Loading...
08-08-2001 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES for Wednesday, August 8, 2001 Committee Members Present: Alice Angus Leonard Filner (Vice Chair) Mark Paone Susan Secoy Joe Woollett (Chair) Staff in Attendance: Chuck Lau, Associate Planner Howard Morris, Landscape Coordinator Dave Statton, Landscape Coordinator Committee Member Absent: None Administrative Session - 4:30 P.M. The committee met for an administrative session beginning at 4:30 p.m. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:15 p.m. Regular Session - 5:30 PM REVIEW OF MINUTES: The review and approval of the July 11, 2001 and the July 25, 2001 minutes were deferred until the August 22, 2001 meeting. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 8, 2001 Page 2 Planning Commission Study Session/ Design Review Committee Meeting DRC No. 3641 - BRANDYWINE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Tentative Tract Map 16218 fora Planned Unit Development with 21 single-family detached dwelling units. 1740 Bolingridge Drive Staff Contact: Anna Pehoushek, Senior Planner DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission Jim Barisic with Brandywine Development Corp., Robert Mickelson -Planning Consultant, and Jim Langston - Project Architect gave a brief overview of the project. The project site is surrounded by an existing 40 years old residential development consisting of single-story ranch style houses. The severe slope conditions add to the constraint in developing this site, making it rather difficult to grade for a standard subdivision. Although a standard subdivision would yield more units, a planned unit development is better suited to the current housing market demand. They also felt that a planned unit development would be more sensitive to the area because it requires less grading and therefore less impact to the neighborhood. In an effort to preserve as many of the existing trees as possible, they have hired a licensed arborist to take an inventory of all existing vegetation on side. The new houses are all 2-story, and are approximately 3,200 sq.ft. to 3,500 sq.ft. in size. Perimeter fencing is comprised of mostly tubular steel fencing, with selected sections of masonry block for privacy reasons. Commissioner Ben Pruitt expressed concerns with the impacts of creating a new gated community within an existing community. Committee Member Mark Paone raised concerns with on-site parking. He was informed that the proposed project is deficient, by approximately 13 parking spaces, of the minimum code requirement. Perhaps the site plan can be modified by pushing the building pads back to create parking spaces along one side of the private street. Bob Mickelson explained that pushing the building pads further back would necessitate construction of large retaining walls along the back. The meeting was opened for public comments: Charles Rupp (1802 E. Sunview Drive) is concerned with the increase in traffic as the streets are not very wide, and that there is not enough parking spaces being provided for overflow parking. The project is estimated to generate nearly 80,000 vehicular trips per year, which is a significant increase for an existing residential neighborhood. The new houses are 2-story designs that are considerably different than the existing single-story houses in the area. Additional concerns include emergency access and trash pick-up. Robert Dickinson (1821 E. Sunview Drive) thinks that the existing streets (Bolingridge & Hillview) should connect through, and that the new houses should blend-in with the existing houses in the area. Perhaps some split-level houses facing Sunview Drive would blend-in better. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 8, 2001 Page 3 DRC No. 3641 - BRANDYWINE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (Continued) Delfino Gonzales (1736 E. Sunview Drive) shares similar concerns with the increase in traffic, noise, and the headlights of vehicles exiting the property shining into his house from directly across the street. Michael Vanderhoof (1903 E. Bolingridge Drive) stated that the proposed new development should not be identical the existing houses in the area, because it would not meet the current housing market demand. He also feels that the project, as proposed, is probably the best it could be for that neighborhood. He has seen several different proposals in the past by other developers that are far less sensitive than the current proposed project. Craig Brisco (1724 E. Sunview Drive) is concerned with the gated entry and its potential of having vehicles stacked out onto Sunview Drive. Vehicles exiting the site are also more likely to go westbound away from Tustin Street due to its heavy traffic. Stephen Carter (1838 E. Bolingridge Drive) has lived in this neighborhood since the 70's. He has also seen some of previous proposals for this site, and the current proposed project is the best one so far. He likes the proposed concept of a planned unit development, and thinks that it is a "win" situation for everyone. Commissioner Chair Teresa Smith expressed concern with the parking deficiency that was mentioned earlier. She is also concerned with the safety factor of not having any sidewalks for pedestrians from the guest parking spaces to the houses. Commissioner Ben Pruitt still has a lot of questions about this project. He would like see alternative plans of having ingress/egress off the east side (Hillview Drive) and eliminating the main entrance off Sunview Drive. End of Study Session) Design Review Committee to reconvene and take action Jim Langston -Project Architect, presented the changes that were made to the building elevations of the new houses, in response to some of the comments that were made from the previous DRC meeting. The designs of the houses have been modified to be either Craftsman, Cape Cod, or Cottage to better blend in with the existing single-story Ranch style houses in the area. The roof pitches have been lowered slightly (4:12) to help reduce the bulk and mass. The houses that back up to Sunview Drive are step-down design to reduce height at the rear. The rear and side elevations are provided with more architectural trim and detail to add more interest. An item that needs to be corrected on the drawing is the labeling of the plan types for Lot 1, Lot 3 and Lot 14. The correct plan types should be; Lot 1 -Plan 3R, Lot 3 -Plan 4R, and Lot 14 - 4R. Committee Member Mark Paone appreciates the changes that have been made, but feels that the houses are still very large and massive. The applicants have made a big step in the right direction, but they still have not succeeded in overcoming the issue of massing. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 8, 2001 Page 4 DRC No. 3641 - BRANDYWINE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (Continued) Committee Member Susan Secoy agrees with staff's recommendation that the rear elevations of the four houses on -ots 14 through 17 be further refined (as outlined in staff report) that: 1) the windows below the balcony shall be of a decorative style similar to those used at the upper story; and, 2) the doors shall be of a decorative style similar to that found on the upper story of the front elevation; and, 3) stone or brick veneer shall be applied to the lower story wall surface. As for the proposed color palette and exterior finish material, it works quite well with the rest of the setting. She also appreciates that the applicant is being sympathetic to the existing natural landscape. Committee Member Leonard Filner reiterates his concerns with the perimeter fencing to the east and west. The proposed plan indicates a mixture of solid walls, tubular steel fencing, and wood fencing. He would like to see more consistency to avoid a "checkerboard" effect with having too much variation. As for the landscaping, removal of the existing matured oak tree should be mitigated with replacing it with three 48-inch box size trees. Jim Barisic explained that the use of different types of fencing (open vs. enclose) was determined based on the individual adjoining neighbor's requests for privacy. As for the existing oak tree, they will try and save it and relocate it on site if possible (50% chance of survival). The planting of three 48-inch box size trees should not be a problem. MOTION was made by Committee Member Mark Paone to recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission with the following conditions: Any changes to the site plan required by the Planning Commission including street, sidewalk, parking, or access shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of grading permits. 2. The applicant shall revise the site plan to accurately depict the construction of Plan 3R on Lot 1, Plan 4R on Lot 3, and Plan 4R on Lot 14. 3. The applicant shall revise the design of the rear elevations of the residences on Lots 14 through 17 to incorporate the following features: The windows below the balcony shall be of a decorative style similar to those used at the upper story; and The doors shall be of a decorative style similar to that found on the upper story of the front elevation; and, Stone or brick veneer shall be applied to the lower story wall surface. 4. Three (3) of the new trees shall be a minimum 48-inch box in container size. This shall be reflected on the final landscape plan for review and approval by the Design Review Committee in coordination with the Community Development Department. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 8, 2001 Page 5 DRC No. 3641 - BRANDYWINE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (Continued) The applicant shall submit a final landscape plan, including landscape standards and shrub planting along the north retaining wall, for review and approval by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. The applicant shall enhance the landscape treatment along the east elevation of the residence on Lot 1 to soften the appearance of the structure from the surrounding neighborhood. This shall be reflected on the final landscape plan for review and approval by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits. SECOND: Leonard Filner AYES: Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 8, 2001 Page 6 2. DRC No. 3662 -BARRY FOUST Facade renovation consisting of modifying openings, changing out windows, new canopy, and addition of new landscaping for an existing non-contributing commercial building in Old Towne. 275 S. Glassell Street Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner -Historic Preservation DRC Action: Final Determination The project was presented by Susan Secoy -Architect. The proposal is to remodel an existing non-contributing 50's stucco box building. The building is currently vacant. Two different design schemes have been studied and are being reviewed at this meeting. The project was opened for public comments: (None) Committee Chair Joe Woollett asked if it is a vine material being shown on Scheme A, and how would it be attached to the building. Susan Secoy explained that some type of wire mesh would be provided for the vine to grow on. Committee Member Mark Paone stated that both Schemes A and B work well. The use of Scheme A depends on getting the right type of vine material to grow in front of the building. Committee Member Leonard Filner has no problems with the plant list, but would like to see some type of ground cover material be provided at the front planter area. MOTION was made by Committee Member Mark Paone to approve the project subject to the following conditions: 1. Both Schemes A and B are approved. 2. If Scheme A is used, provide an espalier at the front for the vine. 3. Add ground cover material at planter area. 4. Submit final landscape plans to Community Services Department for approval. Final plans to include City required inspection notes. The approval is based on the finding that the proposed work conforms to the standards and design criteria referenced and recommended by the Design Review Committee. The proposed work complies with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines. The proposed work is compatible with, and therefore will not adversely affect the use and design of existing buildings within Old Towne. SECOND: Alice Angus AYES: Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: Susan Secoy MOTION CARRIED DRC 08-08-01 Minutes