Loading...
12-04-2002 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES Wednesday, December 4, 2002 Committee Members Present: Staff in Attendance: Committee Member Absent: Jon Califf Leonard Filner (Vice Chair) Craig Wheeler Joe Woollett (Chair) Chuck Lau, Associate Planner Jeffry Rice, Planning Manager Debbie Ritchey, Recording Secretary Mark Paone Administrative Session - 4:30 P.M. The committee met for an administrative session beginning at 4:30 p.m. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:10 p.m. Regular Session - 5:30 PM REVIEW OF MINUTES: A motion was made by Committee Member Leonard Filner to approve the November 6, 2002 minutes subject to the following corrections: DRC No 3745 -Shell Gas Station Page 3, paragraph 5, sentence 4 amended as follows: Howard Morris suggested using' linear root barriers and warned the applicant about the fruit drop from this particular tree. Page 4 paragraph 1, sentence 1 amended as follows: Mario Chavez-Marquez, Assistant Planner, clarified that six 24" tree boxes were required and the rest would be ~-5-' 15 gallon. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 4, 2002 Page 2 Pale 4, condition 1 amended as follows: 1. The liquidambar trees be planted with linear root barriers extending along the curb edge and the property line, each a minimum of 4' from the center of the ~ trunk of the tree in each direction, or as an option, change the tree species at the approval of staff. Review and approval of the October 2, 2002 and the November 20, 2002 minutes were deferred to the December 18, 2002 meeting. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 4, 2002 Page 3 DRC No. 3754 -NELSON COMMERCIAL Renovation of an existing 11,277 sq. ft. retail center. 1615-1649 W. Chapman Avenue (NEC Chapman & Feldner) Staff Contact: Chuck Lau, Associate Planner DRC Action: Final Determination Mr. Glen and Mr. Steve Nelson (P.O. Box 1, Orange) presented the project. The applicant stated that the building in front would have substantial changes because they want to update the center. They have owned the property for almost 30 years. They would like to add landscaping where there has been none before with the help of the City. Committee Chair Woollett asked to verify what each color on the drawing depicted. Mr. Nelson gave a detailed explanation using the blueprint as illustration. He explained the plan is to make the blocks more decorative. Committee Chair Woollett asked what will happen with all the signage and whether the applicant will establish a program for the signage. Mr. Nelson replied that the city is assisting with the signage program. Committee Member Filner expressed that the committee is looking for consistency in the designs of all the signs. Committee Member Wheeler commented there are some confusion concerning the drawings, which part of the drawings are planned for upcoming construction, and which parts are planned for later down the road. Mr. Nelson explained the reason for the progressive construction is because the city has plans for widening the street, and there is a construction easement that the applicant has to schedule around. Committee Member Califf asked if the construction would be done in one phase? Mr. Steve Nelson replied that all the improvements would be in one phase, with the limitation of the areas being affected by the street widening. Committee Member Wheeler suggested that the plans for the plans for the construction indicate the work be done in one phase to which Mr. Nelson agreed. Committee Member Wheeler also wanted to express that the two cornices in the proposal be consistent. The committee discussed the design of the cornices in detail and decided it would be better to have the cornices match. Committee Member Califf asked the applicant to clarify the scones design. Mr. Nelson explained the scones design as illustrated on the drawings; he also noted they're more for decorative and security reasons. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 4, 2002 Page 4 Committee Member Califf asked what the applicant's plans are concerning security and illumination in the back of the building. Mr. Nelson replied that he would comply with the city code and the energy requirements. Committee Chair Woollett expressed the paving needs to be fixed and possibly using a stiff finish would discourage the skateboarders, who are causing the damage to the concrete. Mr. Nelson replied he would agree and will explore the options. The committee and the applicant then extensively discussed ways to discourage skateboarders. Committee Chair Woollett wanted to express to the applicants that the committee is very interested in the project, despite the comments and suggestions that have been made. Initiated by Committee Chair Woollett, the committee and the applicant discussed the tempered glass design, the column, and the mesh along the wall. Committee Member Filner asked to clarify the material of the wall and the planting material on the wall, which he gave some different suggestions and pros and cons to each. Mr. Nelson replied that it will be concrete tilt up wall and contemplated the pros and cons of the suggestions. Committee Member Filner also suggested the applicant hire a professional landscaper/architect because the trees chosen are not the best of choice. Mr. Nelson said he is open to that suggestion. Committee Chair Woollett asked to clarify the future and proposed lighting in the parking lot. Mr. Nelson gave the explanation in details. The discussion went back to the signage program in details. The committee then summarized the issues that have been discussed and contemplated what conditions should be discussed. A motion was made by Committee Chair Joe Woollett to approve the project to the following conditions: 1) All references to future and proposed construction are deleted to show all work done at one time, except that which is affected by the city's street widening program. Planting along south portion of property and the Chapman Street lineage. 