HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-10-27 City Council (27)City of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
TO:
FROM:
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
IZ
CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: Planning and
Community Environment
AGENDA DATE: October 27, 1997 CMR:435:97
SUBJECT:480-496 UNIVERSITY AVENUE (PRESIDENT APARTMENTS):
APPEAL OF AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
CONDITION OF APPROVAL
RECOMMENDATION
The Architectural Review Board (ARB), Historic Resources Board (HRB) and staff
recommend that the City Council approve the project based on the attached fmdings and
uphold the condition of approval to paint the wood spindles located above the awnings a dark
green or the dark brown color which is identical in color to the railings and trim. on the
existing building, thereby recommending denial of the applicant’s appeal.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Apphcation was made to the HRB and the ARB to allow new awnings, associated signage
program for retail tenants and a wrought iron gate to an alley between the President
Apartments and the Garden Court Hotel. For a complete description of the application,
please refer to the ARB staff report dated May 15, 1997 (see Attachment 4).
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
The ARB approved the project and included a condition of approval topaint the wood
spindles above the proposed awning a contrasting color. The ARB has the authority to
review the wood spindles because they are adjacent to, and integrated with, the proposed
awnings. The ARB condition of approval allows the proposal to maintain visual integrity
and assure the compatibility of the proposed project’s design with its site and surroundings.
This in accordance with PAMC 16.48.120 Standards for Review:
(16) Such other features as affect the design and ultimate appearance of the
work, as determined by the architectural review board The architectural
board may recommend requirements which are ~nbre restrictive than the
CMR:435:97 Page 1 of 4
maximum regulations set forth in.Title 16 and!or Title 18 of this Code, when
it concludes such requirements are necessary:
(1) To promote the internal integrity of the design of the project;
(2) To assure compatibility of the proposed project’s design with its
site and surroundings.
The applicant indicated that a condition of approval to paint the wood spindles a dark green
color was not historically accurate and provided black and white photographs to illustrate
that the wood spindles originally did not have a dark contrasting color. The ARB determined
that the issue of historic accuracy was really not relevant because the current color scheme
was completely unrelated to the original colors. Therefore, the spindle color did not have
to match the wall color on the basis of what may have been originally done to the building.
The ARB came to the conclusion that painting the wood spindles a dark green color might
not be historically correct but would be more consistent with the current color scheme. Also,
the wood spindles are an architectural feature that should be highlighted on the building.
The ARB modified the condition that would allow an alternative color which would be the
dark brown color which currently exists on the railings and trim of the existing building.
BOARD ACTION
On May 7, 1997, the HRB reviewed the application and did not recommend approval of the
project and advised the applicant to restudy the possibilities of incorporating a retractable
awning system, locating tenant signage on the flap of the awning and strongly recommended
that the applicant paint the wood spindles above the awnings a "historic" brown color.
On May 15, 1997, the ARB reviewed this project and continued it for further consideration
of the following items that were to be reviewed by the HRB and ARB: 1) signage, possibly
to be on the front flap of the awning; 2) more detail regarding the wrought iron bracket
support; 3) the spindles to be painted "historic brown"; and 4) indicate size of bars for
wrought iron gate. The ARB indicated support for the color of the awnings and either
retractable or nonretractable awnings.
On June 18, 1997, the HRB reviewed the revised bracket detail for the fixed awning. Also,
there was a discussion that chocolate brown paint for the spindles would not be appropriate
for the building because of the yellow color scheme on the existing building. The ARB
voted for the application to return to HRB for a restudy of an awnin" g that is retractable, or
a fixed awning with bracket design that is: a) completely simplified in design, or b) restates
a period design feature that already exists on the building, and the color of the spindles be
made a darker color as recommended by the designer.
On July 2, 1997, the HRB reviewed a revised detail of the support bracket for the awning.
The applicant, Charles Holman, stated that the owner did not want to paint the spindles and
CMR:435:97 Page 2 of 4
that the existing spindle color would remain. The HRB voted to recommend approval to the
ARB with a condition to paint the wood spindles a contrasting color.
On July 3, 1997, the ARB reviewed and approved the revisions to the application with the
following conditions:
1.Approve bracket detail, dated June 11, 1997, that incorporates a "Curly-Cue"
rod.
2.The wood spindles be painted a dark green color.
3.Remove the finials on top of the gate in the alley.
On September 18, 1997, the ARB reviewed the request from Chris Dresse!, building owner,
to remove the condition of approval to paint the wood spindles a dark green. He presented
old photographs to illustrate that the wood spindles were not painted a contrasting color.
Dennis Backlund, the HR representative, stated that the HRB recommended a condition for
a contrasting color, but did not specify the green color as noted in the ARB condition. As
a member of the public, Dennis Backlund, presented a historic overview of the President
Apartments building and the use of accent colors for Spanish Colonial buildings and his
conclusion was that the dark green color was not appropriate.
The ARB voted for the condition to remain, with the following modifications:
The color of the wood spindles may be the previously approved dark green or
the dark brown color of the railings and trim on the existing buildings.
