Loading...
02-06-2002 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES for Wednesday, February 6, 2002 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 Madeline Russell, Recording Secretary 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 7:30 p.m. Regular Session - 5:30 PM REVIEW OF MINUTES: A motion was made by Committee Chair Joe Woollett to approve the minutes of December 19, 2001 subject to the following corrections: DRC #3641 -Brandywine Development Corporation, Page 6, condition 2 amended as follows: 2. The applicant to submit to the 8R9 DRC color pallet and material samples for the entire project. DRC 3658 - Katella Commerce Center, Page 7, paragraph 4, sentence 1 amended as follows: Committee Chair Joe Woollett feels that t#i-s it is a difficult problem to tie all four buildings +r} together. Paragraph 6, sentence 2, amended as follows: This would not be a significant impact on the project a~-a14. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 2 REVIEW OF MINUTES (Continued): Paragraph 7, sentence 2, amended as follows: He understands the parking situation is very tight and that they can't lose any spaces, but he would like to see an adjustment made to the,~terf~.ger~ f-,tea-~ee~e~^~a parking configuration, so that a planter finger with a tree can be added. DRC #3688 - Stonegate Senior Apartments, Page 8, paragraph 5, sentence 1 amended as follows: Committee Chair Joe Woollett stated that the project needs more details, and that t#ey the design hadn't gone far enough ~g to carry the style through on the building. SECONDED:Susan Secoy AYES:Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woolett ABSENT:None ABSTAINED:None NOES:None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 3 DRC No. 3549 - V.R.S.J. MEDICAL Revisions to previously approved new medical office complex and parking structure. 230 S. Main Street Staff Contact: Anna Pehoushek, Senior Planner DRC Action: Final Determination Present were Dave Valentine and Brent Hubinger both of V.R.S.J. Medical. Committee Chair Joe Woolett alluded to DRC site review to this meeting and asked if there was anything further to be presented formally. Committee Member Mark Paone asked the principals to recap what V.S.R.J. was trying to accomplish by substituting smooth painted surface for the split-faced block that was previously approved and explain the material on the reveal. The respondents indicated that the smooth painted area was stucco and the reveal is stucco. Committee Member Susan Secoy wanted to know whether the respondents had any materials and colors to show. Respondents said they were continuing with the same color scheme. Committee Member Mark Paone indicated that in the original design there was more massing with split-face and questioned whether the intent was to reduce the area. Dave Valentine said that it was a structural design, the structure has changed in order to fit the structure on that space, actually, it had been shrunk and was smaller than the original design. The sheer construction is no longer needed. Brent Hubinger added that it opens the structure for better ventilation. Committee Member Alice Angus asked the respondents to recap the changes. Dave Valentine indicated they had basically increased the amount of landscaping because the building shrunk on the North and South ends and 1 ft. 9 in. that shrunk off the front planter between the office building and the parking structure on the East side. That's basically the impact on the landscaping. It was discussed at the site review that at the North end it might be better to do hardscape and pockets of vines. Committee Member Leonard Filner stated that at the informal review footing on the parking structure was an issue relating to landscaping as far as it extending beyond the face of the structure. Dave Valentine indicated they could easily work around the footings. Committee Member Leonard Filner said the pilings occur almost symmetrically across, no continuously square footage across, to which Dave Valentine replied that there was plenty of space to put trees. He remembered the discussion and there was a question as to whether they could intrude on the footing, but as it turns out, there is space for the trees. Brent Hubinger further clarified that there was some confusion on the East elevation and whether that footing was going to encroach the entire length. That is not the case. The landscape plan is correct, showing the areas for trees. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 4 DRC No. 3549 - V.R.S.J. MEDICAL (Continued) Committee Member Filner asked about the North side, there is due to less space? Committee Member Mark Paone asked whether the footings sticking out. Dave Valentine stated that the footings do not stick out. He asked the Committee to recall the back of the building, where there's a 6 ft. easement for Edison, which they couldn't encroach on. Committee Chair Joe Woolett called for public comment -there was none. Committee Member Leonard Filner had further comments about the landscaping. He said that on the North side, he would eliminate the shrub material between the building, change the species of the vine from a focus creeping fig to a Boston ivy on the entire length of the North elevation along with the Northwest cut out and