32:
MINUTES REGULAR
MEETING OF THE
ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW BOARD
MONDAY, MAY 16, 2005
|
City Council Chambers, Room 213 |
|
7:00 PM |
|
1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting
was called to order at 7:07 p.m.
2. ROLL
CALL: Present: Joan Charles, Chairperson
William Adams, Vice-Chairperson
Rodolfo Alvarez
Tania Fischer
Michael Folonis
Lynn Robb
Also Present: Councilmember Bloom (arrival 7:20; departure 9:00 p.m.)
Barbara Kaplan, Landmark Commissioner (departure 7:50 p.m.)
Reza Tabatabai, Associate Planner
Absent: Edouard Mimieux
3. SECRETARY’S REPORT: Reza Tabatabai informed the Board that the
next joint session meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission for the Shape
The Future Project will be on June 28, 2005 to review the Opportunities and
Challenges Report which will identify the opportunities and constraints that
will be used to analyze the land use and circulation elements. This report will provide further background
information and identify regional trends, latest innovations, theories and
topic areas that are relevant to land use, economics, transportation, and
environmental resources. This report
details the opportunities to further the communities’ vision and identify
anticipated challenges to achieve those visions.
Reza Tabatabai informed the
Board that the Architectural Review Board applications now include language to
inform applicants of the need for a demolition permit to be reviewed by
Landmark’s Commission, if the structure is over 40 years old.
Reza Tabatabai informed the
Board that the Architectural Review Board Staff Resolution will be presented to
the Board again in June to focus on the comments of the meeting of May 2, 2004.
Stephanie Reich informed
the Board that Reza Tabatabai will be continuing his education at graduate
school and will leaving the City of
4. APPROVAL
OF MINUTES:
a. April, 18, 2005
Chairperson Charles made the motion to approve the
minutes with two corrections. Board
member Fischer seconded the motion that was approved by voice vote.
ACTION:
APPROVED AS SUBMITTED with two corrections to page 7 paragraph 8 to read,
“Boardmember Folonis stated that the
interior courtyard redesign that was just submitted by the applicant is
improved with landscaping, and interactive space but expressed concern with
regard to window location, and inconsistencies between the exterior elevations,
plans, and renderings.”
Page
5, paragraph 2 to read, “Boardmember
Alvarez received an invitation to visit the offices of Community Corporation to
review the model for Item 11.4, 04-ARB-562,
5. PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND INPUT: None.
6. EX PARTE COMMUNICATION: None.
7. REVIEWS: Public input permitted.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. New Submissions:
7.1 *ARB
05-005,
Approval of Building Design, Colors and Materials
ACTION: APPROVED ON REGULAR CALENDAR WITH REVISED CONDITIONS
Peter Schechter was present to discuss the project.
Chairperson Charles closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Kaplan expressed concern regarding the matching of the roofing choice, handrail detail, siding width, eaves detail, identical light fixtures, brick, and chimney, as too closely matching of the building. There is a need to create variations in detail to clearly identify exactly where the addition starts as distinct from the existing structure, since the structure is listed on the Historic Resources Inventory. Commissioner Kaplan stated that changes in the roof eaves and balcony rail would be sufficient to provide the necessary differentiation.
Chairperson Charles stated that the bridge makes a separation between the two buildings and creates separation and differentiation.
Boardmember Adams stated that there are considerable differences in the massing, roof slopes, and window configurations that distinguish the historical qualities of the additional structure.
Boardmember Folonis stated that the windows are different in location and proportion and the Secretary of Interior standards can be successfully applied to this project.
Boardmember Alvarez stated that the differentiation is minimal but clear, and the addition is compatible with the existing structure, and stated his support of the project.
Boardmember Robb stated that the Landmark’s Commission interpretation should be a valued past experience and referenced for these types of applications and set a precedent for this type of review.
Boardmember Robb made the motion to approve the project with the following conditions:
1. This
approval shall expire when the administrative or discretionary entitlements
previously granted by an associated approval have lapsed. If no such permit has
been issued, this approval shall expire one year from its effective date,
unless appealed or otherwise implemented pursuant to applicable municipal
regulations.