Approve bracket detail, dated June 11, 1997, that incorporates a "Curly-Cue"
rod.
3. Remove the fmials on top of the gate in the alley.
ATTACHMENTS
1.ARB Findings
2.Applicants’ letter dated September 25, 1997
3.ARB minutes from September 18, 1997
4.ARB staff report dated May 15, 1997
PREPARED BY: Phillip Woods, Planner, ARB Staff Liaison
C!vIR:435:97 Page 3 of 4
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW:
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
EMILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
Architectural Review Board
Historic Resources Board
Chris J. Dressel and Russ Flyrm, Property Owners, 1717 Powell Street, Suite 300,
San Francisco, CA 94133
CMR:435:97 Page 4 of 4
Attachment 1
ARB Standards for Review/Findings
480-496 University Avenue
9%HRB-111, 97-ARB-76
The proposed design fitahers the goals and purposes of the ARB Ordinance as it complies
with the Standards for Architectural Review as required in Chapter 16.48 of the PAC.
The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the city’s
comprehensive plan (Standard #al). The site is designated Regional
Community/Commercial and the proposed exterior modifications of the residential
apartments are compatible with this land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan.
The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site (Standard #a2).
The proposed awnings, signage program and wrought iron gate would be compatible
with the immediate environment of the site and consistent with general character of
the area because the overall historic appearance and character are maintained.
The design is appropriate to the function of the project (Standard #a3). The proposed
design maintains an original design element of the existing building and function of
awnings to provide shade and protection from the elements; the signage program
provides a way to identify the retails tenant; the wrought iron gate provides security
and privacy to the rear entrances of the tenant spaces..
In areas considered by the board as having a unified design character or historical
character, whether the design is compatible with such character. (Standard #4) The
proposed awnings, signage program and wrought iron gate are consistent with the
historical character in that they maintain a similar scale and detail as the original
elements.
The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between
different designated land uses (Standard #aS). The proposed awnings maintain the
same location, size and scale of the existing awnings.
The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site
(Standard #a6). The .design of the project is compatible with the existing
improvements both on and off the site because the awnings are restored. The
proposal is integrated through location and design to provide a pedestrian scale that
blends in with the existing characteristics of the site.
The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an
internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors
and the general community (Standard #a7). The proposal maintains the existing site
planning, definition of open space, and circulation. This creates an intemal sense of
order to the site and provides a desirable environment for visitors and the general
community.
The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the
function of the structures (Standard #aS). This finding does not apply because the
subject lot does not have open space on the site.
The sufficient ancillary functions are provided to suppbrt the main functions of the
project and Whether the same are compatible with the project’s design concept
(Standard #ag). The proposal maintains architectural design elements that dbes not
impact the existing main function of the existing residential apartment building.
The access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for
pedestrians, cyclist and vehicle (Standard #alO). The proposed awnings, signage
program and wrought iron gate proposal does not impact the access to the property
and circulation of the site.
That natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated (Standard #11).
This finding does not apply because subject site does not have natural features to be
preserved and integrated in the proposal.
The materials, texture, colors and details of construction and plant material are
appropriate expression to the design and function and whether the same are
compatible with the adjacent and neighboring structures, landscape elements and
functions (Standard #a12). The proposed use of materials, texture, and details are
appropriate expression to the design of the facility and are compatible to neighboring
structures. The wood spindles, awnings and storefront window read as one entity on
the building elevation. Therefore, the condition of approval for a dark green or the
dark brown color of the railings and trim on the existing building or the contrasting
color of the spindles provides an appropriate contrast.
Whether the landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of
plant masses, open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create
a desirable and functional environment (Standard #13). This finding does not apply
because the subject lot does not have existing landscaping on the site.
The plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly
maintained on the site, and is of a variety which would tend to be drought-resistant
and to reduce consumption of water in its installation and maintenance (Standard
#al 4). This f:mding does not apply because the subject site does not have existing
landscaping on the site.
The design is energy efficient and incorporates renewable energy design elements
(Standard #a 15). This finding does not apply because the proposed awnings and gate
do not affect the energy design of the existing building.
FLYNN INVESTME ~ i’S
real estate development
Attachment 2
September 25, 1997
Palo Alto City Council
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94035
Re:Hotel President
488 University Avenue Awning Application
Appeal of ARB Requirement To Paint Spindles
Dear City Council Members:
In an effort to inform you regarding the above mentioned application, I would like to lay out the circumstances that
have led up to this appeal.
The original application for review to the HRB and the ARB for the new awning~ occurred in April of this year.
Since that time the application has gone through the usual review process. Changes have been incorporated into
the awnings, sign panel, and the wrought iron support brackets in order to comply with the HRB and ARB.
However, the ARB has included the requirement that the spindles above the awnings be painted a contrasting color
to the base building color. The first mention of tiffs change in color came from the HRB during their initial review
back on May 7, 1997. The recommended color by the HRB was brown, while the ARB has included the option of
painting them brown or green. This color change was strongly recommended by the HRB so that the spindles
would be painted an "Historic" brown color.
