Loading...
1995-11-08 Final DRC MinutesCity of Orange Design Review Board M I N U T E S for November 8, 1995 Board Members Present Board Members Absent: Steven G. McHarris Steven C. Prothero Erika Wolfe Beau Shigetomi Staff attendance: Jim Donovan, Associate Planner Barbara Gander, Associate Planner Howard Morris, Landscape Coordinator Dan Ryan, Senior Planner /Historic Preservation Joan Wolff, Senior Project Planner The board met for an administrative session starting at 4:30 P.M_ This meeting adjourned at 7:50 P.M. Regular Session - S: 00 P.M. Mr. Prothero (Chair) opened the meeting, and asked whether board members had any comments about, or revisions to, the meeting minutes for October 18, 1995. Mr. McHarris: Regarding Item No. 8 (DRB 3111, Southern California Presbyterian Homes), one of his concerns that he did not see documented in the minutes was for the lack of a landscape along the western edge of the long access drive aisle. He had suggested that the applicant have enough room to add some large trees at this location. They indicated that they would consider the situation and (1) make adjustments to the site plan, or (2) negotiate with the owner of the adjacent church, to see if they would accept landscaping upon their property, which is already developed as a yard at this location. There were no other changes discussed for meeting minutes. MOTION by Steve Prothero to approve meeting minutes with the revision stated by Mr. McHarris. SECOND: Erika Wolfe AYES: Steve McHarris, Steve Prothero & Erika Wolfe NOES: None ABSENT: Beau Shigetomi MOTI O N C A R R I E D City of Orange • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes for November 8, 1995 Page 2 Consent Calendar - Mr. Prothero (Chair) asked other board members whether any proposals are complete, adequately designed, and require no discussion with applicants before a motion can be made for approval. i Ms. Wolfe suggested Item No. 1 (DRB 300), Albertsons, Inc. MOTION by Erika Wolfe to approve this proposal as a final plan. Detailed planting and irrigation plans should be submitted to staff for review and approval. Plans for all signs will be submitted for review and approval by DRB. SECOND: Steve McHarris AYES: Steve McHarris, Steve Prothero & Erika Wolfe NOES: None ABSENT: Beau Shigetomi MOTION C A R R I E D Ms. Wolfe also recommended approval of Item No. 8 (DRB 3112), the Fitzpatrick residence. MOTION by Erika Wolfe to approve the proposal as submitted. According to the staff, Fire and Community Services Departments require a landscape plan to be submitted for compliance with fuel modification requirements. SECOND: Steve Prothero AYES: Steve McHarris, Steve Prothero & Erika Wolfe NOES: None ABSENT: Beau Shigetomi MOTI O N C A R R I E D There were no other motions made at this time. City of Orange • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes for November 8, 1995 Page 3 (Item No. 2) DRB 3053 Walgreen Express Freestanding sign for adrive-through pharmacy 3237 E. Chapman Ave. Limited Business District (C-1) (N.W.C. at Prospect St.) David Sheegog Architect The staff presented background information as to why this proposal has returned to the board. The sign was once approved subject to conditions that the reader board would be eliminated. However, the applicant feels would like to ask the board to reconsider this particular issue. The board discussed sign code requirements with the staff. This proposal does not conflict with any specific regulation in the sign code. However, the board has always maintained a policy that if a cabinet sign is proposed, display faces should have an opaque background. Reader boards have not typically been approved because they are not compatible with this policy. David Sheegog presented photographs of a sign with a reader board that has changeable copy with an opaque background. The letters are a white image on a red background. Solid red blanks are used to fill the rest of the display area, so that no light shows through. Mr. Sheegog said that the photograph was of a sign located somewhere in Illinois, where the city had the same concerns and limitations on transparent backgrounds for signs. Given the unique construction materials, and specific design to include an opaque background, Ms. Wolfe and Mr. Prothero felt that this proposal was not inconsistent with the board's policy. MOTION by Erika Wolfe to approve the revised proposal as originally submitted, and amended to include the use of an opaque background. SECOND: Steve Prothero AYES: Steve McHarris, Steve Prothero & Erika Wolfe NOES : None ABSENT: Beau Shigetomi MOTI O N C A R R I E D Ciry of Orange • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes for November 8, 1995 Page 4 (Item No. 3) DRB 3073 (Recommendation to the Planning Commission) Chapman University Revised landscape & irrigation plans for a parking facility 400 block N. Orange St., W. side Mixed zoning: Residential Duplex (R-2) and Public Frank Radmacher Associates Institution District (P-I); zone change is proposed The applicant was represented Robert Mickelson. These plans have been revised since the proposal was reviewed by the board last July. One more parcel of land was acquired to expand the project site. He indicated that the plan may be changing yet again, as Chapman is presently negotiating to purchase the final parcel, on the corner at Walnut Avenue. If those negotiations are successful, they will return with a revised plan. At this time, they would like to proceed with this proposal in case the other deal falls apart. Barbara Gander (staff): A public hearing was already scheduled before the Planning Commission, so the proposal requires immediate attention, based upon the present components. Steve Prothero recalled no significant concerns from prior review, except that it was not fully detailed at the time. This is only a preliminary plan. He reminded Mr. Mickelson that a final submittal would be required. (Agreed) The location of each light standard has been marked on the plan. He asked whether the applicants had given any consideration to what type of fixture will be used? Mr. Mickelson: Yes, it would the same product used within each of the other parking lots on campus. Steve McHarris has a concern about the perimeter wall. The applicant indicated that this would be the first such wall to be built at Chapman, and the design may be used more commonly throughout the campus. Construction details that we received were pretty basic. It is a continuous run of split-faced block. He would like to see upgrades that would set a positive tone for the university, especially where the perimeter walls will be visible to the public. He suggested that the applicants consider a different material or an applied finish at the pilasters, the use of a capstone or a continuous course of red brick. He also suggested that the applicants look to development at the Claremont Colleges to see what they have done. Ms. Wolfe: With those comments, its appears that the board is ready to recommend initial approval on this preliminary plan. MOTION by Erika Wolfe to recommend the approval of this preliminary landscape plan as submitted, subject to the subsequent approval of the project by Planning Commission and City Council. Final landscape and imgation plans shall be submitted for review and approval by DRB, with construction details on the perimeter walls. SECOND: Steve Prothero AYES: Steve McHarris, Steve Prothero & Erika Wolfe NOES: None ABSENT: Beau Shigetomi MOTI O N C A R R I E D City of Orange • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes for November 8, 1995 Page S (Item No. 4) DRB 3092 The Taco Co. (EI Conejo, Inc.) Landscape and irrigation plans for adrive-through restaurant 1009 N. Tustin St. Limited Business District (C-1) Marco Castellanos Tustin Street Redevelopment Project Area The applicants were represented by Marco Castellanos and John Ahern (Architect). The board recapped concerns expressed at the last DRB meeting, when the applicant was not present. Mr. McHams asked whether the board's comments were transmitted to the applicant. (Yes.) Basically, he questioned whether King Palm trees would be adequate for the parking facility. John Ahern: These trees are very important to the applicant... They have discussed the board's comments from the prior meeting, but they feel that the palms are the right look for the building. Mr. McHarris does not object to the palms. He would like to see them used, but would also rather see leafy crowns among the landscape plan. Mr. Prothero: What are you proposing for the light standards? (They are located within the same planters) Mr. Castellanos: Something ornamental. He would like something that fits into the theme of the architecture. He asked whether it would help to use Pygmy Date palms as a supplement to the planting palette. Mr. Prothero agrees that singular variety of palms does not give much to look at. He, too, would prefer to see trees with leafy crowns. He does not object to the applicant's suggestion that other (Pygmy Date) palms might be used to supplement the planting palette. If only palms trees were utilized, he would suggest a cluster of 3 trees in the planter at the rear end of the parking lot. Mr. McHarris: If the applicant feels so strongly about the issue, he is willing to accept the plan as submitted, with the addition of two palms suggested by Mr. Prothero. Add two more palms in the back planter, 2 15's and a 24-inch box; also something about the sign MOTION by Steve McHarris to approve the proposal subject to the following conditions: (1) Two palm trees will be added in the planter at the rear southeast corner of the parking facility. These may be Pygmy Date palms, if desired by the applicant. Palm trees in this planter will be planted from one 24-inch box and two 15-gallon containers, minimum size. (2) All