everything else can remain the same. Dave Valentine questioned the specifics of Committee Member Leonard Filner's recommendation indicating his concern for maintaining the integrity of the elements, which may or may not tie together. There is a statement at one location that doesn't repeat itself anywhere else in the entire theme. Committee Member Leonard Filner indicated that the vine is not really going to do well and it's also debatable on the Northwest corner, as well. Dave Valentine made a recommendation on how to use the Boston ivy so that it flows. Committee Chair Joe Woollett indicated they should substitute Boston ivy for the fichus all the way around. Dave Valentine responded that he was not concerned, he just had to discuss it with his landscaper, was open to suggestions, and had no problem making the changes. Committee Member Mark Paone asked if it was okay to condition approval based there suggestions to substitute Boston ivy for the fichus all the way around. Dave Valentine said he would consider that but needs to refer that to the architect and give him an option on that. Mr. Valentine continued, landscaping is not an issue, and without making a commitment, he has no problem changing the fichus to Boston ivy, he just needs discuss it with the architect and landscaper. Committee Member Mark Paone indicated the need to document the discussion. The only other problem he could see was with the East side transitioning and if there were more solid elements with some type of opening. Dave Valentine indicated he'd have to review that with the Police Department, because one of their inputs was to try to keep it as open as possible. Dave Valentine said that the structure is designed with sheer at both ends. Previously, that was an architectural element. Committee Member Mark Paone said it was in the previous design and Dave Valentine noted that it may have been lost, inadvertently, in the transition, but he didn't know why there was a reduction in solid surfaces. He thinks it's an error by the architect in his rush to get modify the plans. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 5 1. DRC No. 3549 - V.R.S.J. MEDICAL (Continued) Mark Paone indicated that if that were the intent, the DRC would condition it. Mr. Valentine agreed. MOTION A motion was made by Committee Member Mark Paone to approve the project with the following conditions: 1. The proposed change from asplit-faced material to a solid painted material, either concrete or stucco, as shown on the drawing, with the condition that the East elevation will have the same amount of massing elements as on the original application; 2. That Boston ivy is substituted for the fichus creeping fig. 3. The Magnolia along the North side, within the 3 ft. planter and school property be eliminated. 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 February 6, 2002 Page 6 2. DRC No. 3587 - VALERE TARDIF Relocation and modification of a new detached garage for a refurbished Craftsman Bungalow that was moved-on to the site from another location. 151 S. Harwood Street (Contributing Structure) Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan -Senior Planner, Historic Preservation DRC Action: Final Determination Continued from 01-09-02 meeting) Valare Tardif was present. Committee Chair Joe Woolett asked him to give the Committee the status. Mr. Tardif indicated he did not want to change his driveway. After reviewing the meeting of November 26`", the Committee approved the relocation and design of the garage and there was a request for conceptual landscaping to alleviate some of the driveway massing. He said he has complied with everything, except for the mow strip business and doesn't want to set a precedent for Old Town Orange, especially if it's not significant to the property. Committee Chair Joe Woollett explained for Mr. Tardif's understanding that he had installed this pavement before getting any review of the design. He asked if Mr. Tardif understood that. Mr. Tardif responded in the affirmative, but he didn't think there would by any problem with a nice looking driveway that conforms to the rest of the property. Committee Chair Joe Woollett further indicated that there were a number of items that were not a part of the application that the Committee has accepted. Mr. Tardif noted that there was a mention in Dec. 5t" meeting about the approach and he got permits to do the approach which was approved and signed off and was coerced to repair the sidewalk, which he did. Committee Chair Joe Woolett asked Mr. Tardif to go back in the Committee Minutes of December 5t" to determine where we were. It is important to be brought up to date. Committee Member Mark Paone interjected that Mr. Tardif states things were signed off, but they really weren't. Committee Chair Joe Woolett indicated that on Dec. 5t" the motion was to continue the project. That was approved. There were items talked about, but no approvals given. Mr. Tardif said there was no objection to relocation or to the design and the Committee requested landscape plans, which was done. There's no reference about mow strip. Committee Member Mark Paone read from the Committee Minutes: Committee Member Mark Paone expressed concern regarding the site not staying the same as originally planned with a large amount of paved area and not enough landscape. The Committee expressed concerned then and the minutes further state that the Committee asked for an accurate plan and recognized, right of the bat, that the current plan was not drawn to scale and felt it a disadvantage to Mr. Tardif because it may not be as bad as it looked on that plan. If the Committee saw a more accurate plan, drawn to scale, they would be better able to evaluate it, that's a City requirement. So, the Committee has had the same concerns all along. The Committee does have this latest plan here, from a prior meeting, that is to scale, but there are still some concerns. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 7 2. DRC No. 3587 - VALERE TARDIF (Continued) Committee Chair Joe Woolett indicated that there was conversation about the mow strip, however, there's nothing about it in the minutes. Committee Member Susan Secoy said the Committee did also express concern that the backup distance did not meet requirements for the City. It is approximately 24 ft. when the planning requirement is 25 ft. Committee Member Mark Paone said he understood that Mr. Tardif would like an approval. Mr. Tardif said he'd like to build a garage. On November 29th he was prepared to build it and was told that anywhere else in Orange there would be no problem. Mark Paone indicated that he was probably wrong, because pretty much any place in Orange, we don't build without approved drawings. So, here's what we can do. The Committee can outline for you what the problems are and let you respond or the Committee can deny the application and still enumerate those things that are wrong. Then you could appeal to the Planning Commission. Committee Chair Joe Woolett called for public participation -there was none. Committee Member Mark Paone asked if Mr. Tardif had a preference. Should the Committee make a clear list of the issues for him to try to address them, or would you prefer the Committee deny the project and let Mr. Tardif go to the next step? Mr. Tardif said that the last time he was before the Committee, it was a mow strip and wanted to know if there was something else. Committee Chair Joe Woolett responded that the mow strip was an alternative for Mr. Tardif to deal with one of the primary issue. The December 5'h minutes indicated that 1) the development of the site had not stayed the same as it was originally showed; 2) there was a large amount of paved area, but not enough landscape. One of the suggestions to Mr. Tardif, for dealing with the large amount of paved area, was the mow strip It was not a requirement. It was presented as an alternative that might be easier to accomplish. Mr. Tardif asked where are we now. Committee Chair Joe Woolett responded that Mr. Tardif has brought the same thing back for the Committee to approve it. There have be no changes made. Mr. Tardif wanted to know changes had to be made -put the mow strip in? He believes that destroys the integrity of the pavers. If you're familiar with pavers, they're locked together with a vibrator and sand. Committee Member Mark Paone indicated the Committee is well aware of the process. The manufacturer has recommendations on how to do it, so we know it can be done. Mr. Tardif asked if that is accomplished, would that meet the Committee's approval. Committee Member Mark Paone said it would address the massing issue, but the Committee would still need to see the extent, and location and where that's going. Committee Member Mark Paone noted that Mr. Tardif had asked a question that he'd like to respond to correctly. Question: If Mr. Tardif does do the mow strip, is that the final concern for everyone? City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 8 2. DRC No. 3587 - VALERE TARDIF (Continued) Committee Member Alice Angus replied everyone is looking for is someway to breakup the pavement. There's a unanimous opinion that there's just too much pavement on the lot and the mow-strip would take care of that by visually breaking up the front part of the property. Committee Member Susan Secoy agreed that the Committee's opinion has not changed from two weeks ago. Mr. Tardif asked whether putting the garage in the back, would be visibly different from where it is not. Committee Member Alice Angus responded that the original plan had a very narrow driveway going to a garage in the back. The location was part of it. The other part was what you ended up doing with driveway with the pavers you put out there, which a much wider stretch of covered material than was originally planned. Committee Member Leonard Feldner indicated that what's also required for Mr. Tardif's benefit, is a guideline on how far back the mow strip should be extended. "mow strip" is a grassed area or some planting space between the hardscape. Ribbon driveway is another term. Committee Member Leonard Filner reminded them that there is one other thing that concerns the Committee - it the Committee approving a gazebo. Committee Member Mark Paone indicated that the gazebo is under a separate permit and is not part of the submittal, and is handled separately with the City. There are different guidelines that prevail. The Committee can take it off or add "Under Separate Permit". Committee Chair Woolett said he would like to find a way to take an action to