The ARB has taken this recommendation and included it as a requirement for the approval of the awning
application. In my appeal to the ARB last week, I presented to them original 1930 black and white photographs of
the building obtained from Steve Stieger the historian at the Palo Alto main library. The photographs clearly show
that the Hotel President was painted a light color (probably off white), with dark contrasting windows (probably
dark brown). The spindles appear to match the color of the building, or were non-contrasting at the least. The
building as it is today is painted a light color (off white, yellow), with the spindles being painted the same (off
white, yelloxv) color. I must also note that Dennis Backlund, a member of the HRB, spoke as a member of the
public at the appeal to the ARB last week. He is not in agreement with the HRB’s recommendation to paint the
spindles and he argued admirably toward that end.
There is no evidence that the spindles have ever been painted a brown or dark color, and clearly doing so would
not be "Historic". The decision to include this painting requirement is capricious and subjective and should not be
allowed to stand. I am requesting that the permit for the awnings be granted absent any requirement unrelated to
the awning design. _
Sincerely,
Chris J. Dressel
owner
Attachment 3
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD HEARING
September 18, 1997
48,0-490 University Avenue 97-ARB-76
97-HRB-111
Review of ARB condition of approval requiring the wood spindles above the awnings to be painted.
Chairman Ross: As I understand it, the applicant is asking to have that condition removed from the
prior approval. Phillip, do you want to say anything on this?
Mr. Woods: You can read the ARB condition from the minutes.
Chairman.Ross: To remind the board, on July 3, we approved an application for new awnings in the
signage program. The HRB made a presentation to us, recommending app,:oval with the added
conditionthat the applicant paint the wood spindles in a contrasting color. The board approved that
application with that condition, 4-0. Cheryl was absent that morning.
Mr. McFall: Any specific color?
Mr. Peterson: I think there were two greens selected.
Chairman Ross: It does not appear to have been recorded, but I recall that also. There were a couple
of green colors from the awning and signage presentation.
Mr. Woods: Dennis Backlund, the HRB Representative, is present you might want him to discuss
this case.
Chairman.Ross: Dennis, instead of being a member of the public, would you like to be a member
of the staff for the moment, and remind us of the HRB review of this item?
Dennis Backlund: On this project, the HRB voted to recommend a condition for darker colors,
however, when we came to the ARB on this, no specific color was recommended. At the HRB
meeting, brown was the discussed color. There was a presentation by Charlie Holman, who
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the HRB that brown would not work too well with the yellow on
the building. So the HRB dropped back and just stated "a contrasting color" without any guidance.
Then after the presentation here, dark green was the color conditioned. So that is what happened.
Mr. McFall: Is the HRB aware that the balcony up at the sixth floor level, or whatever floor that is,
is brown?
Mr. Backlunck Yes. However, the conversation on that was that the balcony, being at the top of the
480UNIV.MIN Page 1
building, is so far separated from the street and sits by itself, while on the bottom, the brown will be
in with the green of the marquee and the green of the awnings. There was a final indication that
brown might be too much of a mixture of colors. The specific color of brown was finally dropped
on the advice of Charlie Holman.
Mr. McFall: So the HRB did not like the brown next to the building color?
Mr. Backlunck No, not after the demonstration by Charlie Holman, who brought up samples of the
brown along with a sample of the yellow that is on the building. He placed them side by side, and
the effect was a little different. The HRB had thought of it abstractedly, and when they saw it
concretely, they raised questions on it.
Mr. McFall: So they preferred the green color?
Mr. Backlund: No, they gave no indication other than a contrasting shade. The green did not occur
in the discussions at the HRB. It appeared for the first time here as a specific color.
Chairman Ross: Thank you, Dennis. The applicant is here this morning. Would you like to make
a five-minute presentation?
Chris Dressel: I am the owner of the building at 480 University Avenue, thePresident Hotel.
Charlie Holm/an sends his regrets that he could not make it today. He is the architect and consultant
on this awning proposal for the past several months. I have enlisted the help of literally the resident
historian regarding the building. I think what happened over this long process through the HRB and
then through the ARB, and unfortunately, I was not able to dedicate as much time to the process as
I would have liked to, especially at this point, and it has kind of gone in some different directions.
When Charlie came here the last time, everything had been agreed upon, other than the color of the
spindles. He took it in the directionthat the brown was really going to look bad, so let’s at least get
them to agree to the green. That is why he came in and argued for the green. Subsequently to that,
the other owners of the building and the people that I have consulted with regarding the aesthetics
and the color of the building have strongly disagreed with painting the spindle area above the awning
any color other than what the building face is. So I have gone back and tried to get some sort of
historical information so that I could go a little more on the historical initial colors for the building.