other palms trees will be planted from a 24-inch box, with a minimum brown trunk height of 8 feet. (3) Sign details will be submitted for review and approval by DRB. SECOND: Erika Wolfe AYES: Steve McHarris, Steve Prothero & Erika Wolfe NOES: None ABSENT: Beau Shigetomi MOTION C A R R I E D City of Orange • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes for November 8, 1995 Page 6 (Item No. 5) DRB 3099 Wild West Center Landscape, architectural improvements, and color scheme for S 8~ A Properties an existing commercial center 789-889 S. Tustin St. Limited Business District (C-1) Kurt Donat, Architect Tustin Street Redevelopment Project Area The applicant was represented by Kurt Donat. From discussion that he recalled, there were 3 items that would be resolved in revision to this proposal: one was to upgrade the landscape plan; the second was to change the sign package to eliminate roof signs from building elevations (which he has done); and third was to study the colors. So, do the landscape plans satisfy the standards that were discussed at the last meeting? Howard Morris (staff): Yes, they satisfy the minimum guidelines that were an issue at that time. He has been out to the site and taken photographs (submitted here) of a screen of Podocarpus trees along the rear property line, which is adjacent to residential property. Mr. Donat: The only remaining item is the colors. He showed the board new drawings that were colored with Prismacolor pencils, rather than ink. He and the property owner have agreed on colors that are better represented here in this illustration, as opposed to the original illustrative plan that was submitted. Ms. Wolfe and Mr. McHarris found the color scheme to be agreeable. The color palette is more subtle. Mr. Prothero felt that the sign presentation was an adequate solution to make the signs more of an architectural feature, than roof-mounted signs, as some now exist (on only one building). Mr. Donat said that plexi-faced foam letters would be used for smaller signs, internally illuminated channel letters for the major tenants. MOTION by Steve Prothero to approve the revised proposal as submitted. SECOND: Steve McHams AYES: Steve McHarris, Steve Prothero & Erika Wolfe NOES: None ABSENT: Beau Shigetomi MOTI O N C A R R I E D Ciry of Orange • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes for November 8, 1995 Page 7 (Item No. 6) DRB 3098 Tract 15210 Comprehensive landscape plan for a residential tract Sheffield-Orange Hills, Ltd. Planned Community District (P-C) The Collaborative West "Parkridge Hills" Community This proposal was presented by John Abel and Dave Schaffer. Mr. Abel pointed out that the landscaping is "infill" to a prior landscaping plan that was implemented with construction of Loma Street. Howard Morns (staff) has some technical comments about the proposal. (1) Plant material quantities should be specified on the plant legend. (2) City-required notes should be listed on landscape and irrigation plans. (3) The landscape plan must indicate recreation trail, according to the Master Plan for Trails (and standards). (4) The landscape plan shall comply with fuel modification and indicate zones according to Fire Department requirements. (5) Final landscape plans shall require plan check and approval by Community Development, Public Works, Fire and Community Services departments. Mr. Abel: These plans are intended for preliminary review. Won't those issues would be addressed in plan check ? (Jim Donovan: Yes) Mr. Prothero had a question about garden walls, perimeter walls, or any other walls... are there any that will be proposed with this project ? John Abel: Only where required to fill in the gaps. He pointed to selected locations on the plan. Jim Donovan (star explained that a perimeter wall was reviewed and approved through DRB about 2 years ago. It is acontinuously-running split-faced concrete block wall, built as a sound barrier with the roadway. The wall sits a great distance back from Loma Street, and the prior landscape plan was intended to cover the area between the wall and the public right of way, primarily for erosion control, but also for the aesthetic improvement. Steve Prothero: What are the city's normal standards for parcels within the tract boundaries ? Howard Morns: Generally, the city requires only that one tree be planted at the front of each residential lot, usually upon completion of construction. The maintenance becomes the responsibility of the homeowner. MOTION by Steve Prothero to approve the proposal as submitted, subject to final review and approval by staff, according to guidelines referenced in discussion. SECOND: Steve McHams AYES: Steve McHarris, Steve Prothero & Erika Wolfe NOES: None ABSENT: Beau Shigetomi MOTI O N C A R R I E D City of Orange • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes for November 8, 1995 Page 8 (Item No. 7) DRB 3106 Recommendation to