resolve this issue. He asked Mr. Tardif, if he wanted the Committee to show him where the land strip should go. Mr. Tardif said he didn't want one. Committee Member Mark Paone responded that Mr. Tardif made the same statement in the last meeting and Staff suggested to him then that if he didn't want the mow strip, he should find another way to reduce the amount of pavement. Now, Mr. Tardif has come back and hasn't done that either. He asked Mr. Tardif if he wanted to work that out. After determining the area to be modified, Mr. Tardif agreed to abide by the Committee's findings. Then Mr. Tardif asked about the procedure for appeal, Committee Member s Mark Paone and Chuck Lau informed him that he first file an appeal with the Planning Commission. It would take about thirty days, and, depending on the decision there, M r. Tardif could further appeal to the City Council. Committee Member Mark Paone suggested to Mr. Tardif that he should probably go with the mow strip. If Mr. Tardif was dissatisfied after that he could appeal with conditions and he wouldn't have to come back to the DRC. Mr. Tardif indicated he had two other properties in Old Towne that he wanted to develop. Mr. Woolett told him he'd be an expert by the time he finished those. Committee Member Susan Secoy and Committee Chair Joe Woolett commended Mr. Tardif and expressed their delight for the work that's been done on this house. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 9 2. DRC No. 3587 - VALERE TARDIF (Continued) Committee Chair Joe Woolett reiterated the Committee's pleasure and reviewed the requirements. The pavement is18 ft. wide, he needs 10 ft. for the car and the strips are 3 ft, so, the plan would be to have 3 % ft. of paving of each side of the strip extending back about 20 ft. MOTION: A motion was made by Committee Chair Joe Woollett to approve the project with the following conditions: 1. Installation of a planting area in the driveway - 3 ft. plus or minus 3 in. wide and extending approximately 20 ft. long from the East side of the sidewalk; 2. The Gazebo is not part of the plan because it requires a separate permit; 3. The relocation of the garage and the substitution of material. SECOND: Mark Paone 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 February 6, 2002 Page 10 5. DRC No. 3693 -ORANGE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY New wall signs for an existing commercial office building in Old Towne. 230 E. Chapman Avenue (Non-Contributing Structure) Staff Contact: Chuck Lau, Associate Planner and Lisa Kim, Project Manager DRC Action: Recommendation to Zoning Administrator Moira Boynton of Gannon Design represented the applicant. Lisa Kim, Associated Planner presented the project as proposed signage for the subject building which is currently occupied buy Economic Development Department, the Orange Redevelopment Agency, and Community and Library Services. Ms. Kim turned the presentation over to Moira Boynton, the graphic designer who developed the signage program for the project. Ms. Boynton stated that the project has two signs of identical size, chosen to represent the building in the best possible way to architecturally compliment the building, while being sensitive to the needs for the downtown area. Colors were chosen based on metals that are currently on the building. There is not much color there, there's some beige and wood. The intent was to attract the eye to the sign on the wall. The secondary color of the lettering is a copper color the Redevelopment Agency is currently using on their signs in their lobbies. So there is graphic consistency in the interior and exterior of the project. Committee Member Mark Paone question whether the color was Gold or Copper. Ms. Boynton responded it's a coppery color, which is kind of an Old Towne color. Committee Member Alice Angus asked about the background color. Ms. Boynton replied that the background color is black, because the window awnings are black. She continued that she is considering adding a very slight white outline under the letters so the letters pop just a little more. It would be the same color white as on the fascia. Committee Member Susan Secoy asked whether it was copper or gold. Ms. Boynton made a correction that it is gold. Committee Member Mark Paone asked if gold was the one she wanted to use with an affirmative response. Mr. Boynton add it's for contrast and still thinks she wants to put a white outline around it because the contrast between the two might be a little limited. Committee Member Mark Paone made the observation that this is 230 Chapman and the signs are not on Chapman, there on Grand and then the parking lot. It might be nice to see 230 Chapman on the sign so someone could easily see it. Ms. Boynton said putting the address would be great if she could drop the size on the letters a bit because there is a lot of copy on the sign. One way to make that address pop is to have a panel on the bottom that has a copper or gold background with black lettering so that it so it stands apart form the graphics one is suppose to read. The meeting was opened for comments from the public: (None) City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 11 5. DRC No. 3693 -ORANGE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (Continued) Committee