Loading...
04-16-2008 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES -FINAL 16 Apri12008 Committee Members Present: Adrienne Gladson Tim McCormack Craig Wheeler Joe Woollett Committee Members Absent: Bill Cathcart Staff in Attendance: Ed Knight, Assistant Planning Director Ted Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney Anne Fox, Contract Staff Planner Doris Nguyen, Associate Planner Dan Ryan, Senior Planner Historic Preservation Chad Ortlieb, Senior Planner Howard Morris, Senior Landscape Coordinator Sandi Dimick, Recording Secretary Administrative Session - 5:00 P.M. The Committee met for an Administrative Session beginning at 5:10 p.m. Chair Wheeler opened the Administrative Session with a review of the Agenda. Chad Ortlieb, Senior Planner, stated the applicant for The Auld Irisher was requesting to be moved up in the Agenda, due to his flight arrangements. Chair Wheeler confirmed with the Committee Members that there would be no objection to moving the item up on the Agenda. There was also no objection from any public attendees. Chair Wheeler stated the DRC would begin taking a roll call prior to the commencement of the regular session. The Committee reviewed the Apri12, 2008 minutes and changes were noted. Committee Member McCormack made a motion to adjourn the Administrative Session. Administrative Session adjourned at 5:25 p.m. SECOND: Adrienne Gladson AYES: Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 2 of 25 Regular Session - 5:30 P.M. ROLL CALL: All DRC Members were present with the exception of Committee Member Bill Cathcart. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Opportunity for members of the public to address the Design Review Committee on matters not listed on the Agenda. No public attendees addressed the Design Review Committee on matters not listed on the Agenda. PRESENTATIONS: The Design Review Committee presented Proclamations to: (1) Jon Califf, and (2) Donnie DeWees, expressing appreciation for their dedicated years of service to the City of Orange and the Community Development Department. CONSENT ITEMS: All matters that are announced as Consent Items are considered to be routine by the Design Review Committee and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of said items unless members of the Design Review Committee, staff or the public request specific items to be removed from the Consent Items for separate action. 1) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Apri12, 2008 Committee Member Gladson made a motion to approve the April 2, 2008 minutes with changes as noted. SECOND: Tim McCormack AYES: Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 3 of 25 AGENDA ITEMS: Continued Items: 2) DRC No. 3994-OS - TSOTSIS RESIDENCE SECOND-STORY ADDITION A proposal to add asecond-story addition to the rear of a one-story contributing 1913 Bungalow residence. 247 N. Grand Street, Old Towne Historic District Continued from September 15, 2005 Staff Contact: Dan Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan(a~cityoforange.org DRC Action: Preliminary Review Senior Planner, Dan Ryan, gave a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Tom Tsotsis, address on file, stated he wanted to clarify some incorrect statements contained in the Staff Report. On Page 5, the statement that the addition could be seen from a public street was not true; the west elevation would be identical to the existing elevation. In reference to the features described in the previous meeting, the shed dormer could not be built to code as there would not be adequate head height. Previously there had been changes to the gable. There were no proposed changes to the north or south sides of the existing structure. The addition would be brought in from the sides and would not extend to the edges. The report also noted increased height and there would not be increased height. It would be built off the existing ridgeline with no increase in height. Committee Member Gladson asked if the addition would be visible from Grand? Mr. Tsotsis stated no. It would not be seen. Chair Wheeler stated the Staff Report did not state the conditions existed but that any of the three conditions would require a Negative Declaration. Mr. Tsotsis stated the last paragraph did read: The proposed project was visible from the street. He stated they were trying to remain consistent within a 1 '/2 story concept in maintaining the same roof height. Anything additional that would extend out of the back would not be consistent with a Bungalow style. He had a neighbor that constructed a very nice addition, which had been permitted; however, it was not a Bungalow style. Consistency with Bungalow style was not being done with any new additions. By going to a 2-story structure more of the backyard would be maintained. In looking at the coverage of the house in relationship to the lot it would be an increase from .26 to .3, this would be less than looking at the overall square footage above the existing structure. Conserving more open space would be consistent with the Bungalow style. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 4 of 25 Public Comment Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the OTPA, stated the design was very unsympathetic and many of the issues from the previous submission still existed. The design was inconsistent with the architectural style of the existing structure and there were scale and massing issues. The original recommendation was to go with asingle-story addition. The recommendation for the porch columns were not considered. They were opposed to the removal of the rear section of the roof, as the roof was a character defining feature of the structure. The previous recommendation for asingle-story addition and creation of possible space in the attic would have a minimal impact on the structure and the least possible impact on loss of historic fabric. The design was inconsistent with the design standards and there were street scape issues. They believed the addition would be visible from the street. There could not be comparisons with the proposed project to the home next door or any other project in the neighborhood, as those projects may not have been subject to Design Review. In removing the rear section roof the character of the structure would not be maintained. The property was a Mills Contract property and it was inappropriate to not abide by the terms of that contract requirement. The OTPA opposed the project as proposed. Mr. Tsotsis stated he heard that asingle-story addition had been recommended and that had not been the case. It had been discussed, but not recommended. The Mills Act Contract allowed additions, and in order to do any type of addition it would require disruption of the existing roof. The OTPA had praised the previous addition to the property, which was a 3/4 bath and laundry addition which required disruption of the existing roof to create the gable in the back. There would be no way to build onto the existing structure without alteration to the roof. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee. Committee Member Woollett stated they needed to review the project very carefully. It was clear that changes could be made to buildings in the Historic District. He wanted to gain more information on the significance of the Mills Act Contract in relationship to the proposed project. Often times they were very concerned about the visibility from the street, however, there were other issues to consider. The DRC had allowed additions that were visible from the street, taking into consideration the context of the street, consistency of the design and the scale and massing of the project. He stated the addition appeared to be a forced addition with the flat and hidden roof in the back, under the premise that the installation of an addition should not be visible from the street. In doing that, the design was inconsistent with the building. Mr. Tsotsis stated the previous submittal had a shed dormer out of the back and movement of the ridgeline. The Mills Act Contract prohibited him from that design and that was the reason he was in the current position. Chair Wheeler stated he recalled the application had come back with a smaller shed dormer and the Committee had not approved that design as they would not allow the design of a dormer that met the ridge. He stated he agreed with the Staff Report and felt the addition was not compatible with the style, there was a flat roof, a hip form which was not consistent with the period and style, and there was a new roof slope. The slope was very low and not a consistent solution. Although the ideas presented creative solutions, he encouraged the applicant to look at a shed roof dormer design. Reduced headroom was allowed for historic structures. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 5 of 25 Mr. Tsotsis stated he had explored the additional height allowance; however, it would still not meet the design requirements. Chair Wheeler stated the applicant could look at a Gable dormer coming off of the back and they would have no objection to having that meet the ridge of the existing house. Committee Member Woollett stated they had discussed the construction of an addition on a slab. Generally if it was in the back it was a way to add space. Mr. Tsotsis stated he explored a raised foundation which would add storage space. Chair Wheeler stated there appeared to be an existing window in the back bedroom; if that window would be removed they needed to be aware of the egress requirements. Mr. Tsotsis clarified that the suggestion was for a Gable dormer. He had received poor advice previously and wanted to be clear on the recommendations. Committee Member Gladson asked when was the home purchased? She stated she concurred with her colleagues and felt the current proposal was incompatible. Mr. Tsotsis stated the home was purchase l0years ago and he wanted to have clear direction. Committee Member McCormack asked if the recommendation was for a story and '/2? He concurred with the recommendations given. Chair Wheeler stated with a Gable it would be a story and '/2 to be compatible with the front structure. Mr. Tsotsis reiterated, for clarification, the recommendations: Use the same footprint and replace the flat roof and hips with a single Gable to cover the master bedroom and bath, with a Shed dormer to give the required head space to meet code. Chair Wheeler stated he recommended keeping the roof pitch for the new dormer fairly close to the existing roof pitch. A 12" separation between the Shed and Gable was recommended. Mr. Ryan stated it was best to save as much of the rear roof as possible and they could review the sketches together. Mr. Tsotsis asked if the relocation of the condenser unit for the A/C unit would be acceptable, and showed the relocation space to the Committee on the plans. Chair Wheeler stated the relocation could be completed Chair Wheeler stated no motion was required as this was a preliminary review. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 6 of 25 New Agenda Items: 3) DRC No. 4050-OS -PUBLIC STORAGE A proposal to reconsider a prior condition regarding construction of a parapet. 1040 N. Main Street Staff Contact: Anne Fox, 714-744-7229, afox~a,cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Contract Staff Planner, Anne Fox, provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, James Goodman, address on file, stated there was an existing property line wall and they were in agreement with the parapet requirement. The dilemma was how to add a 30" parapet to the existing wall. They found with the structural engineering requirement it was not that easy as it involved existing roofs and flashing. The other problem they ran into was that the wall had been plastered. They came up with the idea to add a screen and to cantilever the metal studs, structurally it would work and then to join the two together they decided to attach it to the building. Mr. Goodman stated the addition would be a panel that would float. The reveals would mimic the new building. Committee Member McCormack clarified that it would be held off approximately 8" Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee. Chair Wheeler stated the solution they had come up with was brilliant. Mr. Goodman stated that ultimately the trees would help. Chair Wheeler stated he liked the way the design stopped before it came to a corner. With a curb and the slope of the ground, he suggested holding it up a bit further. Ms. Fox stated they could bring it up another foot and give it a more artistic quality. The Committee reviewed the plans with the applicant and Ms. Fox. Committee Member McCormack asked if there was a proposal to add 2 Palm trees? Ms. Fox stated there were more trees and that the picture they were seeing wasn't current. Mr. Goodman stated there would also be another variety of a street tree. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 7 of 25 Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve, DRC No. 4050-05, Public Storage, with the clarification that the base of the wall screen remain level and be separated from the ground between 12" and 24" SECOND: Tim McCormack AYES: Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 8 of 25 4) DRC No. 4083-06 -HOLY SEPULCHER CEMETERY A proposal to develop 11 total acres of vacant land which would include a mausoleum, wall crypt, family estates, and a new maintenance facility. 