What I have here are some of the original photos, which I would like to pass around. They are not
all from when the building was built. Some of them are from the 1940s, but in all of the
photographs, they clearly show that the building was painted a base color and that the spindles
correspond to that base color. Obviously, this is a black-and-white rendition in all of these photos,
so it is hard to discern exactly what the colors are, but from the photos, you can tell that the color
of the building is the same color as the spindles, and those colors contrast with the balcony, which
is a wood structure, and it appear, s in these pictures to be painted a dark color, most likely a dark
brown, which was historically the way, in a Spanish Colonial building like this, the wood would
have been treated.
480UNIV.MIN Page 2
We are here to ask that you remove the condition to paint the spindles. They have been painted, and
they are exactly the same color as the building. I am here to request that the condition to paint them
green or brown or any contrasting color be removed.
Chairman Ross: Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the applicant?
Mr. McFall: Who selected the new colors that are on the building now?
Mr. Dressel: The colors for the trim and the balcony and the building were selected by the wife of
one of the owners, who is a design consultant. Essentiallyall of the owners, I mean, I was involved
in approving the color.
Mr. McFall: You mentioned the original building color scheme. Did she research what the original
color was when she did her --
Mr.. Dressel: No, well, I think she did research it in a sense, but I did research to find out, and there
was nothing on record as to what color was used. There were no color pictures to indicate what
colors were used. Historically, as Dennis has pointed out, Spanish colonial buildings like this were
painted an off white. I know Dennis likes to refer to the color as yellow on the building, but in our
opinion, it is more of a cream color, an off white. There really is nothing on record, other than the
photos that you see, as to what was there.
Mr. McFall: And you said that people were opposed to painting the spindles at all? People being
whom?
Mr. Dressel: We, the owners. In our opinion, the aesthetics of doing that and our opinion that that
is not the fight direction in which to go, and that it will not aesthetically look correct.
Mr. McFall: So it is the aesthetics that you are concerned about.
Mr. Dressel: Yes. As far as to what it is going to cost, we have already gone through and painted
these areas, so to repaint the spindles would be a pretty minimal cost, compared to all of the other
things that have been done to the building. Painting the entire building would be a whole other
question, but the main impetus for my coming back here is that we feel it is a mistake to paint them
a contrasting color or any other color than what the building face is.
The other thing that comes up is that I know that this recommendation did come from the HRB. I
regret that I was unable to be a part of that process. The recommendation from the HRB was to
make it brown, and here it was to the point where, let’s make it green. Going through the historical
process, we are not really close to doing what was historically on the building. With the restoration
__of_~the_building, we had to restore one of the store fronts with the spindles that had actually been
taken out, and we restored that part of the building. We restored the tile, and it was very time
consuming to do that. It really enhanced the building to make it a whole building again. This part
480UNIV.MIN Page 3
of it, the painting of the spindles, we really feel, and I am curious to hear Dennis’ opinion on this
also, that it is really a step in the wrong direction as far as what the building originally looked like.
Mr. Alfonso: I am trying to understand the reasons for not wanting to make it a contrasting color.
Am I correct in saying that it is because you do not feel it would look good and that it is not
historically accurate?
Mr., Dressel: I think that (1) it will not look good, no matter what color you use, if it is a contrasting
color, and (2) it is not historical with the building. I know that when we purchased the building, it
had a big brown band going around it between the first and second floors. Some people liked that,
and some did not, and that was not historical, either. So .that got painted over. When that got painted
over, some people liked it, and some people didn’t. It was not historical so we decided not to keep
it. Originally, the big snafu was regarding the actual color of the building when it did get painted.
I know that Dennis was very involved in that. It almost feels to me that this recommendation from
the HRB, I don’t know what kind of homework was done on it regarding making it a contrasting
color. Unfortunately, I was not at those HRB meetings, and I don’t know how much of that was
brought over to you guys, how much of that indication was brought to you as to why that would be
a good idea. My understanding was that the HRB people felt that actually, the color it is now is too
overwhelming and too yellow, and that painting the spindles would cut that and would somehow
take your eye offthe color of the building. I don’t follow that.
Mr. Alfonso: I have two other questions. I realize that the architect is not here to answer this
question, but do you know what his thinking is regarding whether or not these contrasting colors are.
Mr. Dressel: I know that he would not want to do it.
Mr. Alfonso: So he would not want it painted a contrasting color.
Mr.. Dressel: Correct. And I am sure that when he was in here presenting this proposal, and again,
I was not at the HRB meetings either, but I know that he did try to fight that, and in my
conversations with him, he just got beat down and gave in.
Mr. Alfonso: Also, what color do you have in mind that you would paint them? Would they be the
same color as the building itself?.