2. Prior to the
issuance of a building permit, for all landscape areas including any use of
landscape material in the driveway and especially the rear yard landscaping,
the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the City’s Water Conservation
Ordinance subject to staff approval.
The applicant shall submit a landscape plan that includes plant
materials and or rear property line wall selected for use as a vertical screen
of the first floor from the property to the west.
3. Prior to the issuance of a building
permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that the plans comply with all
applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
Significant changes to a project’s design shall require review and approval
of the Architectural Review Board. Minor
changes may be approved administratively pursuant to all applicable guidelines.
4. Prior to
issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall work with staff to provided
further differentiation between the existing structure on the front of the
property and the proposed structure at the rear of the property.
Boardmember Folonis seconded the motion that was approved by voice vote.
7.2 ARB05-114, 1907 &
ACTION: APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR WITH STAFF CONDITIONS
7.3 **ARB05-140,
Approval of Façade Design, Colors, Materials, Sign Plan
ACTION: APPROVED ON REGULAR CALENDAR WITH STAFF CONDITIONS
Mary Ryan was present to discuss the project.
Chairperson Charles closed the public hearing.
Boardmember Folonis stated that he had removed this from the Consent Calendar to point out how this application clearly demonstrates the existing and proposed and should be used as a standard for future applications.
Vice-Chairperson Adams stated that the proposal is a very beautiful presentation.
Boardmember Folonis made the motion to approve the project that was seconded by Boardmember Fischer.
7.4 ARB05-156,
Approval of Building Design, Colors, Materials, and
Sign Plan
ACTION: APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR WITH STAF CONDITIONS
B. REGULAR CALENDAR
a. Re-Submissions
7.5 **ARB-04-561,
Approval of Building Design, Colors, and Materials
ACTION: CONTINUED AT THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST
Deadmi Deodovski was present to discuss the project.
One chit was submitted, Amy Glad.
Chairperson Charles closed the public hearing.
Boardmember Folonis expressed concern regarding the inconsistencies between the renderings, the exterior elevations, and project plans. The details on the south elevation are inconsistent with regards to the balconies and their relationship to the windows and geometry of the building. The elevations do not have the same character as the renderings. The street elevation lacks imagination in articulation, color and massing.
Boardmember Robb concurs with Boardmember Folonis and experienced difficultly in interpreting the plans. Any future application should eliminate such confusion. The front elevation should contain more rhythm and clearly identify project design style.
Vice-Chairperson Adams stated the shadowing shown on the elevations is exaggerated. Vice-Chairperson Adams also stated that the building is flat and the upper cubic volume is heavy and lacks integration with overall design.
Boardmember Alvarez stated that the application appears like a box and has no distinguishing or appealing architectural features.
Boardmember Robb noted that the floor level at three feet about the existing grade does not appear pedestrian oriented.
Chairperson
Charles stated that the proposal is difficult to understand and the style is
undefined. The transition in relation to
the adjacent structure is not well designed defined and the project is towering
to the south and does not relate to other structures on
Boardmember Folonis recommended applicant to work with neighbor and address concerns.
Mr. Deodovski asked for a continuance.
Chairperson Charles made the motion to continue the project. Boardmember Robb seconded the motion that was approved by voice vote.
b. New Submissions:
7.6 **ARB04-501,
Approval of Building Design, Colors, Materials, and Landscape Plans
ACTION: APPROVED ON REGULAR CALENDAR WITH STAFF CONDITIONS
Hamid Farkhondeh was present to discuss the project.
Chairperson Charles closed the public hearing.
Boardmember Alvarez stated that the project is well articulated and pedestrian oriented.
Vice-Chairperson Adams stated his support of the project. Vice-Chairperson Adams also stated that while in the past he expressed concern regarding elastomeric paint in projects that should not have a sheen, and applied by trowel, to have a mottled appearance to deliver an aged, natural quality, in this instance the elastomeric paint may work with white color and contemporary design. This project is well put together and conforms to the R2 requirements and easy to understand and the third story is relatively unobtrusive.