2) North parking lot lighting fixtures to meet lighting criteria's of the Police Department and the lighting on the north side of building are eliminated. 3) Building signage criteria be presented at a future submission, along with additional data about the front sign. 4) That there be a column on the west end of building to match other columns. And the trellis extending west from the intersection be extended as shown on elevation. 5) That the moldings on the parapets be the same throughout with the western portion of building. 6) The vines on the north parking lot maybe creeping figs and the vines on west side of the west wing be a trumpet vine. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 4, 2002 Page 5 7) A continuous planter (two (2) feet wide, six (6) inch curb) be along the north side of parking lot defined by a curb that will function as a wheel-stop, and similar curbs will occur at the landscape planter at front parking lot. 8) Final landscaping plans be submitted to DRC. SECOl~'D: Leonard Filner AYES: Jon Califf, Leonard Filner, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: Mark Paone ABSTAINED: None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 4, 2002 Page 6 2. DRC No. 3781 -CITRUS COMMUNITY APARTMENTS Construction of a new two-story 29-unit affordable housing development Northwest corner of Chapman Avenue and Citrus Street Staff Contact: Karen Sully, Planning Manager DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission Mr. Robert Mickelson (P.O. Box 270, Running Springs, CA) presented the project, stating that he doesn't have much to add to the staff report other than being excited about the project even though there is opposition from the neighbors. Committee Chair Woollett asked Mr. Mickelson to explain why they have chosen the design. He also expressed concern about the context of the project because this project will set a precedent for Chapman Avenue and how the rest of the area is going to develop. Mr. Noel Hart (153 S. Cypress St., Orange) explained they gravitated towards the Spanish colonial design instead of other designs like craftsman because it's the gateway to the Old Towne area, which has the Spanish Colonial style, and it ties into the expansion of the library. He showed pictures of some of the neighborhood houses with the Spanish style homes. He went on to discuss the elevation of the buildings. After Committee Member Wheeler's observation that there are not many the roofs along W. Chapmen, the committee unanimously agreed that the the roof might not be a great idea. The applicant said he is open to other suggestions and he and the committee discussed options to break up the roof, including lowering the plate, or overhang the roof. Committee Member Wheeler then suggested possibly going with more of a mission style look if the applicant would like to keep the the roof. Committee Co-Chair Filner asked about the landscaping in the surrounding area, including the plant material on the trellis and such. Mr. Hart replied to Committee Member Filner's questions. Mr. Filner added that he likes the changes that he sees in this presentation, but the original concern was the bulkiness and massiveness of main building, which may not have been adequately addressed. Mr. Mickelson expressed that he likes the the roof and suggested possibly choosing a tile. Mr. Rick Otto commented that in speaking to the neighbors in the area, they see this part along Chapman as more of a residential area than a commercial area. Along with that, the the roof would represent more of a residential character. Ms. Sully asked Mr. Hart what the color change would be if the design of the elevations were to change. Mr. Hart presented the proposed color scheme for the proposed elevation changes. Ms. Sully suggested the application of accent material at the base of the elevations. Committee Chair Woollett expressed he feels this is a family project and is concerned for the children who will be tenants, living so close to Chapman, a busy street, which may present a safety issue. He added that he prefers the first plan better than second plan, with a stronger sense City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 4, 2002 Page 7 of enclosure. The applicant and the committee then discussed the possibility of using landscaping, possibly a trellis, to create the enclosure. Committee Chair Woollett stated that the children should be visible from the units which overlook