Mr, Dressel: Yes, exactly the color that they are already is, which is the same as the building. In
those original photos, it appeared that those spindles were the same color as the building. It is black
and white, so you cannot discern exactly what the colors were, but you can tell that it is not a dark
color. If you look closely, there are some shadows in those pictures, but I think there is One in
particular that definitely shows that it appears to be the same as the underlying color or genre of
colors. My guess is that it is ~he same color~
I would like to make one other commenl: My biggest concem on this is that I don’t know how the
480UNIV.MIN Page 4
. spindles got drawn into an awning proposal. I am curious as to how a different section of the
building is being drawn into the awning proposal itself. I am wondering if you feel that it is correct
to do that, to grab hold of that. I am not sure what the HRB’s feeling was on that as to why, ail of
a sudden, the spindles became a part of the awning proposal. We did not present it as that, and I am
not sure if in the past, other painting requests have been made regarding awnings, and what the
precedent is for that. I don’t know why it would not preclude the HRB or ARB to comment on
almost anything on anybody’s building if an awning proposal comes forward. So I am just
wondering if there is any feedback on that or if there is any sort of historical feedback as to whether
it has happened in the past or really what brought it up.
Mr. Peterson: Has there been any attempt made to strip this down, layer by layer, to find out what
the original color might have been?
Mr. Dressel: No, we have not. That is certainly a possibility, and it could be done. I am not sure
what kind of a task it would be to actually determine that, but it could be done.
Chairman Ross: Before we bring this back to the board for comment, I will open the public hearing
and invite members of the public to speak to us on this item. We have one card from Dennis
Backlund, speaking as a member of the public.
Dennis Backlund, 480 Universi .ty Avenue, Palo Alto: As a member of the public, the only remarks
I will make have not been heard before the HRB. The applicant did contact me when this subject
came up. He felt that this was a good time to do some research on what the building was originally.
He called me to ask about any resources that I knew. I did know about the photo files down at the
library, so I called Steve Steiger, the historian, and asked if he could help the applicant on this in
locating the earliest photographs. After that, I went ahead and did some of my own research on this.
I am sure you have all seen this picture, but I will hand it out again. This is the earliest one we know
that survives, and it is circa 1955, so it is 25 years after the building was built, but it is the earliest.
Secondly, I found a photograph which, from the automobiles, indicates circa 1932. I would say that
is definitely what the building was. It shows light spindles on this pretty cle~ly. One of the
questions I raised about the 1932 photograph is that I have found from examining a lot of
photographs that it is possible for the sun to fall on any feature at certain times of the day to render
a darker object lighter. So a certain amount of skepticism has to be brought. So I continued
searching for photographs, and at last, I found a pamphlet from 1947, and this one had a closeup
view of the spindles. So I regarded that problem of light reflection as not being relevant in this case.
It indicated to me conclusively that at least in certain periods of the past, there had been light
.spindles the same as the building color.
So I have looked at this problem, .and it is certain that there was a lot of comment in the city when
the building was painted a different color than it had been before. After that perception, there were
a lot of comments and suggestions as to how to mitigate the problem. When it came before the ARB
without any specific directions on color, the ARB did not have very much time, just minutes to try
480UNIV.MIN Page 5
and decide upon a color. So as I looked at it, the dark green, after studying the building for hours,
I believe it would have kind of a circus tent look if the spindles were this dark green. So I researched
spindles all over Califomiain historic Spanish Colonial buildings, and there are a few examples of
green spindles, but one and all, they were a light gray-green, kind of an earth tone of light green.
Where yellow occurred, the contrasting which was very rare, but it happens, the color was a very soft
earth tone of yellow, which is not the case with the building now. So as a more strident color than
historicallyin yellow and the green being a much darker, more strident true green than has occurred
on any Spanish Colonial building, it seemed to me that that contrast would be an even greater
distance. Sometimes when one tries to mitigate something, and nothing rums out right, it may be
the reluctant conclusion to just leave it alone.
I concluded that the light gray-green, while historically correct on spindles, would then contrast with
the color of the awning, which is tied in with the current color of the marquee, which is dark green.
So that, in my opinion, would introduce too many shades of green in this and that at the street level
so that was not possible to be historically correct with the current awning project. So I was left with
no further conclusion than to reluctantly leave it alone and discuss color review on downtown
Spanish Colonials for the permanent historic ordinance. That is far as I could get on this. Thank you
very much.
Chairman Ross: Seeing no one else who wishes to speak, I will return this to the board for
comments. Jim, you have the longest tenure among us on historic issues, so would you like to start
off the discussion?
Mr. McFall: For me, there are two issues. The first is the appropriateness of reviewing the spindle
color in conjunction with the application for the awnings. From my viewpoint, I think they are
related, so I am very comfortable with discussing and making a decision on the spindle color as part
of the approval of the awnings. The spindles are almost integrated with the awnings, so I feel there
is a great deal of overlap, and it is certainly appropriate to look at the two items together.
