Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-09-81 (SPECIAL MEETING)110117--al (15 DATE: November 5, 1981 inter-Com TO: Honorable Mayor and City Counc:ffl FROM: Bill Huston, City Manager SUBJECT: NOVEMBER 9, 1981 SPECIAL MEETING A Special Meeting of the City Council has been noticed for 5:00 p.m., Monday, November 9, 1981® The meeting will convene as a closed session® Attached for the Council's review are the transcribed excerpts of the October 6, 1980 Redevelopment Agency meeting and the January 5, 1981 Planning Agency meeting concern- ing the 150-160 El Camino Real office building. A model of the building approved by the Agency on January 5, 1981 will be available at the November 9 Special Meeting. At the Special Meeting, I will make recommendations with regard to: 1. Lowering the height of the building by 5-®7 feet. 2. Restricting the height of buildings in areas designated by the City Council to two stories (e.g. El Camino Real), 3. Revising the development review process to ensure there is no confusion or misunderstanding concerning required and approved design standards for any buildings which involve Agency or Council approval. Bill Huston ff City Manager 0 0 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING - 10-6-80 Brotemarkle This is within the Redevelopment and even more specifically, this particular site is within the El Camino Design district. The property was the subject of a pre- vious Use Permit approval by the Planning Agency for a tiled roof, three story office complex which included a plaza walkthru between El Camino and the Pepper- tree Park. The property has now been purchased by other parties who are going to be in the near future to file applications for development and they submitted their preliminary plans which essentially reflected, I think as you can see, a glass modern contemporary motiff in the El Camino Real. After having been through the Public Hearing on the property with this body serving as the Planning Agency on the property at Holt and Irvine concerning a very similar structure that was proposed there and the concern over its appropriateness at that location, it was staff's feeling that this should properly be brought to the Redevelopment Agency for their consideration of design direction and direction for the property owner in that regard. I do believe that Saltarelli Do we not have any implementing resolution of approval that the archectectural style was part of that - part of the El Camino area. Brotemarkle No. Saltarelli Well, the developer stated very distinctly to us at that time that he knew that the plans for the development agency, in fact, I recall asking the developer if he he was planning to build the building or to sell the, sell the map, and that's obviously what he has done. Is that correct? Brotemarkle Correct. This applicant would now be essentially starting over from scratch again with a new Use Permit. Saltarelli Now, does anyone believe that we're getting what we approved in terms of the architecture of this, in keeping with the design plan that we had established when we approved that building. Kennedy Have we communicated with this company and why do they wish to do this? Brotemarkle Correct. I do believe they have a representative in the audience who might wish to address the agency so that they might seek some guidance and direction on this matter. Come forth. Letterman Good afternoon. My name is Ken Letterman. I am representing the architect and ;3 representative of the owner also in the audience. We have a, when we went into this project, we weren't that aware of the constraints of the Redevelopment Agency. The only thing we had was your resolution. We have carried it to this point and have brought it here before you before it goes into Planning Commission and before you have to give a formal approval to more or less run it by you, I guess would be the best term, to get your feelings on it. We have a model of the project to show you the concept that we're proposing, if you'd like to see that. Saltarelli We'd like to see that, certainly. Letterman Okay. Where would you like this? Saltarelli What are we gonna do with that? Uh, perhaps up on Mrs. Kennedy's ledge there. Letterman The concept as we propose is a two-story office building raised over the parking area. The site is very narrow, as I'm sure you are well aware. We've proposed to drive through the underground, it's not underground actually, it's just underneath the building. The parking would be at-grade with the building over that area. We've pulled the building away from both of the sidelines so that the, as you can see, the cars are exposed to the outside light so that the building no longer goes from side property line to side property line as it did before. The, both entries on C Street and El Camino Real are identical. They both have waterfalls in the plaza, that's the blue element at each end of the buildingi and they both have entry plazas then that are also over the parking that would lead you into the first level of the building. Kennedy How many feet high is it? Letterman Thirty feet, I believe it is, if my memory serves me right. It's less than 35. Saltarelli (Incomprehensible) the parking is underground, or at-grade parking? 