Loading...
08-18-2004 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES August 18, 2004 Committee Members Present: Jon Califf (Chair) Craig Wheeler Joe Woollett Donnie Dewees Staff in Attendance: Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Dan Ryan, Senior Historic Planner Howard Morris, Landscape Assessment/District Coordinator Committee Member Absent: None Administrative Session - 5:00 P.M. The Committee met for an administrative session beginning at 5:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Regular Session - 5:30 P.M. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 2 1. DRC No. 3888-04 -CRAIG AND FRANCINE PRESTININZI Clarification on type of siding recommended at the 06-02-04, DRC meeting. 804 E. Washington Avenue (Within the Old Towne Orange Historic District) Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner Historic Preservation DRC Action: Final Determination Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner Historic Preservation, gave the overview presentation. The applicants were not in attendance. The DRC had previously asked that the applicants provide photographs of what is below the existing material (the stucco covering) on the residence and submit those to staff to make a determination of siding would be appropriate based on what was discovered. The photographs show vertical board and bats, without the bats, in very bad condition, and also some plywood. There was nothing to indicate that there was anything in good enough condition to go with that particular siding. Mr. Ryan indicated that after the last DRC meeting, his understanding was that the siding would be wood; the applicant had a different understanding. The item is before the DRC now for clarification on that item. Mr. Ryan discussed parts of the Secretary of the Interior's recommendations for historic structures, as it relates to reconstruction of historic buildings. In this case it is not recommended that you use a substitute material that does not convey the same appearance as the historic building and what was previously used. The material that the applicant wished to use was hardy plank, and the material that is on the house now is not considered historic -it's textured stucco. Committee Member Joe Woollett stated that he was looking at Section C of the guidelines for rehabilitation of historic structures which states that "deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced" and "where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of the distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture and other visual qualities, and where possible, materials." He further stated that it is not known what was there, because it is no longer there. Mr. Woollett stated it is, therefore, difficult to even match the visual quality much less the material. He further referenced additional items in the guidelines that he stated appeared to be somewhat contradictory. One was on Page 30, under materials, stated "materials substituted should be considered during project review (fiberglass columns, tin cornices, etc.); however, traditional detailing and intent shall be maintained. Any improvements, restoration or new construction shall duplicate original details and materials as accurately as possible. See Appendix B for use of alternate materials." He also noted a comment from the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service that stated, and "there is growing evidence, with proper planning, careful specifications and supervision, substitute materials can be used successfully in the process of restoring the visual appearance of historic structures." Mr. Woollett stated that he believed whatever was put on the outside of the structure needed to look" like a historic material, and the logical one would be wood. He believed that each time a decision was made on a structure such as this, it established a precedent and felt that this particular issue had been one of the greater challenges on this particular building because it could not be determined what was on the structure originally. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 3 Mr. Ryan offered that there had been a consistency of using alternative materials in new construction for infill development. This was not considered infill. He stated that it was known that board and bat would not have been used on a principle structure, but would have been used more on an accessory structure. And certainly no one, including the applicant, wanted to use board and bat. Mr. Ryan felt that a wood siding would be the best choice for the building's exterior treatment that would reflect that period and style of building. Committee Member Craig Wheeler felt that in this case, since it is a restoration (not an infill) that the exterior material should be what was used during the time of the construction of the house. Committee Chairman Jon Califf asked the public to comment. Jeff Frankel, representing OTPA, noted that regarding materials for contributing structures according to the design guidelines), the only permitted materials are brick, wood siding, cut stone and stucco (stucco being on a Mediterranean, Spanish or that type of structure). Even on infill, he noted, "in kind materials should be encouraged." Mr. Woollett stated that he was not in favor of the wood siding being used today, simply because of the lack of durability of the material in the heat and sun. Mr. Frankel disagreed, stating that he felt that redwood was one of the most durable materials out there, and further that when wood is painted and maintained it lasts quite a long time. Mr. Califf noted that it's difficult to get the quality "old growth" type of wood today. All agreed. A motion was made by Committee Member Craig Wheeler to make a final determination on the siding issue: 1. The approved exterior siding material will be a wood siding, with a smooth finish, and horizontal lathe. 