The other issue is the color. The applicant has approached us on the basis that historically, the
spindles were a match to the building wall color. That may or may not be. It looks like it is very
possible, but I think the entire issue of historic accuracy is really not relevant here, due primarily to
the fact that the current color scheme is, completely unrelated to the original colors. The applicant
has said that they want to go with a contemporary scheme, and the issue of historic relevance goes
out the window. So I am not persuaded that the-spindle color should match the wall color on the
basis of what may or may not have originally been done on the building. I am still of the opinion
that the contrasting color is appropriate here. I am open to the idea that it would be either the dark
green color, as previously’ approved, or even a browncolor. In looking at the building numerous
times since this came to us originally, I am inclined to think the brown color works better with the
spindles. There are spindles on the balcony up above which are also wood which are brown, so there
has to be greater consistency using the brown color. The applicant has said that the brown does not
go with the color, but I would query as to why use those two colors on the building originally. So
I am definitely in support of the original approval, with the addition thatthe color may be open to
480UNIV.MIN .......Page 6
discussion. I would be willing to talk about that.
Mr. Alfonso: I have stood out there a number of times, trying to visualize these various colors that
were talked about, as well as whether or not a match would be a viable alternative. I am not
convinced, either, that to leave ii alone is the best recourse in this case. I actually feel that the nature
of this type of architecture, really worldwide, has been that the element, that wood, in itself, is
represented differently in color than the actual wall texture, as well as the fenestration. There is a
kind of consistency. Whether or not this building, at one point in time, in its initial concept, was a
spindle color, I have to concur withJim. I feel that is irrelevant at this point. I would not support
having the spindle color that matches the wall color. I think the building is really read as one entity,
even in these photographs, namely, the store windows, the awnings, and the spindles above are all
one color. I think they need to be dealt with in a total value in a similar way. So I would be in
support of a contrasting color, and not a match.
Mr. Petersorc Let me first address the issue of whether or not it is appropriate to review the spindles.
I, too, have looked at this building a considerable number of times since the application came
forward. From a design point of view, in my mind, they are completely integrated. They are seen
in the same frame. It is exactly connected. One might move up two or three floors and make that
argument, but in this case, they are absolutely adjacent to one another. There is no question that they
are integrated and all part of the same design issue.
I also agree with what Jim had to say. I don’t think you can have it both ways. If you want the
spindles and everything to be historical, then you have to go back and reexamine the color of the
original building. If the applicant were prepared to do that, I would be prepared to address this issue
on a historical basis, but unless that happens, I really address it on a design basis. From that point
of view, to my eye, I think the contrast is appropriate. I happen to like the green color that was
selected before, but I am not opposed to reexamining another contrasting color, but I believe it
should be contrasting. So I would not support a change of our original decision.
Chairman Ross: I will also speak to the first issue. I asked staff to look at whether our jurisdiction
included pulling into the review an element that was not part of the application, and the answer was
that our jurisdiction is actually interpreted pretty broadly, and that was as I expected. We do have
the authority to do that. We probably would not, and I don’t think we have used that to pull in very
distant elements of a project, but as my colleagues have pointed out, the awnings and the spindles
are really part of the same system of the entry or portals into the building. So I am satisfied that we
are within our jurisdiction to comment or make a condition on the colors.
I may have the least concern on the board about the spindle color. I do not have a problem with their
being contrasting. I do not mind them too much the way they are now, although I think they are an
interesting enough feature on the.building that from an aesthetic point of view, it would be nice to
highlight them a little bit, and a contrast of some kind or color change would accomplish that.
I feel similarly about the historic issues, which are that while the suggestion came in our meeting
480UNIV.M1N Page 7
from the HRB that there be a contrasting color, I think it is something that had come up for us
before, even in the discussion of the restaurant facade that went in. I recall our discussing the
spindle color issue, so it is not on a purelyhistorical basis that we made that decision. Probably,
somewhat to the dismay of the HRB, we are not always as tied to historical accuracy as they might
be. I suspect that if this presentation had been made at the HRB, in the interest 0f historical
accuracy, there might be a change of opinion about the color, but we might still stick to our guns
here and say, yes, but the contemporary aesthetic that is being applied to the building here calls for
a contrast. So all that being said, I am pretty open minded about the color of the spindles.
Obviously, there is a majority on the board that believeg that the original approval, or something like
it, should stand. I do not have a problem with that, either. So I guess the thing to do here is-for
somebody to propose a motion, and We will vote on it.
Mr. McFall: Could I query staffas to what is the action we are being asked to m~ke?
Ms. Grote~ It is to reconsider a condition of approval that you put in the original approval. So your
motion Would be to either support that original condition or not support it. Then the Director would
sign that. This is a recommendationto the Director of Planning and Community Environment. He
will sign it on Tuesday, and then there is a four day appeal period.
MOTION: Mr. McFall: I make a motion to support the original condition previously approved by
the board, with the addition that the color may be either the previously approved dark green or the
existing brown color on the building.
SECOND: By Boardmember Peterson.
MOTION PASSES: Chairman Ross: Is there any further discussion on this motion? All those in
favor, say aye. All opposed? That passes on a vote of 4-0. Thank you for bringing this to our
attention again, and I appreciate the photographs.