the Planning Commission Casa Teresa Architectural proposal for a group home 213 N. Olive St. General Business District (C-2) James Richeson, Exec. Director Old Towne District The proposal was presented by Clark Butts (Architect), James Richeson and Mike Lennon. The use of the building was discussed, as a home for unwed mothers. Mr. Lennon said that the facility needs to grow and there is an opportunity to complete this project with donated building materials and volunteer labor. Mr. Richeson explained how the facility is operated; the buildings are connected because there is a need to share some of facilities in the larger building. Mr. Butts said that he has received some feedback from staff, and he believes they have responded to those initial comments through a revised plan. Mr. Lennon added that the use of the building requires a "residential feel and institutional durability." Mr. Butts would like to begin working drawings so that plans may be processed through plan check as soon as possible, and construction would begin in January or February. He only recently learned that among the donated materials would be concrete roofing tiles, so they would like to use those instead of the composite shingles that are shown on the plans. Mr. Prothero asked whether the applicants have considered an addition in the same style as the existing building. He also had a question about parking demands, and expressed concern that if the applicant can't accommodate what is ultimately required by the city, the parking arrangement would have an impact on the layout and architectural design. The site is already quite intensely developed. It is a narrow building site. There is not much room available, a site planning issue with consequences upon the building design. Mr. Butts explained that a variance application was submitted to request a waiver of parking requirements because this is not a typical development. The girls do not own cars, or do not drive. Mr. Richeson reported that there are 2 permanent staff plus one volunteer. He feels that the parking which they have is adequate for their needs. It was their intent to make the building more comfortable for the residents, and they chose the Craftsman style not only because the new structure would replace a smaller Craftsman-style bungalow at this location, but because it is more comforting than the larger brick building. It is institutional and unwelcoming, and that is not the image they want to project to incoming residents. Mr. Lennon added that the architectural style was also influenced by offers to donate specific materials and labor skills. Unlike a normal project, the applicant has no construction budget to speak of, and therefore less control over such considerations. Board members inquired about the original use of the building. Joan Wolff (staff) reported that the building was originally constructed as a hotel. The zoning is commercial. Dan Ryan (Staff) noted for the record that he wrote a letter (dated October 19) to the applicants to identify design issues which he felt were important to resolve before this meeting. He had some recommendations about the architecture. Copies of his letter were distributed to board members. Additionally, he referred to the Secretary of the Interior Standards for new construction as related to historic buildings. These standards discourage new work that would be incompatible with the original building -and the (Continued on a following page) City of Orange • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes for November 8, 1995 Page 9 (Continued from a previous page) neighborhood- in style, materials, size, scale and texture. If buildings are to be connected, there should be a design relationship established. Further, he appreciates the difficulty for anon-profit organization to undertake a project such as this, but the city has an obligation to consider each application according to adopted ordinances, policies and standards. Another group home was completed by a non-profit organization in recent years, the "House of Hope" on South Lemon Street. They were able to revise a plan that satisfied the design standards, and that project was also completed with volunteer labor and donated materials. Mr. Prothero generally concurred with the points in Dan Ryan's letter. The architectural grammar is not exactly appropriate, in light of the applicant's stated Craftsman-style design. The proposal has some elements of a Craftsman style bungalow, but only as affixed to the front. There is not much balance to the front elevation, and the placement of the chimney might be reconsidered. He suggested it be moved to the side, rather than appear at the front. Mr. Butts did not agree that symmetry was part of the grammar of the Craftsman style, and he could probably demonstrate that some had chimneys on the front facade. Mr. Prothero: Yes, but your proposal was formulated with balance, with