Loading...
1994-07-13 Final DRC MinutesCity of Orange Design Review Board M I N U T E S CONFERENCE Room "C" WEDNESDAY JULY 13, 1994 Board Members Present: Robert Hornacek David Kent Steven Prothero Beau Shigetomi (Chairman) Erika Wolfe Staff in Attendance: James Donovan, Associate Planner Howard Morris, Landscape Coordinator Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner -Historic Preservation Administrative Session - 4: 30 P.M. Item 1) Review minutes from June 15, 1994, and preview applications on this agenda. One board member did not receive a copy of the minutes in her packet. The last meeting was postponed, and it has been a while since other board members read their drafts. The staff will reprint the minutes from June 15, and distribute them before the next meeting. All items on this agenda have been continued from July 6, 1994. Regular Session - S: 00 P.M. City of Orange Design Review Board Minutes July 13, 1994 Page 2 Final Reviews - Item 2) DRB 2974 - ST. JOSEPH'S HOSPITAL (DEREVERE 8 ASSOCIATES) LA VETA AVE. AT PEPPER ST. Pedestrian overcrossing to connect hospital and outpatient pavilion. Plans were presented by Mr. DeRevere. The architect stated that final plans remain largely the same as originally proposed. The board felt that horizontal elements of the structure are not substantiated. The original proposal has details that provide more of a vertical emphasis. Structural segments are divided (or interrupted) by columns that support the covering of the overpass. More should be done to define the bridge as a continuous form, lengthwise. The architect suggested a modification using tracing paper over bridge elevations (page A 1.2). The vertical elements will be shortened along the base of walkway, so more of the rail surface is exposed. Motion: to approve the proposal, subject to the modification discussed during the course of review. Landscape plans must also be revised and submitted to staff for final approval. by: Robert Hornacek 2nd by: David Kent ayes: Robert Hornacek, David Kent, Steven Prothero, Beau Shigetomi, & Erika Wolfe no: None MOTION CARRIED Staff Recommendations & Requirements - Final landscape plans have not been submitted to staff for review and approval. The following landscape recommendations are required from the minutes of the May 4, 1994, DRB meeting: Sheet L-1, Irrigation Plan; provide the following note: NOTIFY COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT, (714) 744-5596, FOR IRRIGATION MAIN LINE PRESSURE TEST AND COVERAGE TEST. 48-HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED. Sheet L-2, Planting Plan; Changing drawing title to read: "Planting Plan," and indicate plant material sizes on plan, per DRB requirements. City of Orange Design Review Board Minutes July 13, 1994 Page 3 New Proposals - Item 3) DRB 2880 -COUNTRY HARVEST BUFFET 1875 N. TUSTIN ST. (NORTH OF TAFT, SOUTH OF GROVE AVE.) Wall signs proposed through variance application for height exceeding 24 inches; C-TR, or Limited Business District, Tustin Street Redevelopment Project Area. The application vas presented by Mike Schneider of Michael Graphics. The board questioned three specific aspects of the project: 1. Is the 50-inch overall height of these wall signs necessary, as proposed? 2. Is the letter style appropriate? 3. Are the diagonal corner walls a good (and legal) location for these signs? The staff advised that the sign ordinance allows a maximum number of one wall sign per building elevation, and further states that no building shall be considered to have more than four walls. Since the applicant proposes only three signs, and the signs v<~ould not exceed the display area that is permitted by code, the staff considers the proposal legal (except for extra height, as requested through variance). The applicant's representative stated that the channel-lettered sign is based upon a corporate trademark, and the applicant needs the greater height for visibility. The board replied that clarity is a larger part of the problem, as the applicant has selected a letter style that is difficult to read. The board recommends that: 1. The overall height of the signs should be reduced to not more than 42 inches. 2. The app]icant should further consider a change to the letter style. Perhaps "Country Harvest" may be displayed as proposed, and the word "Buffet" reduced and displayed in a different text. (One board member felt that signs should not be permitted at corner locations, and should instead be limited to the central portion of walls that are parallel to front and side property lines. Other board members were reminded of a similar proposal to display walls at a 45-degree angle from the public right of way, which was not approved.) Motion: to continue the review of this item until revised plans are submitted. The applicant must also prepare a plan that shows each wall as a separate elevation, rather than at an angle. Plans shall also be accurately scaled. by: Robert Hornacek 2nd by: Erika Wolfe ayes: Robert Hornacek, David Kent, & Erika Wolfe no: Bcau Shigetomi abstain: Steven Prothero MOTION CARRIED City of Orange Design Review Board Minutes July 13, 1994 Page 4 Item 4) DRB 2983 -PACIFIC RIDGE PARTNERS TRACT 14858 ("THE BLUFFS") Preliminary site plan, building elevations and landscaping plan for asingle-family residential tract; "Southridge" Planned Community. During the administrative session, the staff reported that the Environmental Review Board considers the proposal to be different in substance from what was originally approved by Planning Commission. The units are somewhat larger, and common open space and recreation areas have been reduced in order to devote more open space to private yards. The street configuration has also changed. Because of these modifications to the plan, the board may expect the plan to be modified before the project is finally approved. (A revised proposal may require the Planning Commission's reconsideration.) The board agreed that they had no concerns about the proposed elevations for residential buildings. One board member expressed an