2. Final selection of material will be subject to review by the Community Development Staff. SECOND: Jon Califf AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler NOES: Joe Woollett ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 4 3. DRC No. 3910-04 -HATFIELD RESIDENCE Demolition of an existing residence and construction of a new single-family residence. 355 N. Pine Street (Old Towne Historic District) Staff Contact: Christopher Carnes, Senior Planner DRC Action: Recommendation to the Planning Commission The project overview was given by Senior Planner Chris Carnes. Jon Califf recused himself from this item, as he was the architect of record. Mr. Carnes noted that the applicant had submitted a revised set of plans because, due to setback requirements, the structure was too tall - and the revised plans comply with the guidelines. The final determination will be made by the Planning Commission, which is required because a demolition requires an environmental review, which in this case is a negative declaration. Jeff Frankel, 384 S. Orange Street, representing OTPA, spoke to the issue of the vinyl windows. He felt they were not consistent to the rest of the streetscape and the district; wood windows would be the only way to achieve the proper look. Mr. Carnes further explained that all of the windows, even if they were of vinyl construction, would have wood trim along the exterior. Committee Member Craig Wheeler stated that, even so, you could not alter the color of the vinyl windows. He stated that as he interpreted the guidelines, the committee could not require wood windows in this case, but they could encourage them to use wood. Andrea McCullough, 326 N. Shaffer, representing OTPA, stated that she also wanted to encourage the use of the wood windows. She complimented the applicants on the look of the house and said she was pleased with the modest proportions of it. She referred to the infill guidelines for justification that in kind materials should be used for the windows, noting that the kind of materials used on the windows should be compatible with those used on historic structures. The applicant spoke to the benefits of vinyl windows, noting them as their preference, mainly because of the maintenance. They also stated that they'd be willing to look into the wood windows. A motion was made by Committee Member Craig Wheeler to recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission subject to the following conditions: 1. Wood windows are encouraged, but if non-wood is used then the windows should be of a profile similar to a true wood window both in width and depth, and that Staff be asked to verify the shape of the profile prior to approval. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 5 SECOND: Donnie Dewees AYES: Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: Jon Califf MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 6 3. DRC No.3921-04 -THOMAS WALSH Half-story addition and fire repair to a 1910 Bungalow. 390 N. Shaffer Street (Old Towne Orange Historic District) Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner Item continued from July 21, 2004, DRC meeting DRC Action: Final Determination The project overview was given by Senior Planner Daniel Ryan, noting that the item had been continued from the July 21, 2004 DRC Meeting. At the previous meeting, the applicant was to consider decreasing the height of the second floor plate line, and try to accomplish the addition and reconfiguration of the second floor within the existing roofline. Also, the applicant should consider lowering and matching the height of both dormers and maintaining the fish-scale shingles that were proposed originally. The architect on the project, Phil Bennett, 12361 Panorama, Santa Ana, noted that everything that was being proposed was within the existing roof height; there would be no addition to the roof height. The applicant is actually lowering the ceiling height to accomplish this, noting that the upstairs would appear more as a "finished attic" than it would a room. The only change would be the location of the dormers. The north-elevation dormer would be shifted down a bit to be able to get a functional window into the attic area. The only height change would be a modest one in the south elevation, which was not visible from the street. Patti Ricci, 618 Culver Avenue, Orange, spoke to the committee. She mentioned that this was an R-2 lot and there were already 3 units on the property, and wondered where the additional cars were going to park. Daniel Ryan stated that he had spoken to the applicant about the issue, and staff was taking the issue at face value as far as what the applicant was telling them. If there were something different than what the applicant states, it would be dealt with by code enforcement. Jeff Frankel, 384 S. Orange Street, representing OTPA, spoke to the proposed design and stated that you will never find apop-out dormer design on a Craftsman home anywhere. He noted that the design standards state that "roof patterns must be typical to style and period of the architecture of the building," and the proposed design was definitely not typical. As far at the height of the dormer/structure, he felt the DRC should be consistent with other projects that have been approved and other applicants that had been required to lower their dormers (for instance the residence at 450 S. Orange Street where the owner was required to lower both dormers to the appropriate height in comparison with the ridge of the main structure). A letter was submitted by Janet Crenshaw, Chairman OTPA, who was not in attendance. The letter is attached for reference, and was read at the meeting by Andrew McCullough. A copy was provided to each committee member. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 7 Shawn Howell, 385 S. Glassell Street, also a member of OTPA, stated that he agreed with the comments previously made by OTPA members. Thomas Walsh, in response to the comments made by the public, stated even if there were only two people living on the property, there would be cars parked along the street every day because of the proximity to Chapman University and the students park in the street. Conversely, he stated, not all Chapman students have cars, which is why they try to get housing so close to campus. The Committee Members discussed various options that would solve the problems with the pop- out south-facing dormer, which is not typical of the style of the Craftsman home. The architect noted that he could revise the plans to include a shed roof, as long as the window met egress requirements. Committee Member Craig Wheeler felt that a shed roof would certainly be more appropriate than the massive gable. A motion was made by Committee Member Craig Wheeler to continue the project to the September 1, 2004 DRC Meeting, allowing the applicant time to revise the plans per the Committee's recommendations. In discussion following the motion, Jeff Frankel, OTPA, wanted it noted that he felt it was important to retain the gable, an important architectural element of the house, and acharacter-defining feature of the house, which according to the standards should be retained. SECOND: Joe Woollett AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler, and Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 8 4. DRC No. 3927-04 - CONOCO PHILLIPS Remodel of an existing automotive service station. 615 South Tustin Street (southeast corner at Fairway Drive) Staff Contact: Chuck Lau -Associate Planner DRC Action: Final Determination See notes relating to DRC No. 3928-04. Both items are from the same applicant and are similar, and they were discussed and voted upon together. A motion was made by Committee Member Joe Woollett to approve the project as submitted. SECOND: Donnie Dewees AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler, and Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 9 5. DRC No. 3928-04 - CONOCO PHILLIPS Remodel of an existing automotive service station. 2345 W. Chapman Avenue (northeast corner at Bitterbush Street) Staff Contact: Chuck Lau -Associate Planner DRC Action: Final Determination This item incorporates the discussion for DRC No. 3927-04 which was included in this discussion and motion for action. The projects were both introduced by Chuck Lau. He noted that both projects were owned by Conoco Phillips, which purchased Union 76. Tait and Associates had been hired by Conoco to integrate these properties into their corporate image programs (including signage, building and canopy remodel). Both properties had an existing ranch-style look, and the new design would phase in a more contemporary high-tech appearance with a flat roof. Chuck Lau discussed the many design changes that were being made to bring the projects into the Conoco design standards. He stated that the only difference between the two locations is that on the Chapman Avenue location, the sign would not be changed (put in during the Chapman Avenue widening project, courtesy of the City of Orange Public Works department). On the South Tustin location the existing sign will be replaced with the new corporate sign to comply with code. The treatment would be the same on both locations. Joe Woollett stated that it appeared that a new canopy would be installed on the Tustin location, and wondered if a new canopy would be on the Chapman site, as well, or whether it would just be a re-wrap of the existing canopy with new signage. The applicant noted that it would be a brand new deck, because in the cases where there was not a canopy that complied with the clearance that was required (which is 14'6" from the finish grade to the underside of the deck) what they are doing is removing the old canopy. In instances where the code is complied with in terms of clearance, the client wants to cut off the top of the old ranch-style canopy, put in a brand new deck and brand new lights underneath. So the old canopy would be hidden. A motion was made by Committee Member Joe Woollett to approve the project as submitted. SECOND: Donnie Dewees AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler, and Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 10 6. DRC No.3937-04 - TRICO SYCAMORE MEDICAL PLAZA Equipment addition to rear of medical center. 431 S. Batavia Street, (Old Towne Historic District) Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan -Senior Planner Historic Preservation DRC Action: Final Determination William Skinner, representing the applicant, described the project. He explained that there originally was a 15' tank, the top of which came right beneath the windows. They are proposing to install a liquid oxygen storage tank and related equipment within a new enclosure on the rear face of an existing medical facility. The applicant proposes to alter the exterior east elevation of the building to house equipment needed for a wound care center by their tenant. The existing windows within the enclosed area on the first floor will be filled in to provide atwo-hour fire separation. These areas and the enclosure will be finished to match the existing building. The roof will have venting louvers to allow venting and act as a screen to obscure views into the facility from the second floor. The applicant noted that the tank is insulated, so there was no requirement to protect that area. It is the bottom of the tank, with pipes, etc., that is the area of concern. The portion above the tank is open (and louvered) so that the tank maybe removed, if necessary. The project has been reviewed with Fire, and based on what they have seen so far; the project meets with their approval (with the qualification to see fully