Chairperson Charles stated that this application responds nicely to the street.
Boardmember Fischer made the motion to approve the project. Boardmember Alvarez seconded the motion that was approved by voice vote.
7.7 **ARB04-513,
Approval o Building Design, Colors, and Materials
ACTION: CONTINUED AT THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST
Richard Kolbu was present to discuss the project.
Chairperson Charles closed the public hearing.
Boardmember Folonis stated that the proposed matching of existing structure is problematic. The current building lacks articulation, detail, and imagination and the proposal lacks the same. Boardmember Folonis also stated that there are missed opportunities with this application.
Boardmember Alvarez concurs with Boardmember Folonis and stated that this proposal is a missed opportunity to work with the new part of the building.
Boardmember Fischer clarified the intention of the applicant clarifying that the applicant is limited by budget.
Boardmember Robb stated that the proposal provides the opportunity to take the existing simple elements and deliver quality character to the addition with well composed design even with simple elements provided, within perimeters of client’s budget.
Boardmember Adams stated that the existing perimeters of materials and details, should be played in a creative way and increase livability to make a more interesting expansion without affecting the budget.
Chairperson Charles stated that the existing structure and the proposal are modest and the addition is in the rear and difficult to see.
Mr. Kolbu asked for a continuance.
Chairperson Charles made the motion to continue the item.
Boardmember Folonis seconded the motion that was approved by voice vote.
Chairperson
Charles made a motion to combine Items, 7.8, 05-ARB-128,
7.8 ARB05-128,
Approval of Sign Plans
ACTION: APPROVED ON REGULAR CALENDAR WITH STAFF CONDITIONS
Chris Polster was present to discuss the project.
Chairperson Charles closed the public hearing.
Boardmember Folonis stated his support of signs that comply with the Sign Code and stated his support of this application with conditions to adhere to the Sign Code.
Boardmember Robb concurs with Boardmember Folonis.
Boardmember Alvarez concurs with Boardmembers Folonis and Robb but expressed concern with the applicant’s presentation. Boardmember Alvarez also stated that the proposed monument sign is oversized and not well defined and the presentation is minimal.
Chairperson
Charles polled the Board regarding 05-ARB-129,
Boardmember Folonis made a friendly suggestion to the applicant to review with the owner any restrictions with the corporate name and logo.
Chairperson
Charles polled the Board regarding 05-ARB-128,
Boardmember Robb stated that the brushed stainless background will disappear into the building, and the unification and simplicity reduce the mass of the proposed signage.
Boardmember
Folonis made the motion to approve the 05-ARB-128,
7.9 ARB05-129,
Approval of Sign Plans
ACTION: APPROVED ON REGULAR CALENDAR WITH STAFF CONDITIONS
7.10 ARB05-130,
Approval of Sign Plans
ACTION: APPROVED ON REGULAR CALENDAR WITH STAFF CONDITIONS
8. DISCUSSION:
a. Discussion of potential recommendations
for Shape the Future Project Team (Land Use Element/ Zoning Ordinance Project)
Chairperson Charles
requested copies of the Shape the Future Report of the City Council and
Planning Commission joint meeting scheduled for June 28, 2005.
Chairperson Charles
requested a copy of the Challenges and Opportunities report that was accepted
at the Planning Commission meeting of May 4, 2005.
Chairperson
Charles suggested that the subcommittee convene to prepare a preliminary
report.
b. Update
from the Architectural Review Board Liaison to the Planning Commission (MF)
Boardmember
Folonis has no update at this time.
9. FUTURE
BOARD AGENDA ITEMS: None.
10 REFERRALS TO STAFF: Boardmember Folonis referred to staff the
signs at
11. ADJOURNMENT: Chairperson Charles made the motion to adjourn at 9:25 p.m. that was seconded by Boardmember.
05-26-05
MB