the open space area; it would make it safer and give a sense of protection from the street. Committee Member Filner suggested looking at the preliminary landscape plan, which will make the discussion relevant. Mr. Hart commented there might be a need for a fence around the tot lot area. The committee suggested having the rental office area look out over the laundry and tot-lot area. Mr. Hart said he could look at that, but he thinks the area should be more of a mom social area, to do laundry, and watch the kids play. Committee Member Filner asked ifself-policing is the issue. Mr. Hart replied in the affirmative. Committee Chair Woollett stated that he would like to see the applicant put a document together that the DRC can recommend. Committee Member Filner addressed the landscaping, pertaining to the corner treatment and screening trees along the west side of the building. Mr. Aguilera replied that has been addressed in the drawings, adding the same species (Podocarpus) along the back. He added that they are in the process of looking at other corner treatments. Committee Chair Woollett commented that the southeast corner treatment seems to be a visual entrance, even though it's not an entrance. He asked where visitors would park. Mr. Hart replied that the visitors would park around the back. Mr. Hart also addressed the question of the complex being gated, which he commented that many of the previous reviewers, including the police department, do not want the complex gated. Committee Member Califf suggested how the applicant could use the illusion of a gated community to discourage people from going through the area. Community Member Filner asked if the applicant plans on hiring arborists to document measures to protect the old trees during construction. Mr. Mickelson replied that he is open to that, except he would like to have a clause that states that if the tree is not worth saving, they would not be responsible for replacing the tree. Committee Member Filner suggested going with something more solid between the main buildings, along the courtyard areas, for sound and security. The applicant and the committee discussed the timeline of the project, in order for the applicant to address the concerns and suggestions made. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 4, 2002 Page 8 A motion was made by Committee Member Leonard Filner to continue the project. SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Jon Califf, Leonard Filner, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: Mark Paone ABSTAINED: None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 4, 2002 Page 9 DRC No. 3785 - KOTHARI DENTAL OFFICE Proposal to increase the overall building square footage by enclosing two spaces to the east and west elevations for the construction of additional office space, add required landscaping, and a monument sign. 765 N. Tustin Street Staff Contact: Mario Chavez-Marquez, Assistant Planner (714) 744-7239 mcmarquez(a~cityoforange•or~ DRC Action: Final Determination Continued from 11-20-2002 meeting) Mr. Mario Chavez-Marquez presented the project and presented Mr. George Handy (24621 Via San Fernando, Mission Viejo), Mr. Ramesh Kothari DDS (12144 E. Carson St. #E, Hawaiian Gardens), and Mr. Darshan Shah (Integral Consultants, 10 Lynnfield, Irvine). Mr. Chavez- Marquez reminded the committee of the issues addressed during the last meeting: 1) Enhancement of the south side of the building, in regards to establishing a main entry identity. 2) Address the roof style to prevent water from the roof falling onto the walkway aisles. 3) Address the water runoffs concerns with either gutters or down spout. 4) Add required lights to the parking lot area. 5) Address specific ground cover issues. 6) Replace the Sweet Gum with a more adequate and appropriate tree type. 7) Increase the proposed two (2) trees along the front of the property from atwenty-four 24) box to a thirty-six (36) box. Mr. Chavez-Marquez stated the applicant would like to address these issues one by one. Mr. Handy explained how each item was handled: 1) He did not do anything to enhance the building, other than proposing an awning be put in-the same color as the facing, would have some support. 2) and 3) He put in a gutter around the entire structure. 4) The lightings are expressed on the drawingsshoebox lighting, wall lights, and streetlights. 5) 6), and 7) Addressed on drawing. Committee Member Filner said he does not recommend any particular type of ground cover, as long as there is a ground cover. Mr. Morris added that the applicant should make sure final landscaping plans, with inspection notes be submitted to him. A motion was made by Committee Member Leonard Filner to approve the project subject to the following conditions: 1. Ground cover be planted within front landscape area, from property line to property line. 2. Submit final landscape and irrigation plans to staff for approval. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 4, 2002 Page 10 SECOND:Craig Wheeler AYES:Jon Califf, Leonard Filner, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:Mark Paone ABSTAINED:None MOTION CARRIED N:\C D D\P L N G\Council Commissions Committees\DRC\DRC 2002\12-04-02 drem.doc