engineered drawings to receive final approval). The Committee Members discussed the proposed landscaping and recommended some treatment to complement the enclosure. A motion was made by Committee Member Joe Woollett to approve the project with the specific recommendations noted in the Staff Report and the following condition: 1. Landscaping be added on the east side. SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler, and Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 11 7. DRC No. 3611-01, DRC No. 3788-02 and DRC No. 2789-02 - CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY MAIN CAMPUS FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS Review of final landscape plans for Chapman University's main campus, including All Faiths Chapel, Leatherby Libraries and Oliphant Hall. One University Drive -main campus area generally located north of Palm Avenue, east of Glassell Street, south of Walnut Avenue and west of Center Street Staff Contact: Kim Chaffin -Associate Planner DRC Action: Final Determination Kim Chaffin, Associate Planner, gave an overview of the entire project. Specific drawings and plans were displayed on the walls and used by Ms. Chaffin to describe the various areas of the project. She noted that the final landscape plan was required to be returned to the DRC, and that it must be consistent with the Master Landscape Plan, which was the purpose of this presentation. She discussed the various components of the Master Landscape Plan and how they correlated to the Final Landscape Plan. Detailed descriptions are found in the Staff Report. She noted that the design for the primary gateway and already been approved and was under construction (due to be completed in time for the fall semester) and she shared the designs with the Design Review Committee. Ms. Chaffin noted that the proposed Final Landscape Plan was consistent with the Chapman University Master Landscape Plan, with the exception of the central quad area. Staff is recommending a permanent design for the central quad area shall be approved by the DRC and installed prior tot he issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Film School. Chapman indicated they were comfortable to committing to a five-year period to complete this (although it could come in for review as early as two years), as their funding is donor-driven. The applicant noted that they had spent a great deal of time in making sure that they landscape concept is visually consistent and compatible, not only with the internal campus flavor/feel/history, but also how they relate outward to the rest of the community. He also noted that the designers had spent a considerable amount of time discussing the central quad area, and the fact that although the design was interim, a considerable thought process had gone into discussing how that area could function even in its interim state until it was completed. Committee Members discussed and questioned the various aspects of the design. It was noted that the water feature which had been previously discussed, was actually a series of mounds that are covered in a number of native grasses that are of different lengths and different colors, surrounded by boulders that are being imported and hand-selected by the artist to complement the turf. It incorporates the central design element of sea and sky and earth as you go down the trellised area into the foyer of the chapel. Committee Member Craig Wheeler stated that it was appropriate to be diligent to the original plan, but that sometimes plans change due to circumstances and evolving ideas, and as an individual he did not have a problem with that. He questioned what was being done on a proposed Aquatic Center and if/how it impacted this plan. It was explained that Chapman was currently only in the conceptual stages of the Aquatic Center City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for August 18, 2004 Page 12 which is why the plans were not being displayed at this meeting. The new center would be part of what they are calling an Athletic Complex, and it will take over the existing parking area and the bleachers would become two-sided, with an full-size regulation Olympic-sized pool and some offices surrounding it in an L-shape for the coaches and offices. The offices are currently housed in trailers, which will be eliminated once the office building is completed. All of this will fit within the Master Landscape Plan, and will not impact this plan. Howard Morris, Landscape Assessment/District Coordinator has reviewed the plans and found them acceptable. Donnie Dewees discussed the various options concerning the type of enclosure for the trees Liquid Ambers) proposed on the project, and how to properly contain them so that the placement and watering would encourage the roots of the trees to go down (not to the side and on the surface) thus giving the trees stability. He also noted that he felt the shrub palette appeared to be fairly minimal in terms of variety and quantity. The applicant explained that some of the spaces, contrary to how it appears on the plan, were fairly tight and a lot of layering of shrubs could not fit into those areas, as it's fairly narrow. Their concern was for maintenance and the reduction of space itself. They further explained that they had looked at good examples on the existing campus and emulate those as closely as possible. A motion was made by Committee Member Joe Woollett to approve the project as submitted with the recommendations contained within the Staff Report, with the following exception: 1. The DRC will review the final design for the central quad area within five years. SECOND:Craig Wheeler AYES:Jon Califf, Craig Wheeler, and Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:None ABSTAINED:Donnie Dewees MOTION CARRIED N:\C D D\P L N G\Council Commissions Committees\DRC 8-18-04 drem.DOC