0 0 Letterman At-grade, but under the building. Kennedy (Incomprehensible). Letterman Yeah, yeah, less than 35, anyway. I think it's 30 feet. There are some dimen- sions on there, we can't read them from here though. Saltarelli It doesn't look as imposing on the model as it does on the paper, does it? Essen- tially, the narrow portion of the building will be facing C Street and El Camino? Letterman Yes, sir. Saltarelli And that you have a large landscaped area with the waterfall facing so that the immensity of the windows will be to the side lots, behind the motel. Letterman That's correct. Sharp Uh, Mr.? Saltarelli Council? Sharp I'm wondering if the architect had had an opportunity to review ordinance 510 and is, was, familiar with the paragraph that's, that's quoted here because it doesn't seem that the design solution necessarily addressed itself to that, to that para- graph. Did you have these standards at hand before you began the design? Letterman Unfortunately, I personally didn't until we had submitted it, I saw a copy of the ordinance. Whether or not we asked, I can't answer that question at the proper time. But, when I picked up the ordinance we had submitted the drawings, and the ordinance, the ordinance as I recall, doesn't relate to a specific style, it just gives some general, very general guidelines. Sharp That's correct. But your solution is such a radical departure from, you know, no matter how you interpreted that paragraph, one would not read that it precipitated the kind of vocabulary that you have there. Letterman To the best of my knowledge, we were not aware of the resolution in the way it was stated when we designed the building. We made some initial inquiries with the Planning staff, our design staff did, and most of the paperwork came across my desk when that gentleman came back to the office, and there was no resolution in his paperwork, so. Letterman I understand perfectly. I live in Mission Viejo. Saltarelli Okay. I don't know how the rest of the Council feels. But myself, I'm not as concerned as I was when I saw this package originally, but I would still think that something, if it is possible, to be done to from a design point of view that could make some modifications to, particularly the area that faces El Camino. Sharp Mr. Chairman, I think you need to recall also, though, that at least the existing structures on the north and south of this, which are then parellel to the long elevations, are predominantly one-story. And so you're going to be able to see above those a story and a half, at least. Saltarelli Sharp Saltarelli Sharp Letterman ZMMM IM M But the motel there, I think, is two stories that runs along the one side. Yeah, that's two there. There is a little one-story building on El Camino Real, I think, that leads into the motel. Yeah (incomprehensible). Letterman There is a one-story converted store, if you will, on El Camino Real that leads into the two-story motel area. The motel actually backs right up almost on the property line. And then, on the other side of the property are some older homes. I don't know what your intentions are there, but they're really old homes and that's, that's all that's on that block. Hoesterey Through the chair. Sharp Another question I have is, is this El Camino Real elevation drawing, what, that's, that's what the building was going to look like when some other develop, we were working with some other developer, is that, yeah. Saltarelli Correct. Sharp Okay. Saltarelli But that did utilize the entire width of the property. Sharp Yes, I remember, I remember. Saltarelli . . . It was something that we were concerned with at the time and I like this, the width of this much better. Ron, do you have. .? Hoesterey Yeah, basically I think we have picked a theme for the downtown area, and the Redevelopment Agency itself is going to be spending millions in that area to main- tain that theme, so I think if a redesign could be done to be in conformity of that theme, it would be in the best interests of a long-range for the community. Edgar I would have to agree with that, and reindicate that, you know, the treatment is a facade. It doesn't, it's not something that's structural. But structurally you've achieved everything that looks like a very efficient utilization of the property, and yet, it's the appearance that is of concern. Kennedy Through the chair. Saltarelli Yes. =12 9 0 Brotemarkle It just depends on how early American you want. Letterman Well, we're willing to do, you know, within reason the things that would make this building a part of the community. obviously, the owner has no intention of coming in here and forcing his way into the community. This building's going to be here awhile. I guess what we're asking, we're asking of you today is some kind of direction. If this doesn't fit, what do you conceive belongs there? Saltarelli Do you want individual opinions? Letterman Uh, you know, what, what kinds of things would you then be looking for when we make the formal presentation? Saltarelli Myself, I like the shape of it, the design of it. I think the landscaping treatment you have in the front with the waterfalls on each side is very pleasing. Perhaps if you had a treatment of bricks around the side, as opposed to as much glass and stuff like that it would soften it to me and probably still fit in with any general theme. This is my view. You could ask everybody else what their thoughts are. Saltarelli Well, there's a good example right down the street where the Chastain Art Gallery is, where the old City Hall property was, it's a very brand new modern building. But yet they used alot of slumpstone and stucco, and Letterman It fit in with the buildings. Saltarelli Yeah, yet that's certainly not Spanish, it's certainly not early American, it's certainly not alot of those things, but it. . Letterman So, it's not the style necessarily, it's more material use? Sharp Just say something, anyhow. Well, it seems to me that we did work for some time with an earlier designer on the use of this property. Am I correct? And they did come up with something that looks like what we have on this, it's not numbered, but it's this one, you know, and we worked sometime on that, and I'm wondering why the radical departure at this point by another developer who has come in and 0 0 Saltarelli I think this one had undergrounded parking. Sharp Yes, it did. The other one did. Letterman The other one had underground parking. It was also designed to, for a single tenant, primary single tenant usage. Saltarelli I had clot of good concerns with this one, frankly, because of the amount of square footage that was in there and the amount of