appreciation for the attempt to address the street exposure along Via Escola. Motion: to approve building elevations as submitted; landscaping plans shall be revised according to the following conditions: A) Replace wood fences s~~ith block walls where visible from entry points, as indicated by red pen upon plans on file at the Community Development Department. B) Block «-alls should also replace wrought-iron fence around continunity recreation area. C) The size of trees shall be upgraded at entries: 3 in median at eastern driveway, 2 at sides of drive approach on west. Size shall be 48-inch box, rather than 36-inch. D) All other trees, minimum size: 15-gallon, per city landscape requirements. by: Erika Wolfe 2nd by: Robert Hornacek ayes: Robert Hornacek, David Kent, Steven Prothero, Beau Shigetomi, & Erika Wolfe no: None MOTION CARRIED Staff Recommendations & Requirements - • Submit final landscape and imgation plans to staff prior to issuance of a building permit. • Provide landscape and inspection notes, as required by Community Services Department. • Any irrigation crossings under public rights of way shall be shown on Street Improvement Plans. City of Orange Design Review Board Minutes July 13, 1994 Page S Item S) DRB 2984 -EUGENE 1. SALTZER, M.D. 250-264 S. TUSTIN ST. (NW CORNER AT WASHINGTON AVE.) Medical-professional office building; C-1, or Limited Business District, Tustin Street Redevelopment Project Area. Pursuant to the City Council's instructions, this item was advertized to all those who voiced concerns about the subsequent development of this property during a public hearing on June 21, 1994, regarding a general plan amendment and a zone change for the two existing residential parcels. A presentation was made by Doug Martin, the project's designer. Photographs of the neighborhood were submitted for the board's review. Integration of the proposed development was discussed. Neighbors grew anxious to participate in the discussion. Concerns were expressed as follows: • .The driveway should be on Tustin Street, not Washington Avenue. • There is already too much traffic on Washington. This is a residential street; the driveway presents an added safety hazard for residents. The building does not face Tustin Street, but faces residential development along the south edge of Washington Avenue. • The buildings should be fumigated before they are demolished, to avoid infestation of adjacent properties by pests that are displaced when demolition begins. The building should be rotated 90 degrees and placed along the rear edge of the property; neighbors adjacent to that property line disagreed. The site plan should be reversed so that the building is located as close as possible to Washington Avenue; residents on the south side of Washington disagreed. The board maintained a lengthy discussion with neighbors. The board explained that the site plan has been minutely detailed to specifications that are mandated by zoning ordinance, and the designer does not have the flexibility to make adjustments without comprehensive revisions being required. For example: the side yard along Washington cannot be reduced any less; a minimum number of parking spaces must be provided for the size of the building, and none may be removed; the rear yard that is required in an O-P zone would consume much of the land that is otherwise available for development. The zoning ordinance serves as something of a guarantee in that a development will normally be permitted so long as the developer meets all requirements, including approval by DRB. The board's function is to consider those issues that are related to aesthetics: primarily building elevations and landscaping. While the board is authorized to make decisions that pertain to site planning, any decision to modify the site plan should be related to the board's mandate to promote their aesthetic aims. At this time, the site plan has been reviewed and approved by the city's Environmental Review Board. The Design Review Board feels that it would not be wise to require any changes that would confound the objectives of the traffic engineering staff. (CONTINUED ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE) City of Orange Design Review Board Minutes July 13, 1994 Page 6 Item S) DRB 2984 - (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) One member of the board implied that the overall quality of the design is sufficient for approval. The building is "pretty." Neighbors agreed that the proposal had its merits; they were generally pleased by the appearance of the building. The primary concern is about the driveway. Perhaps the doctor should work out an access agreement with the other doctor on the north side of the property line, to share the existing driveway. The board suggested that the neighbors discuss site access requirements with the City Traffic Engineer, or his staff, and that one of the neighbors contact the adjacent property owner to see whether a reciprocal access agreement is feasible. If access to the site is changed, it could affect the entire proposal, and the board would have to consider ho~v those modifications affect the plan. Doug Martin volunteered to continue this meeting until next Wednesday. The board has a regular meeting scheduled on July 20. This item will be added to the agenda. Meanwhile, the neighbors will discuss their concerns with staff. The staff explained that if the traffic engineers do not allow changes to access on the site plan, and the board were to approve the proposal as originally submitted, the neighbors may appeal the board's decision. Conversely, the applicant may file an appeal, if necessary. Motion: Review will be continued until July 20, 1994. by: Erika Wolfe 2nd by: David Kent ayes: Robert Hornacek, David Kent, Steven Prothero, Beau Shigetomi, & Erika Wolfe no: None MOTION CARR/ED Staff Recommendations & Requirements - • Landscape plan is incomplete. Planting legend and irrigation plan is missing. • Submit landscape and irrigation plans to the Design Review Board, per city requirements. Adjournment: 7:1 S P.M.