7845 E. Santiago Canyon Road Staff Contact: Doris Nguyen, 714-744-7223, dnguyen@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Preliminary Review Associate Planner, Doris Nguyen, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Chris Mekus, address on file, stated he wanted to give a breakdown of the site, the building and the material and finishes. The lot is very long, measuring approximately 3500' long and covered over 46 acres. There are 11 acres of undeveloped property at the north and south portions of the site. The entrances would be on Santiago Canyon Road at the office administration building with another at the existing maintenance yard. The property is surrounded on the north and south by residential, on the east by the flood control basin, and on the west by church property. The topography of the site included a ridge that ran down the center of the site. He reviewed a model of the proposed project with the Committee Members. Applicant, Mike Padian, stated there is a low spot on the property where the mausoleum would be located. Mr. Mekus stated the administrative office and mausoleum had the character of a one-story building and as the terrain changed on the south, the administrative building became atwo-story building and the mausoleum became atwo-story structure as it faced the east. There would be wall crypts and private family estates which parallel the eastern property line. The view to the East Mountains would not be blocked. Committee Member Woollett asked for clarification of the area he pointed out to the applicant on the model, which were the family estates along the eastern edge of the property line. Mr. Padian stated the area included family estates and the wall crypts with the mausoleum in the background. Committee Member Woollett asked if the area would include a walkway down to the lower elevation? Mr. Padian stated no, that was not the case. The area would be used for drainage on the property. Currently the water sheet flowed off of the area. They proposed to plant a vegetative swale with catch basins and treatment areas. Under a low flow water situation the water would be absorbed into the ground and under a high flow situation the basin would fill, crest over the ridge and re-establish a sheet flow condition. He pointed out the area on the model that he was speaking of. Committee Member Woollett stated his understanding was the proposed lawn crypts would be only accessible from above. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 9 of 25 Mr. Padian stated yes, that was correct. There were pre-cast lawn crypts located in that area. Committee Member McCormack asked if there was a fuel modification plan in place? Mr. Padian stated it had not been an issue. The Fire Department actually used the property for a staging area. The intent was to plant irrigated vegetation in that area. Mr. Mekus stated that the wall and lawn crypts would create a tiered development, which allowed visitors to have an unobscured view of the mountains to the east. The proposed area was approximately 800' of development. There would be a walkway to access those areas. Mr. Padian stated there were wall crypts on the lower area that would be accessed from the side. Any ceremony held at the grave site would be held in that area. Services for a family estate property would be held in the area above. Ms. Nguyen stated there was also a chapel in the administrative area. Committee Member McCormack stated he was looking for handicap accessibility on the site. Mr. Padian stated the proposed plan would include ADA accessible sidewalks from both sides. There were areas in the center of burial sites that did not include sidewalks. They had made an attempt to provide handicapped access to most of the facilities. Mr. Mekus stated access would also be two-sided from the road, to each of the family estate areas and the wall crypts. The service site would be dependent on the burial site or held at the chapel. Committee Member Gladson stated she felt the sites would be chosen based on the accessibility to visit over time. Mr. Mekus stated it was part of their responsibility to insure that the path to the grave sites were accessible. Mr. Padian stated they would have people at the site that were there for an internment or who were there to visit a grave site. Committee Member Woollett asked in their presentation, if the applicant could address the proximity to the residential areas to the south. Mr. Mekus stated the proposal would include 3 new buildings, a maintenance building, the administration building and a mausoleum building. From an architectural standpoint they wanted to develop consistency from one building to the next to create a unity throughout the entire property. It was important to them to use materials that would tie into the land. The proposal included the use of a green shingle roof, the cement plaster and stucco would be a combination of lime stone and buff hues. The stone base on the building areas and wall crypts would be of an earth tone palette. The mausoleum was set back approximately 210' from Santiago Road and the cruciform shape would be topped with a stain glass dome which would be lit in the evening. The dome sat lower than the residential properties. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 10 of 25 Mr. Padian stated there were exhibits included in sheet A-11, which showed the horizontal and vertical relationship between the buildings. The top of the residential property was at 658' and their building sat 11' below that property. The other exhibit, which was a photo simulation, taken from the master bedroom balcony of the adjacent property (exhibit A-10) showed the view from that area. Mr. Mekus stated from the photograph, the proposed integration of the roof color could be seen, which would diminish the scale of the building. There would be Mediterranean style columns with post and beam expressions to reduce the scale of some of the sides of the building and the intent was to integrate that design in all the buildings on the property. Chair Wheeler stated he viewed the design as having a bit of Italian Renaissance in the forms. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee. Committee Member Woollett stated he was very familiar with the area as he had hiked in that area. Mr. Padian stated the site was not very visible. The best visibility of the site was obtained from across the street, where the view blended in with the surrounding landscape. Chair Wheeler asked, in looking at the view from the southwest (sheet A-9), on the end of the masses, it appeared from the plans that there would be openings for crypts; however, he did not see openings? Mr. Mekus stated the crypts would face a 2°d level balcony that looked onto the first floor garden. Chair Wheeler stated there was a projecting element on the drawings that he could not find on the floor plans. Mr. Mekus stated it was an area at the back of the wall crypts where there was a slight projection to catch the roof of the terrace overlook. Ms. Nguyen asked which was correct, the elevation or the floor plan? Mr. Mekus stated the elevation was correct. Chair Wheeler stated there was a string line for the arches and frames at the top of the stone for the upper level and at the lower level the stone was dropped down. As the frames were above the stone he suggested that should be done on both the upper and lower areas to remain consistent in both areas. There was a very thin wall and arch and in another area a thicker wall and he encouraged them to make all of the arches thicker. It would give a much higher quality feel to the design. He pointed out an area where oculi were used, and he was concerned that City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 11 of 25 structurally they could not be done so close to the arch. He suggested the use of some type of a medallion, and presented some suggestions to the applicants on the use of those. He stated the mausoleum circular form made him a bit uncomfortable as there was no other circular form used in that area. He suggested another approach that would be keeping with the other forms of the building and something more traditional. He suggested the use of arches or other forms that tied into the steeple and towers of the other buildings. Mr. Mekus stated they viewed the tower as becoming an icon for the property, a landmark, so to speak. Their thought was for the dome to become a beacon. Chair Wheeler stated in most designs there would not be just one circular element. In using just the one-dome element he felt another approach would be more appropriate. Committee Member Woollett clarified that the suggestion was for the vertical elements to be a bit more substantial looking. Chair Wheeler stated yes, that was the suggestion. The mausoleum needed to have a feel that it would be there forever and to have it too light and too modern did not give that sense, it needed to have substance. Mr. Mekus stated they had used the circular form as the recall from the European cathedrals, they had looked at the use of square elements, however, felt the circular element was more ethereal - no beginning and no end. It was placed at the center of the mausoleum and was more of a philosophical idea. Chair Wheeler asked that on the next submittal if the applicant could notate where the existing buildings were located on the property. Mr. Padian presented a drawing on which he pointed out the existing facilities and showed the Committee Members where the new buildings would be located. Ms. Nguyen stated sheet B-1 showed that the maintenance facility would be located on the northern portion of the parcel. Committee Member McCormack stated there did not appear to be a buffer between the building and Santiago Canyon Road. Ms. Nguyen stated there was a buffer and pointed out the area on the plans where that would be located. Mr. Padian stated if the proposed project was approved the plans included a new horse trail that would be added. Santiago Canyon Road had been widened and at that time a horse trail crossing was added; however, there was not an existing trail and their intent was to complete a more formal trail that would connect to the County Reservoir and connect to other established trails from there. Committee Member Woollett asked if the applicants had been in contact with the Orange Park Acres Committee? City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 12 of 25 Mr. Padian stated yes they had been contacted and they were aware of the presentation at the DRC Meeting. Chair Wheeler asked that on the next submittal to provide orthographic elevations along with the rendered elevations. Mr. Padian stated the previous cemetery expansion had been presented to the City with a stark, flat building. In looking at the landscape plan they wanted to plant with the same density that already existed. If they had shown the number of trees that they proposed on the rendering the building would not be visible on the plans. They had taken photos and superimposed the building onto the photos and half toned the trees to make the building visible. Chair Wheeler stated they wanted to see both renderings. On the final submittal they would need to include a color board and a notation where the materials would exist on the exterior elevations and to provide roof plans as well as floor plans. Applicant, Joe Novoa, asked on the recommendations that were being made, did the Committee want to see an attempt to include all of them or could they look at the recommendations and come back with an explanation why it might not have worked for them? Chair Wheeler stated that was fine. The recommendation that interested him most were the suggestions for the use of medallions, which he felt they should consider. Committee Member Woollett stated this was the applicant's facility and they had very capable people working for them. The Committee's position was to share their thoughts and recommendations and they were in support of the project. Mr. Novoa stated they had been working on the proposed project for over 4 years and he would be reluctant to make major changes as it would necessitate going back to all of the other committees that they had previously reviewed the project with. Chair Wheeler stated they did not require seeing the attempts on the recommendations made but that they should give the recommendations some consideration. Committee Member Woollett stated it was important to have clarity in the documentation to ensure that what was ultimately built matched the drawings. Ms. Nguyen stated the Design Review Committee (DRC) was a recommending body to the Planning Commission (PC) and then the City Council (CC). The specific items that were discussed at the DRC meeting would again be addressed during the PC and CC reviews and the reason for not incorporating a recommendation would be looked at. Mr. Novoa stated their objective was to keep the project moving. Committee Member Gladson stated she would like to see how the vehicle bays in the maintenance facility would be handled. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 13 of 25 Mr. Padian stated there would be screening all along that area with an 8' fence, which was the height of the current fencing. There was a horse trail and a significant landscape area along the perimeter. The maintenance facility would match the other buildings with the same exterior materials being used. Committee Member Gladson stated she would like to see those details. She asked what type of fencing would be used along the trails? Senior Landscape Coordinator, Howard Morris, stated the Park Development Planning Commission would like to see tubular steel fencing on the west side of the street. Mr. Padian stated what existed around the property and adjacent areas were typical two-rail wood fences; the Diocese was willing to look at any alternative. They did not want to see a concrete barrier and they were looking at more of a pipe rail corral fence that had more integrity than a wood fence. Ms. Nguyen stated she anticipated resolution of the fence requirements as that would need to be part of the proposal. Mr. Padian stated they had been working with the community on the fencing issue for many years and that was one area that they could not gain a consensus on. Mr. Novoa stated they had met with the various committees and they would install whatever would be recommended. Committee Member Woollett asked if there was any interest in using Cor-Ten fence material? Committee Member McCormack stated the horse community might have a problem with the use of that material as the horses would lick it and those types of things would need to be considered. Committee Member Gladson stated she was opposed to the use of chain link fencing. She noticed a proposal for the use of chain link fencing in one of the drawings. Mr. Padian stated in that area there was an existing chain link fence. There was a facility that was located in that area, called the House of Prayer, the facility was a meditative retreat type facility. The idea was to have a barrier to that area and the intent was to replace what was existing in that area. The facility was an already developed property and they had kept that space in its existing state. Ms. Nguyen stated the chain link along the east side of Santiago Canyon Road would be replaced with a metal fence and pilasters. It was a huge effort and a monetary investment to change all of that fencing. Committee Member McCormack stated there was a native soil trail and in reviewing the planting plan there was no connection between the trails in that area, which he pointed out on the plans and asked why the connection had not been made? City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 14 of 25 Mr. Padian stated there was a native 6 '/z to 8' wide area and the intent was not to have a formal concrete walkway but to have a native material pathway and those areas could be connected. Committee Member McCormack stated on the road width, if the Fire Department used that as a staging area they would need to ensure that the width could accommodate two-way traffic. Mr. Padian stated it would be 38-40' wide to accommodate two-way traffic. Mr. Mekus stated the parking was also driven by the ground burial which was located on the side of the road. There was a setback requirement that needed to take into consideration at the ground burial sites. Mr. Padian stated the intent was that the turn around would accommodate emergency vehicles. Committee Member McCormack stated there was a landscaped edge with small trees along one edge and to make it a grander and formal streetscape he suggested matching the landscape buffer along both areas (he pointed out those areas on the plans). Ms. Nguyen stated she understood the suggestion that on the family estate side to add a parkway of landscaping to match the other side. Committee Member McCormack stated that was correct, to have the same treatment for both areas. Mr. Padian stated operationally there was a difference as an 8' wide area was required for internment on those sites. The other area did not require a wide buffer as the other area accommodated lawn crypts. Committee Member McCormack asked how was trash handled? Mr. Mekus showed where it was processed in the proposed maintenance facility. Committee Member McCormack stated the landscaping be predominantly turf and trees with the shrubs being secondary. He suggested the use of trees that were more native to the existing landscape and have a transition between the natural landscape of the area and the new plantings. Mr. Padian stated they wanted to introduce a wider variety of plantings to the area. Committee Member McCormack noted an area on the site that needed to be addressed as he felt people may use it for a walkway. Mr. Padian stated the area Committee Member McCormack was referring to was one of the steeper areas of the property and they might need to install barriers to keep people from walking through that area. Committee Member Woollett asked Committee Member McCormack if he recommended keeping the Brazilian Pepper tree? City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 15 of 25 Committee Member McCormack stated he would not keep that type of tree. Some of the trees listed, which were more restful-type trees, would become larger trees and would be preferred. There was a predominance of medium size trees on the plans. Mr. Padian stated the choices in plantings were made based on the areas they would be covering. Many of the trees would be along the parking areas and borders with the larger trees covering the burial areas. Committee Member McCormack stated he would like to see a more detailed description on the next submittal that would show specifically how they treated the parking areas and where the larger trees would be planted. He also suggested in the ground cover area to see a transition between mowed grass, unmowed grass and ground cover. Mr. Padian stated the intent was to utilize as much property for cemetery use. Much of the area would be planted with grass and larger trees. Mr. Morris stated City Staff was recommending rethinking the use of Escolonias, as he had many areas in the City where they were dying, as they would not grow well in heavy soil. They may also reconsider the Wild Strawberry as it did not do well in heavy soil. He suggested deleting those two items from the plant palette. Ms. Nguyen stated regarding the stone and marble colors would the applicant need to have a specific color palette, or could they differ from that in the future? Chair Wheeler stated he did not have a problem with the color choices as long as they remained consistent throughout the design. Mr. Padian stated they had discussed that at length. The intent was to use a green roof as shown in their proposal along with a green shaded stone. There was also a reddish stone shown in their plans, and the proposed project would use those earth tones in their project and they appreciated the opportunity to have those types of variations in their color choices. Ms. Nguyen stated the private family mausoleum choices would be decided by the family when they are needed and asked if the DRC would like to place any general restrictions on those choices based on colors and materials? Committee Member Gladson stated those would be choices that a family would make. Ms. Nguyen stated the applicant was looking for any general restrictions on sizes and materials. Mr. Padian stated that most of the family mausoleums were pre-fabricated kits which included a variety of stone uses and various sizes. Chair Wheeler stated that in a cemetery setting they expected the use of a wide variety of forms and sizes. Ms. Nguyen clarified that each of the private family mausoleums would not come back before the Committee for approval. The DRC was fine with that. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 16 of 25 Mr. Padian stated the headstones on the proposed location would be flush mounted memorial plaques and gave more of a park-like feel. Committee Member McCormack asked for clarification on the selection of stone. Mr. Mekus stated the stone areas would be a more textured type stone. Upon approaching the building, the use of stone would become smoother, more of a limestone-type material. The stone on the mausoleum would be more of a granite or marble material. The use of that stone would be in earth tones. There was some discussion regarding ledgerstone vs. fieldstone in order to create a more uniform look. Mr. Padian stated the stone used in the elements along the entrance would be the same used along the building perimeters to provide continuity along the entire property. Committee Member McCormack stated the use of real stone products rather than any synthetic type product would create the feeling of permanence, which would be appropriate for the proposed project. Mr. Padian stated the intent was to use real stone products throughout the property. Chair Wheeler asked if there was anything further to discuss or clarify. There was no further discussion. Chair Wheeler stated that a motion was not required on the proposed project as the project had been presented for preliminary review. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 17 of 25 5) DRC No. 4119-06 - BHALLA TRIPLEX A proposal to demolish an existing non-contributing duplex and construct a new two- story, three-unit apartment building. 438-440 S. Olive Street, Old Towne Historic District Staff Contact: Dan Ryan, 714-744-7224, divan@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Recommendation to the Planning Senior Planner, Dan Ryan, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Chair Wheeler initially reviewed and passed out two pages with his concerns regarding the following items: 1. Doesn't agree with the application's area calculations and gave an example of calculations. 2. Per DRC review of December 19, 2007, the application needs to be very clear about the materials to be used and have them called out on the plans: a. Roofing-type of concrete roof tile. b. Window material. c. Patio door material. d. Garage door material. e. Door & window trim. f. Barge Board & exposed rafter tail sizes. g. Railings on Unit 1 + see item #7 below). h. Stucco finish i. Attic ventilation j. Exterior Stair construction 3. Front elevation now shown for Units 2 & 3 contains mistakes: a. One-story roof element shown over entry to Unit 3 but not shown on north elevation or roof plan. b. Another one-story roof element shown at the northeast corner of the garage for Unit 2. c. Appears to be some sort of second-story hip with a projecting gable shown over Unit 2. This doesn't appear on any of the other elevations or on the roof plan. 4. Front & Right elevations for Units 2 & 3, as well as the Front elevation for Unit 1, seem to show some sort of horizontal trim at the second floor line. 5. Front (East) elevation of Unit 1 shows some sort of vertical line at the first floor running through the right side of the kitchen window. 6. Arched opening for the second-story balcony on Unit 1 shows some sort of unlabeled trim on the Right elevation. This doesn't occur on either the Front of Left elevation of Unit 1. Mentioned previously, trim should be deleted. 7. Mentioned previously, second-story deck railing above the garage for Unit 1 looks like it might possibly be metal on the Left and Right elevations but looks to be more like wood on the West Elevation. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 18 of 25 8. Roof plan shown for Units 2 & 3 still appears to be incorrect. Chair Wheeler's attached roof plan sheet showed his area calculations. 9. Referencing attached roof plan sheet, questioned the applicant that it's their intent to have a higher plate elevation on the second floor line at the exterior wall to the south of Unit 3's bedroom #l. This was consistent with their West elevation for Units 2 & 3 but not consistent with South elevation for the same building. South elevation seems to be lowering the late height at exterior wall on the sought side of Unit 2's living room. 10. If used, the new covered entry area for Unit 1 would seem to need more work. To make it structurally viable, it would probably need some beams running in the east-west direction. Also, need some sort of north-west beam at the east side with a king post to support the ridge board or ridge beam; and specify the size of the posts and of any new beams to be used. 11. Agreed with Staff/Staff Report that the arched window openings over the garage doors are not really appropriate, as they seem not to go with the arched openings being provided in the wall. Amore simple design would be more appropriate. Public Comment Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the OTPA stated there were still issues with the bulk and mass of the proposed project, especially considering the context of the block. There were seven apartment buildings on the block and it was difficult to compare the project to others on the block. The block was already over developed and there were density issues. There needed to be consideration for cumulative impacts, and he questioned the CEQA Exemption 15303, New Class Construction which discussed adverse impacts on historic resources. The resource being the Historic District itself. The block already carried a negative impact to the historic district and adding the project to the block would be an inappropriate project for the area. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee. Chair Wheeler handed out a summary of the issues and questions he had on the project. He stated he did not agree with the area calculations which worked out to 235 square feet, rather than the 206 square feet that was noted on the plans. He reviewed a worksheet he had prepared to show the applicant how he had arrived at the area calculations and invited the applicant to correct him if his calculations were in error. Chair Wheeler had arrived at an FAR of .442, and the project needed to be reduced by approximately 100 square feet to meet the mass issue. He stated, as requested at the prior DRC Meeting, that the drawings needed to be accurate. For example, the roof material was not called out for the first unit and the window material was not noted, the DRC had made it clear that these items needed to be noted on the drawings. Applicant, Shiv Talwar, address on file, stated they planned to use vinyl windows and asked the Committee if there was any objection to the use of vinyl windows? Chair Wheeler stated there was no objection to the use of vinyl windows. The following materials needed to be called out for the patio door, garage door; railing material and he wanted to see the size of the barge board noted as well. Mr. Talwar stated that they had called out for decorative wrought iron railing. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 19 of 25 Committee Member Woollett asked if they would be utilizing tubular steel or solid iron. Mr. Talwar stated they would be using wrought iron, which would be a solid form. Chair Wheeler stated the stucco finish needed to be noted. The texture and all details should be noted on the drawings. If the attic ventilation would be visible those materials should be noted too. He reviewed the roof changes with the applicant and clarified the use of a hip roof, he pointed out an area where a raised plate was being used and requested that the elevations reflect the actual roof form. He reiterated that all details needed to be presented on the drawings. The deck railing showed two different forms. Mr. Talwar stated there were different plate heights. Chair Wheeler stated there were inconsistencies between the elevations. The plate height appeared to be raised, however, on the south elevation the plate looked as if it had dropped. The applicant needed to clarify which was correct. He asked for clarification on the covered entry. Mr. Talwar asked if they could construct a flat roof over the entry. Chair Wheeler stated he felt a flat roof would not be appropriate. An arch opening would look better with a shed roof. Mr. Ryan stated the door could be recessed with an arch, creating an alcove and giving the applicant an opportunity to reduce the square footage. Mr. Talwar stated they had already cut down so much, in reducing the entry it would interfere with the layout of the interior. Chair Wheeler stated he liked the covered porch which gave a better look to the front elevation. Mr. Talwar stated he could make the roof a shed design and include the arched doorway. Chair Wheeler stated he would like to see simpler garage door windows. Mr. Ryan stated the magic number was .424, which was the Grant Street recommendation. Chair Wheeler stated that would require a reduction of approximately 150 square feet. Mr. Talwar stated they had been working with a number of .43. Mr. Ryan stated the garages may not need to be so long. Mr. Talwar stated previously the second floor was cantilevered over the garage. The garage area was larger than necessary and he could move them back. Committee Member Woollett asked, on unit two, could the dimensions be reduced, possibly by reducing the width of the unit? Mr. Talwar stated he would work on it to keep within the .43 requirement. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 20 of 25 Chair Wheeler stated the area would not include the area under the stairs. Committee Member Gladson asked if the front doors were a Spanish style? Mr. Talwar stated it would be called out on the drawings, and they would be choosing a design that matched the style of the house. Committee Member Woollett asked on sheet A-3, for the south elevation the stairway would need to have a closed in riser. He asked for clarification on the posts and braces? Mr. Talwar stated there would be a post without braces. Committee Member Woollett stated that structurally the unit did not need to have the braces. The post would need to be fireproof. Mr. Talwar stated the post would be exposed fire retardant treated material. He suggested they could enclose the area and use it as storage. Chair Wheeler stated it would then need to be counted as floor space. If there was a wall constructed on one side it would not be counted as floor space. Committee Member Woollett stated the area had a notation as a landscaped area. In enclosing an area in a multiple unit dwelling the area would tend to gather trash. Mr. Talwar stated they would leave the area open. Committee Member Gladson asked where the trash receptacles would be located? Committee Member McCormack stated with 3 trash cans per unit, there would be 9 receptacles lined up on the street on trash day, there would not be an area for parking on the street. Mr. Talwar and Mr. Bhalla stated the trash cans would be on the sidewalk. Committee Member McCormack stated they were required to be positioned on the street, and it would create an interesting problem for the units. When the trash cans were lined up on the street the trash cans would eliminate any street parking. Committee Member Woollett stated on sheet T-1 of the site plan, on the north side of unit one, there was an area called out as a planter area and there was also a notation of a grass area that would come around the north east corner of the building, he asked for clarification of that area. Mr. Talwar stated they were currently working with a landscape architect to work out the details. Committee Member McCormack stated in the parking space area he suggested adding some green to the space. They might consider the use of small diamond cut outs to include tree plantings. The two trees along the front of the building should be larger. Mr. Talwar stated there were vine pockets along the wall. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 21 of 25 Committee Member McCormack stated the area chosen was the worst place to grow a vine. A south facing; hot concrete wall was not the best placement for a vine. Projects that carried such a large bulk and mass made it hard to soften the design with landscape. There was not enough ground space. To make the area a bit greener, he pointed out an area on the plans that they could add an additional tree to shade the area. Committee Member Woollett asked if an area on the plans could accommodate turf? Committee Member McCormack stated yes, he felt the area could accommodate turf. He asked the applicants who would be responsible for the landscape maintenance? Mr. Talwar and Mr. Bhalla stated the owners would be responsible for the landscape maintenance. Committee Member Gladson stated she felt the Committee was leaning toward a continuance of the item. Senior Landscape Coordinator, Howard Morris, asked if the street tree would remain or would it be removed? Mr. Talwar stated the tree would remain. He stated he could respond, in writing to Chair Wheeler's written comments for review, and instead of meeting again with the DRC they could present their proposal to the Planning Commission. Chair Wheeler stated he felt the applicant needed to return before the DRC to review the project again. Committee Member Gladson made a motion to continue, DRC No. 4119-06, Bhalla Triplex, in order to allow the applicant to address the concerns and guidance given in the memo prepared by Chair Wheeler. SECOND: Tim McCormack AYES: Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 22 of 25 6) DRC No. 4332-08 -THE AULD IRISHER FACADE MODIFICATIONS A proposal to modify the previously approved paint scheme. 1547 W. Katella Avenue, The Stadium Promenade Staff Contact: Chad Ortlieb, 714-744-7237, cortlieb(a~cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Senior Planner, Chad Ortlieb, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Robert Atkinson, representing the property owners, address on file stated they were in the final stages of re-developing the center. It was recognized at a previous DRC Meeting that the pale yellow looked very faded, it was not vibrant and did not match. They came back with a gold color choice which worked much better with the blue. The store front for the Auld Irisher was very distinctive. He stated they had worked with City Staff to compare paint swatches and chose a color that would enhance the business. He supported the request of the business owner to use the blue color. The Tustin location had used the "same blue color and it looked great and the blue provided a more vibrant color scheme and would look good against the adjacent business, Prime Cuts. Applicant, David Copley, representing The Auld Irisher, address on file, stated the reason they chose the color scheme was to keep the theme consistent between the interior and exterior. Much effort had been put into aging the interior to give the feel of an old Irish Pub. The interior gave the impression of walking down a street in Ireland with various store fronts, as they were looking to extend that to the exterior of the building. Their idea was to use the blue with a washed over color to give it an aged look. It was a look conceived from a typical pub color that you would find in Ireland. The original yellow that was on the building was very faded and a color change to those areas would be nice. The blue against the gold just looked right. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item to discussion by the Committee. Committee Member Woollett asked about the legal bond that was posted? Mr. Atkinson stated the tenant posted a legal bond with the City when obtaining their certificate of occupancy to ensure they would return to present their color scheme. Committee Member Woollett stated he had no problem with the new color solution and it did make subtle differences that were important to the tenant. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 23 of 25 Committee Member Gladson stated she was interested in the wash affect they were creating. She had visited the site and understood the concept, however, she did not know if it gave the sense of being old. The gold color was good as the existing yellow was very faded and needed to be updated. Mr. Copley stated to use a solid blue color would be over powering. They were trying to achieve a two dimensional feel. The wash over had been used at their other location and overall it gave a more worn element to the building. Committee Member Gladson stated her first impression when looking at the building was that someone had done a poor job of painting the building and she wasn't sure that was the look they wanted to convey. Mr. Atkinson stated the interior of the building carried atwo-tone look and they wanted to extend that feel to the exterior of the building. Chair Wheeler stated he did not object to the stronger color or the antiquing of the wood surfaces. He was concerned with the treatment of the stucco pilasters. He felt they could find another solution to get the aged look without it appearing crude. Mr. Atkinson stated the landlord would be painting the gold colors and the wash over look would be repainted to appear more professional, as the paint that was on the building currently had been accomplished under moonlight when the business was opening. Committee Member McCormack stated he concurred with Chair Wheeler. He liked the more vibrant colors and the antiquing as it gave a certain feel to the business. Chair Wheeler stated that it appeared the Committee Members agreed with the new color scheme and that the applicant should improve the stucco pilasters. Committee Member McCormack asked if the pilasters were true stucco? Chair Wheeler stated yes. Mr. Atkinson stated the pilasters could be given a skin coat treatment to give it a better match to the wood treated areas. Committee Member Gladson asked if anyone had problems with the signage? Chair Wheeler stated the signage appeared very appropriate for the type of business. Mr. Atkinson stated the signs were wood letters that had been painted and had not been approved by the landlord. With the bond posting, it allowed the tenant to open the business, and then to come back to work on the signage in regard to the sign program. Once the building was painted he felt the signage would look good. If there was anything objectionable about the signage that could be addressed through the sign program that they were working on with Staff. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 24 of 25 Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve, DRC No. 4332-08, The Auld Irisher Fagade Modifications with the following conditions: 1. Change the stucco pilasters to give a more smooth appearance. 2. Improve the antiquing paint process. SECOND: Adrienne Gladson AYES: Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2008 Page 25 of 25 ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Committee Member McCormack to adjourn to the next regular scheduled meeting on Wednesday, May 7, 2008. The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:17 p.m. SECOND: Adrienne Gladson AYES: Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Bill Cathcart MOTION CARRIED.