traffic generation, and I don't remember what the total square footage of this one was, but is yours less? Letterman A little bit. Not significantly, but, uh . . Saltarelli But for multi-tenant use? Letterman But for multi-tenant use, yes. That is really the primary reason for the, the change, if you will. We have, there's a new owner on the property and the single-owner concept, single-user concept was no longer valid. Letterman Yes, I think so. And we certainly appreciate you taking your time to take a look at it. Saltarelli Thank you very much for your cooperation. We appreciate it. Okay, uh, that com- pletes the Redevelopment Agency. A motion to adjourn back to the City Council is appropriate. Edgar Move it. 0 0 PLANNING AGENCY MEETING - 1-5-81 Edgar our first item is a public hearing on Use Permit 81-1. Uh, Mike will you. . . Edgar Are there any technical questions of staff? Hearing none, I'll open the public hearing and anyone wishing to speak either for or against this issue, please come to the podium and state your name and address and be heard. Edgar Now we don't know what the timing might be. Mr. Brotemarkle,® could you respond to that? 9 0 Edgar Does that, ah, address your . . Sharp Allright, then your recommendation is to authorize, as I understand it now, is that the County Fire Marshal (incomprehensible). 0 0 Brotemarkle I would say the only thing that I would do is to, if the, in terms of the sprin- kler system is to just say installation of a fire protection system with plans approved by the Orange County Fire Marshal's office. That probably would simplify the matters and then if it were decided to change it later it would just have to be plans approved by the Orange County Fire Marshal. Edgar Are there any other questions, any other comments, you want to make at this time? Letterman No, sir. Thank you very much. Edgar Thank you. Is there anyone else that wishes to speak at this time in the open public hearing. Hearing none, I'll close the public hearing and open the item for Agency discussion. Kennedy I have a couple of questions. Uh, how were the surrounding property owners noti- fied? Brotemarkle Uh, in the case of this, all property owners, which is a Use Permit, and all prop- erty owners within a 300 ft. radius were notified by mail. Kennedy By mail, and have you had any reactions at all? Brotemarkle We've had no reactions directly to this proposal, but more to the potential rezon- ing of some of the R-2 properties to commercial. Edgar Let me make one comment, Ursula. There is a letter that Mrs. Jenny Flaherty wrote and let me just read the, uh, I just got it this very second, and her words are "I trust that the new building on El Camino Real and C Street will not, repeat not, clutter El Camino Real with parked cars or employees as occurs with all the other new buildings, most specifically, El Camino Real and Second Street." And so she's voicing concern over the potential parking on the structure. Kennedy Um, another question of staff. In the recommendation from staff, staff approves the parking layout as long as the parking, underground parking, is under the con- trol of a security gate, or in other words, it will not be used by the general public. Brotemarkle It's under the direct control of the building management. It may be open to the general public during working hours, but it would be under their direct control rather than just . . Kennedy But they're going to control it either through security gates or through some measure of control. How, it's not included in the resolution, but I saw that this is part of the conditions of approval, unless I missed it. Brotemarkle It's really been more policy that in underground parking structures, since they are not as accessible to the general public, that they've been deemed to be more secure than in general. anyway. And we really have'nt ever adopted it as a condi- tion that they be totally secure in that nature. Kennedy Yeah, I'm more concerned about what happens five years later when, perhaps, some- body else buys the building. Since obviously it's a little tighter than alot of things we approve, uh, would an abuse occur? Do you think it's adequate the way it is? Brotemarkle We believe that it's adequate the way it is with the one-way circulation system, in the circulation system and the herringbone parking that we don't need a wider aisle width of this particular item. But this parking is basically very similar to the plan that was proposed by Mr. Hackenberry which was designed with, only the aisle widths have been widened. I do believe at that time we approved approxi- mately 14 ft. width instead of 17. Kennedy And one last question. They are short four parking spaces. Uh, in the studies we've done, we have found that our, if my memory serves me, we have found that our parking requirements are enough so that that may not be a problem. I'm always hesitant to approve something that is underparked. Can you react to that? I assume it's going to be a professional building. -3- Kennedy And has every advantage been taken of the new trend toward smaller cars? Brotemarkle As a matter of fact, we've been taking maxim tun advantage of the trend toward smaller cars. Brotemarkle I'll have to defer to Bob on that question. Ledendecker (Inaudible, not speaking into microphone at podium.) Sharp So that would happen prior to the time that you gave final approval and issued an occupancy permit on this project. Ledendecker (Inaudible) Sharp Is this in District 1 or 7? Ledendecker (Inaudible) Sharp Thank you. That's not all my motion, but I am now satisfied with it. The only correction to 1938 would be the word "protection" to replace the word "sprinklers" on the first page. Edgar Is there a second? Kennedy I'll second. Under discussion. The way I'm going to vote is going to be assisted by what staff can tell me about the City's attempt to find some parking in the downtown area. Could someone bring me up to date on that? ���, -S-