Member Alice Angus asked Ms. Boynton whether she would be opposed to shifting one opening with another. Ms. Boynton responded that the problem is the scene on the building and this leans towards positioning the sign towards the front of the building. There is more visibility from the street if she pushes the sign towards the edge of the building. Regarding a building seam, Ms. Boynton responded that the line may or may not be important graphically, but considering the traffic situation there she wanted to move the sign to the corner as much as possible. Committee Member Alice Angus asked for clarification of the background color since the plans show black and the color number is called out as deep bronze. Ms. Boynton said it is supposed to be black, the color number is in error. Committee Chair Joe Woolett stated that Ms. Boynton had given her justification for the colors is because they are used in the building elsewhere, but he didn't think it looks very good. It looks like this is the most "government" of all government buildings. Why isn't it orange, white and green, the colors the City of Orange uses, so that he knows as he goes by that it is the City of Orange, even if he doesn't read the sign. Ms. Boynton stated that her first intent is to work with the building and not necessarily compete with it. She thinks the sign should be more of an accent, and not look like it doesn't belong there. Associate Planner, Chuck Lau indicated that the Old Towne Design Guidelines prohibits the use of bright primary colors, i.e. orange. Ms. Boynton said her intent was not to be bureaucratic in appearance but to esthetically blend with the building. Committee Member Mark Paone commented on Committee Member Susan Secoy's suggestion earlier, that the building joint (seam) goes away and it becomes a question of whether it is a better composition of the windows and the structure of the building, and he thinks he prefers it. Committee Member Secoy interjected that she thinks the image is slightly deceptive, you don't see the line and also there are structures with lighting so that if it is pushed back a little, it won't interfere with visibility. Ms. Boynton agreed that as long as it lines up with the center and it's not too visible, then at 65 percent and 35 percent, it should be fine. Committee Member Secoy asked if Ms. Boynton proposing the gold or the copper. Ms. Boynton replied she thinks it should be copper with white outline. MOTION: A motion was made by Committee Member Susan Secoy to approve the project with the following condition: 1. The color of the letters is copper, not gold, with a white outline of 1/8 in. to 3/16 in., at the designer's discretion. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 12 5. DRC No. 3693 -ORANGE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (Continued) SECOND: Mark Paone 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 February 6, 2002 Page 13 3. DRC No. 3611 - CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY New revised All Faiths Chapel at Chapman University Campus. One University Drive (northwest corner of University Drive and Orange Street) Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner -Historic Preservation DRC Action: Final Determination Robert Hornacek introduced: Ken Ryan -University Representative for Planning Projects; David Martin -Architect; Bill Cathcart -Landscape Architect; and Chris Olson -University Director of Construction. Mr. Ryan asked the Committee to focus on the fact that Chapman University had tried to provide thoughtful and responsive architectural modifications and revisions that reflect specific input from the Committee, Planning Commission, City Council, and residents of the community. Keeping the use of the facility in mind, and with significant input they tried to create a project that will significantly contribute to the campus setting. As a result of, the revisions to the All Faiths Chapel reflect the relationship of this setting to the heritage in the community of Orange. The second thing to take into consideration is that as part of the City Council's approval recently of revisions and concepts, the Council gave clear direction indicating they are not the experts, but they rely on the Design Review Committee for landscape details and architectural details. While we review what's been done, we want to make sure that the vision that inspired this project is implemented and does fit in with the campus setting and with the overall community of Orange. Mr. Ryan introduced Mr. David Martin to walk through the All Faiths Chapel revisions. Mr. Martin began with an orientation to the Chapel, where it sits on the campus, the strategies and some ideas on materials and color. Glassell Avenue, the Beckman Building, the Law School, University Drive, the campus area, and the chapel share what will become an even more important plot of the campus. Just to give you a sense of scale of the building, it has a gross square footage of about 12,000 square feet. It is almost a corner post to this quad, there is a lantern, a tower with backlit marble, the main worship space, and a gathering place that opens onto University Avenue There is a series of offices on the West side of the gathering place for the ministries, so that students and ministers can