symmetry to the roofline, a flat facade and a broad porch that might otherwise impose a similar (symmetrical) order to the facade. Craftsman buildings may well have been non-symmetrical, but if not, they would not have a symmetrical roofline and a straight front facade. (Mr. Butts agreed) It was suggested that the chimney be moved from the front of the building to the side. (Staff verified that development standards will allow the chimney in the side yard, to some extent.) Mr. Prothero also suggested that massing on the second floor broken by adding a smaller gable, offset from the peak of the main ridgeline, so as to create a recess on the elevation. Mr. McHarris questioned the shutters on the front elevation, where there is a staircase planned inside the building. He realizes why they are there, but wondered if there was another way to resolve the design problem here (that being a large blank area on the primary elevation). If the shutters must remain, should others be added to the other windows? Mr. Butts sketched modifications on vellum, overlaid on the plan. He felt that the windows would be fixed at present locations because their positions are fixed by the floorplan, but he will attempt to off-set the front elevation to provide a separate plane, modify the roofline to be asymmetrical, and improve upon the Craftsman style. Mr. Ryan suggested that the building might be finished in same material on all four sides, and if the building is Craftsman style, there should be an attempt to define that architectural style on all four of the elevations. Mr. Butts questioned the need to make such improvements on sides that are not visible to the public. Mr. Ryan: The point of the architectural guidelines is to preserve the historic context of the community. The guidelines apply to the entire building. Old Towne is an area of intensive development including larger (Continued on a following page) Ciry of Orange • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes for November 8, 1995 Page 10 (Continued from a previous page) commercial buildings and higher density residential apartments. Each of these buildings has reference to development of adjacent parcels, and as the intensification of land uses is increased, the city standards are intended to make each development relevant to the historic era. It is important that these regulations be applied in a consistent manner. Mr. Prothero: On most projects, the board typically requires that new construction be the same material and architectural style as the existing building. This is a different situation because the original structure is so massive, and the fact that it is adjacent to residential property is a good reason to scale down the building so it is compatible with an adjacent apartment building. The design issues will not be resolved this evening. He knows that the project is committed to a timetable of review. He recommends that discussion be continued until the next meeting, after plans are revised. Ms. Wolff discussed the submittal deadlines, if the Planning Commission hearing is to remain as originally scheduled. Mr. Butts agreed that the project could be continued. Mr. Prothero summarized the recommendations that are key. MOTION by Steven Prothero, to continue the review of this proposal until November 21, 1995. (1) The applicant should modify the primary elevation as volunteered by the architect this evening, with a second gable, a recessed background plane, and an organization to the fagade that is consistent with the entry and window arrangement. (2) The applicant should also make an effort to address the other three elevations in a manner consistent with the style of the building, using the same finish materials on all sides. The board has a strong preference for wood siding, rather than stucco, because it is the more appropriate material for the Craftsman style that was chosen by the applicant, and the horizontal orientation would help break up the uniformity of a building with a large, monotonous surface, such as stucco. At a minimum, the board would like to see wood siding on the upper level of the building, since it would be more prominent from adjacent propitious. (3) The building should also have a (2 x 10", or 2 x 12") belt line or "rain flare" between the first and second floor. (4) The chimney should be moved to the side of the building. (5) The applicant should also consider a new location for the stairs, so that blank walls at the front and rear elevations are eliminated, and more windows included in the design. (6) Additionally, the board suggests that the architect provide a detail or exhibit to show the window locations on the apartment building across the north property line, and the relationship to window openings in the building that is proposed. SECOND: Steve McHarris AYES: Steve McHarris, Steve Prothero & Erika Wolfe NOES: None ABSENT: Beau Shigetomi MOTI O N C A R R I E D