DRC2010-00314D); and Sonic Burger (Conditional Use
Permit DRC2009-00219) at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Pittsburgh Avenue.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA
DRC2013-00283— BICKEL UNDERWOOD ARCHITECTURE FOR MCDONALD'S
August 20, 2013
Page 2
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.
None.
Secondary Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion
regarding this project.
1. All walls along the perimeter shall be refinished to match the primary colors of the building.
2. The overhead trellis of the trash enclosure shall be reconstructed to incorporate the aluminum
trellises used over the drive-thru lanes.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
1. All signs are subject to the separate review and approval of the amendment to Uniform Sign
Program #134 (Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2013-00590).
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the
Planning Manager for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee approved the project as presented.
Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger
Staff Planner: Mike Smith
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
7:00 p.m. Mike Smith August 20, 2013
UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT DRC2013-00590 — PERMIT PLACE, INC. FOR
MCDONALD'S -A request to amend Uniform Sign Program #134 in conjunction with a review of
modifications to the site and architecture comprised of revisions to the exterior elevations, the
drive-thru lanes, the parking lot, and an expansion of the floor area by 390 square feet of an existing
fast food restaurant of 3,670 square feet an exterior within the Financial (MFC) District, Terra Vista
Planned Community, located at 11198 Foothill Boulevard-APN: 1077-422-53. Related file: Minor
Development Review DRC2013-00283 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00498.
Background: The proposed Sign Program Amendment is requested for three(3)revisions. The first
revision is to incorporate new pages that reflect the revised architecture and Site Plan/parking lot
layout of the McDonald's restaurant (Related file: Minor Development Review DRC2013-00283).
The second revision is to increase the number of signs. The third revision is to allow slightly larger
signs. The remainder of the Sign Program, including the construction and design requirements for
wall signs; category definitions, i.e. "Major Tenant,""Minor Tenant,"etc.; sign restrictions, and tenant
responsibilities will remain unchanged. Note: Based on the floor area of the proposed building,the
fast food restaurant is classified as a "Pad Shop Tenant (all tenants under 4,000 square feet)."
Design Parameters:
Revision No. 1: As the amendment is in conjunction with proposed revisions to the exterior
elevations, the drive-thru lanes, the parking lot, and floor area expansion of the existing restaurant,
new pages reflecting these physical changes to the building will be incorporated into the Uniform
Sign Program. This is a housekeeping revision.
Revision No. 2: The amendment proposes to increase the number of wall signs. There are
currently two (2)wall signs. The proposal is to add six(6)wall signs for a total of eight(8)wall signs
that will be located in relative equal distribution on all elevations. Two (2) of the walls signs will
consist of the text"McDonald's" (identified as"wordmark" on the plans), while the remaining six(6)
signs will be logos consisting of the trademarked arched 'M' (identified as"wall arch"on the plans).
The colors and fonts will be the trademark colors of McDonald's.
Revision No. 3: The amendment proposes to increase the allowable height of the text to 24 inches;
the current limit is 18 inches. The height of the logo is proposed to be 42 inches — no maximum
height is given in the Uniform Sign Program for logos, but the maximum overall height of a sign
permitted for this category of tenant is 36 inches. The proposed overall length of the text is
approximately 16.5 feet, while the proposed overall length of the logo is 48 inches. The logo and
text will both have a proposed depth of 4 inches. The overall area of the text and logo will be 33.38
and 14 square feet, respectively. As there are currently no restrictions relating to length or area
discussed in the Uniform Sign Program, the restrictions in the Development Code are applied. Per
the Code, the maximum sign area permitted for this category of tenant is 150 square feet (there is
no length restriction discussed in the Code). Consistent with the other signs within the shopping
center, the text of the signs will be fabricated channel letters, while the logos will.be a box. No
changes to the existing monument sign are proposed.
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.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA
DRC2013-00590— PERMIT PLACE, INC. FOR MCDONALD'S
August 20, 2013
Page 2
1. Per Table 17.74.080-1 of the Development Code,the maximum number of signs permitted per
tenant is three (3) signs. This maximum may be comprised of three (3) wall sign or two (2)
walls signs and one (1) monument sign. (Attachment B, excerpt of the Development Code)
As there is already a monument sign, the applicant will only be allowed to have two (2) walls
signs. The proposed amendment shall be revised to address this limit prior to approval of the
amendment and submittal of plans for construction and installation of the signs.
2. Per Section 17.74.070(B)(4)(c) of the Development Code, wall sign raceways shall be
concealed from public view (e.g. within the building wall or otherwise integrated with the
design of the sign and building). (Attachment C, excerpt of the Development Code) Both wall
(texUwordmark) signs have exposed raceways. The sign at the north elevation shall have its
corresponding raceway located behind the parapet wall. The sign at the west elevation shall
have its corresponding raceway to be designed in a manner that integrates(or blends)with the
raceway into the metal coping.
Secondary Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion
regarding this project.
1. The depth the channel letters and logo boxes shall be 5 inches in order to be consistent with
the existing Uniform Sign Program.
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion.
•
None.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the proposed amendment to the Uniform Sign
Program be approved subject to the applicant coordinating with staff to make the above-noted
revisions identified under the Major and Secondary Issues. Staff shall review the revisions for
compliance with the Development Code and, when deemed acceptable,forward the amendment to
the Planning Manager for review and action.
Design Review Committee Action:
The Committee directed the applicant to revise the proposed USP amendment in order to comply
with the sign regulations as described in the Development Code with respect to the maximum
number of signs (wall and monument) that a tenant is allowed to have. The applicant is to
coordinate the revisions with staff for review and approval.
Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger
Staff Planner: Mike Smith