move about without going through the body of the Chapel. One of the fairly consistent instructions has been to create an All Faiths Chapel, therefore, have shied away from the classic Christian Church. Our idea was getting to the worship space through a sequence of architectural events that would ultimately get them into the worship space. We've taken that path and move it to the East. So, from the gathering space, one would go up a few steps or handicap ramp, under a trellis, into a vestibule starting with a lower ceiling to a higher ceiling. As one follows this path, the windows are organized so that as you go into the first vestibule, the light is from the side with a view of a lovely pond. Then as you get further along, the windows really start to occurring higher up, so that the light and the view is going from out to the side to up. One focus is the fountain, water being an important part of all denominations. Then one goes through the very massive, 10 ft thick walls, 45 ft. tall, and that creates a sense of awe with the idea of bringing one eye up to the heavens above. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 14 3. DRC No. 3611 - CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY (Continued) One of the strategies as we move from this the circular plan to a square plan was a floating sloped roof, from the neoclassic period, with light coming in under the eaves, giving the sense of strong light coming from above. Another strategy was to introduce materials that would bring the collegial use of brick onto the campus instead of the vocabulary of plaster and stone. The tonality of brick exists in the building across the street, so we would come up with a blend that would really match, bring it across Glassell, and introduce it into the Chapel and other buildings as they happen on Chapman. Mr. Ryan continued, some other images that we've done include the School of Humanities, as happens a lot in Old Towne, we took that course of brick, moved it out 3/4 in. to get a strong shadow line. Mixing brick with pre-cast stone or sometimes limestone is another way to get richness in detail in the brick vocabulary. The view from the entry, going to the vestibule with the fountain, always being aware of the fountain, to the point where you would turn and go through the very thick wall and begin focusing on the worship space. An additional idea is to heighten the worship space with some sculpture suspended from under a skylight to draw the eye upward. We're inspired by the sculpture, it happens at the MIT chapel. We imagine the insides of the chapel done in a maple or sycamore paneling, rich and light in character. We envision movable seat and having the capability for organ recitals and coral events as part of the religious services. Mr. Ryan shared a slightly earlier version, showing at night, the illumination of the corner steeple, backlit with marble, stained glass windows on the vertical strips, and separate glass under the eaves to help float the roof. This starts to look at the use of the brick material at the arbor trellis leading to the entryway, and the notion of two tones of brick in the orange, a lighter cream and then the orange. Ken Ryan stated that this is the concept the Council approved, the details and the brick materials that you see. They had concerns of some of the tower elements and how they could be more closely related to the building and we've worked on those. Mr. Martin continued with samples of the brick coloration, keeping the roof in the zinc materials, weathering zinc reminding us of the old buildings in Europe. Mr. Martin showed samples of hard glass and translucent glass to be used on the large bands around the worship space, the vertical elements. Whether this or the more classic swirl of art glass is something that we're looking at. Committee Member Susan Secoy mentioned that Mr. Martin had referenced stained glass earlier and wondered if they would use the sample glass instead. Mr. Martin said they would use some form of stain glass, but their would be the use of classic art glass or colored glass is being explored. Colored glass and translucent glass would be used, for effect, inside the worship space, and in the chapel it would be divided into more artistic pieces of stained glass. Where there are offices, non-religious or no-worship areas, the windows would be smaller panels, similar to other buildings in Old Towne. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 15 3. DRC No. 3611 - CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY (Continued) Committee Chair Joe Woolett asked if the elevations shown with the panels and the tower orientation were current. Mr. Martin responded positively that they wanted to have the lantern facing more to the center part of the campus. Committee Member Alice Angus asked if there was still a skylight. Mr. Martin said that as the flat ceiling evolved, they thought keeping the peak in the roof was appropriate and would offset the skylights. Committee Member Alice Angus asked in the current proposal would the building be entirely enclosed in brick. Mr. Martin responded yes, based on current cost estimates. Committee Chair Joe Woolett asked about ground level materials, particularly in the patio area to which Mr. Martin responded that currently