480UNIV.MIN Page 8
Attachment_4
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report
Item No. II.4
Agenda Date:
To:
May 15, 1997
Architectural Review Board
From:Phillip Woods, Associate Planner
Subject:480-496 Universi _ty Avenue
President Apartments
Historic Category: Category II
Department: Planning
File No.:97-ARB-76
97-HRB-111
REQUEST
Application for Architectttral Review Board review and a recommendation to the Director of
Planning and Community Environment to allow new awnings, a signage program for retail tenants
and a wrought iron gate to an alley between the President Apartments and Garden Court Hotel.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of the following:
The removal of existing awnings and the installation of a solid green fixed canvas awning with
wrought iron brackets that project 4’-0" into the Public right-of-way. The proposed awnings will
be located in front of each individual retail tenant on University Avenue and one awning on the
Cowper Street side. ~.
Signage program for five of the six retail tenants on the ground level. New awning signage
reads, "Rock’n Tacos," "American Printing and Copy," "President Barbershop," "Jewel Ritz,"
and "Tobacconists." The proposed tenant signs will have 6" high yellow painted letters with a
dark green background on a one-foot high birch plywood panel located below the new awning.
Th/e wrought iron gate will be located in the alley between the President Apartmems and the
Garden Court Hotel. The maximum height of the wrought iron gate will be 8’-3". There will
be a metal screen behind the gate for privacy.
A:\arb\1865ecr.sr Page 1
Please refer to applicants’ project description letter and plans for further details of the proposal.
colored drawing/material sample are on file and will be presented at the ARB meeting.
A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the project with conditions outlined in the "Conditions" section of
this report, which address the Historic Resources Board suggestions.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Comprehensive Plan
The project must be determined to be consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, Zoning
Ordinance, and the Architectural Review Board Ordinance.. The following policies are relevant to
this project:
1. Urban Design Element, Policy 2: "Encourage private preservation of buildings which have
historic or architectural merit or both." The project complies with this policy because the proposed
changes are compatible with the architectural style and historic character of the existing building.
2. Urban Design Element, Objective, p.42: "Promote visual environment which are of high
aesthetic quality and variety and considerate of each other. The proposed modifications will be
consistent with the historic structure and other buildings located on the block.
3. Program 4 of the Urban Design Element: "Discourage garish signs through sign regulations
and design standards and encourage signs that blend with the site and the area." The project
complies with this program in that existing signage which is inconsistent with the historic building
is to be removed and the proposed sign program establishes uniformity and consistency for signs
located on the building.
4. Downtown Urban Design Guide, page 59: "Encourage distinctive, finely crafted signs
which are oriented to pedestrians." The project complies with this program in that the proposed
signage has a unique, high quality and proposed location of the signs below the awning is oriented
to pedestrians.
DISCUSSION
Site description
A:\arb\1865ecr.sr Page 2
The City’s inventory list states that the six-story Spanish Colonial Revival structure was designed
by Birge Clark and constructed in 1929. The existing historic building, located on the comer of
University Avenue and Cowper Street, consist of six individual storefronts on the street level as well
as the entrance to the current President Apartments.
Background
The Historic Resources Board (HRB) at its May 7, 1997 meeting did not recommend approval of
the project and advised the applicant to restudy the possibilities of incorporating a retractable awning
system, locating tenant signage on the flap of the awning and strongly recommending that the
applicant paint the wood spindles above the awnings a "historic" brown color.
Issues and Analysis
The building was originally designed with awnings for the ground level retail spaces. The awnings
have been altered from the original design and two of the awnings have been eliminated. The
applicant has indicated that the owner, of the building is unable to get replacement parts to restore
the mechanisms of the awning. The proposal removes the existing retractable storefront awnings
and replaces them with fixed awnings. Staff finds that replacing the awnings with a similar
retractable system would be a more appropriate long term solution that would be consistent with the
original design intent.
The proposal removes existing tenant signage and establishes a signage program which includes the
location and color palette which is more consistent with the Spanish Colonial Revival of the subject
building. The proposal creates a friendly pedestrian scale by the use of a sign located below the
awning. Staff recommends that signage incorporated on the awning flap would be more consistent
with the existing historic building.
The proposed wrought iron gate will provide privacy and security for retail tenants of the President
Apartments to the back alley way between the President Apartments and the Garden Court Hotel.
ARB Standards for Review/Findings
The proposed design further the goals and purposes of the ARB Ordinance as it complies with the
Standards for Architectural Review as required in Chapter 16.48 of the PAMC.
The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the city’s comprehensive
plan (Standard #al). The proposal is compatible with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan as
discussed in the Policy Section of this Report.
The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site (Standard #a2). The
proposal modified by the conditions of approval would maintain the awnings as an architectural
feature and the proposed signage enhances the historic character of the building. The proposed
A:\arb\1865ecr.sr Page 3
awnings, signage program and wrought iron gate would be compatible with the immediate
environment of the site and consistent with general character of the area because the overall
historic appearance and character are maintained.