they have used pavers and concrete steps and the water garden is really a pond and there would be a bunch more grass and greenery in the back. Committee Member Leonard Filner question how much landscaping is involved in the front gathering space, referencing the pictorials with trees in the corner. Mr. Martin indicated that it's just a sketch rendering. He believes there should be a big tree, but wanted to keep it open without too much landscaping. Committee Chair Woolett called for public participation. Anne Siebert - 340 S. Olive Street, Ms. Siebert is a member of the Old Towne Preservation Society. She said that they have been a part of the process from the beginning and is very excited about the revised plan. It's more compatible with the neighborhood and the National Register District. She commended the University for their review and the resulting project, which the Society feels will be very outstanding. Committee Member Mark Paone questioned the roof structure, it looks like it's really a thin element and it's floating and asked whether that been structurally achieved yet. Mr. Martin indicated that in the schematic estimate they were going to stand the small truss inside the very thick braced steel walls. In response to whether the lower roof would be parapet situation, Mr. Martin said there were 2 things, a small parapet and the use of zinc as a trim for the cap. It is a always a parapet on a flushed roof and there is the same type of roofing for the chapel Committee Member Mark Paone further stated his concern when he sees two colors of glass and how they will work together on the building. One suggestion is investigating the use of laminated glass with a silk screen in between. It's very inexpensive. Mr. Martin stated that once the hurdles are passed, they imagined involving artist to look at stained glass windows, mosaic floors, etc. It is an exciting next step. Committee Member Mark Paone and Committee Member Susan Secoy agreed that stained glass windows have tremendous crossover ability as well as a tremendous impact and impression on the design building. It's going to merit a great deal of study. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 16 3. DRC No. 3611 - CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY (Continued) Committee Member Leonard Filner asked about changes that had occurred regarding landscaping. Mr. Cathcart responded that there hasn't been much change. With the thrust of the concept, the promenade, the parking lot and obviously wanting to celebrate the architecture and enhance, he considered an edge that softens it. The plant materials, feelings and textures will evolve. Committee Member Susan Secoy indicated that there is never an absolute right when it comes to design solutions, the current scheme is very well done and is more sympathetic to the groups who need to support this project. Committee Chair Joe Woolett summed that tonight we're supposed to approve the materials and we have an unresolved glass material. He asked what else is unresolved, the brick and the roof are resolved. Mr. Martin said he would want to involve the artist in the glass discussion. Additionally, he said that their goal was to have the Committee embrace the use of the materials and the tower modifications and the changes made, believing that what has been done is a good direction. Maybe there is a way to craft the glass as a condition and asked that the Committee consider doing that. Committee Member Susan Secoy asked for the documents that the Committee would be approving since they are not part of the current packet. The architect said he would forward any updated versions of the documentation for inclusion in the packet. MOTION: A motion was made by Committee Member Mark Paone to approve the project with the following conditions: 1. Submittal of a final landscape plan. 2. Any deviations in the use of exterior finish materials, including but not limited to the use of glass and window treatment, shall be submitted back to the DRC for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. SECOND: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED Leonard Filner Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett None None None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for February 6, 2002 Page 17 4. DRC No. 3669 -DONALD BERNARD New replacement brick staircase at the front porch of an existing Craftsman residence in Old Towne. 230 S. Grand Street (Contributing Structure) Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan -Senior Planner, Historic Preservation DRC Action: Final Determination Continued from 01-09-02 meeting) Committee Chair Woolett called for the representative for Donald Bernard. There was no representative but a request had been received to continue the project to the next meeting. MOTION: Moved by Joe Woolett to continue DRC 3669 to the next regularly scheduled meeting. SECONDED: Mark Paone AYES: Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woolett ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Review and approval of the January 9, 2002 and January 23, 2002 minutes was deferred to the February 20, 2002 meeting. The Design Review Committee Meeting was unanimously adjourned. N:\C D D\P L N G\Council Commissions Committees\DRC\DRC 2002\02-06-02 drem.doc