The design is appropriate to the function of the project (Standard #a3). The proposed design
modified by the conditions of approval would restore the original function of the awnings to
provide shade and protection from the elements; the signage program provides a way to identify
the retail tenant; the wrought iron gate provides security and privacy to the rear entrances of the
tenant spaces.
The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site (Standard #a6).
The proposal modified by conditions of approval would be compatible with the existing
improvements both on and off the site because the original awnings are restored; the proposed
signage program eliminates visual clutter on the building facade; and the wrought iron gate
provides security and privacy to rear tenant entrances. The proposed awnings as modified by
conditions, signage and wrought iron gate are integrated through location and des!gn to provide
a pedestrian scale that blends in with the existing characteristics of the site.
The materials, texture, colors and details of construction and plant material are appropriate
expression to the design and function and whether the same are compatible with the adjacent
and neighboring structures, landscape elements and functions (Standard #a12). The proposed
use of materials and color palette are consistent with the traditional Spanish Colonial Revival
building colors and materials of the existing building and are compatible with neighboring
structures.
Standard’s #a4, #a5, #a7, #a8, #a9, #al0, #all, #a13, #a14 and #a15 are not applicable to this
project.
Zoning Ordinance Compliance
Zone Designation:CD-C(GF) (P) Commercial Downtown Community
District with Ground Floor and Pedestrian Shopping
Combining District.
Use Category_:Retail and residential use
Overhead sign el,earanee:
Proposed 8 feet
Required(minimum) 7 feet (sect!on 16.20.130 (b)(2)
A:\arb\1865ecr.sr Page 4
Sign Area:
"Rock’n Tacos" sign:
Proposed 9 square feet
Allowed 20 square feet
"American Printing and Copy" sign:
Proposed 11 square feet
Allowed 21 square feet
"President Barbershop" sign:
Proposed 8.5 square feet
Allowed 20 square feet
"Jewel Ritz" sign:
Proposed
Allowed
8.5 square feet
20 square feet
"Tobacconists" sign:
Proposed
Allowed
9.5 square feet
20 square feet
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice of the project was provided by publication of the agenda in a local newspaper of
general circulation.
TIMING ACTION LIMITS:
Date project received:
Date application deemed complete:
Action time limit:
(105 days after project deemed complete)
Optional extension upon applicant’s request:
(90 days after action date)
4/9/1997
4/9/1997
7/23/1997
10/21/1997
A:\arb\1865ecr.sr Page 5
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This project has been determined to be categorically exempt per CEQA requirements.
ATTACHMENTS
Applicants’ description letter.
Plans (ARB members only).
CONDITIONS
PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL FOR BUILDING PERMIT
Planning/Zoning
Any additional tenant signage in the future shall return under a separate application for
review and approval by the Architectural Review Board.
2.The awnings shall be retractable and the tenants’ signage shall be located on the awning flap.
o Color chips to match colors specified in the building permit drawings shall be attached to the
cover sheet of the building permit drawing set.
Public Works Engineering
The applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Public Works Department for
awnings constructed in the public right-of-way, easement or on property in which the City
holds an interest.
The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit or temporary lease from Public Works
Engineering for the proposed construction which will impact the use of the sidewalk, street,
alley or on property in which the City holds an interest.
A construction logistics plan shall be provided, addressing at minimum parking, truck routes
and staging, materials storage, and the provision of pedestrian and vehicular traffic adjacent
to the construction site. All truck routes shall conform with the City of Palo Alto’s Trucks
and Truck Route Ordinance, Chapter 10.48, and the attached route map which outlines truck
routes available throughout the City of Palo Alto.
COURTESY COPIES
A:\arb\1865ecr.sr Page 6
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Charles Holman
Holman Design Associates
366 Lytton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Meridian Management Group
One Nob Hill Circle
San Francisco, CA 94108
Prepared By:Phillip Woods, Associate Planner
Manager Review:Lisa Grote, Zoning Administrator
A:\arb\1865ecr,sr Page 7
HOLMAN
DESIGN
-,’366 Lytton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Tel: 415/325-4374
Fax:415/325-5379
April 7, 1997
Historical Resources Board
Architectural Review Board
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Ave.
Palo Alto, Ca. 94301
re: President Apartment Retail Storefronts (awnings and signage)
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Boards,
This building, designed as a Hotel by Birge Clark in 1927, consists of six
individual storefronts on the street level as well as the entrance to the current
apartments. The building has a Class II Historical designation. Ourintention is
to remove what’s left of the existing retractable storefront awnings and replace
them with new fixed awnings. We also propose to add suspended sign panels
to each awning as part of a retail tenant signage program. All the tenants except
Pluto’s Restaurant will participate in the proposed signage program.
The old retractable awnings are in disrepair and the owner is unable to get the
needed replacement parts. Another benefit of the proposed awning and
signage set-up is that it will provide the retail tenants with much needed identity.
The awnings and sign panels are detailed to be compatible with the existing
building and storefronts. We look forward to your review of the plans and
material samples.
Sincerely,
Charles Holman
HOLMAN DESIGN