HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2014-11-18 #2Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 13, 2014
TO: Chair and Review Board Members
FROM: Stafford, r\i:'''''J<.' Planner
SUBJECT: [ZC14~001; ED14~086; UP14-027; I ORB Continued Review;
Further Study of West (Front) Building Elevation
Trellis Dr. ('Mark Day School'); APN: 175-060-01
November 4, the Design Review Board (ORB) reviewed a project proposing a new
two-story, 11,270 sq , 'Learning Commons, Lab Administration an
Mark Day campus at 39 Trellis Dr. The ORB unanimously supported (Chair Lentini
motion, Huntsberry second) the twa-story However, the continued
of project to allow the applicant additional time to study the west (front) building elevation to
incorporate the fallowing modifications:
» Raise entry 'portal' height;
» Reduce the height of the expression area located directly above
» the roofline, removing or relocating dormers to the east
('quad' or courtyard-facing) building elevation with the intent to reduce the perceived mass
of structure.
ORB requested color elevations or renderings only, showing buildi elevation. The
otherwise recommended approval of the design with the following conditions:
enhancements shall be proposed from the parking area to the street frontage
Dr.) and behind the neighbors needed.
» bmit a written plan prior to BUilding to Planning outlining an approach or timeline
repaint the buildings to com the new palette of the
project.
ORB continued their review to the November 18, 14 for final review and
on the revised elevation. Planning provides the following attachments to the ORB for
continued review of the
1. Applicant's to ORB Comments
2. Reduced (11" x 17") Color (West Bldg Elevation), Concept Planting Plan, Photo
Simulations (West Elevation) and Sections .
Mark Schoo! 14
Learning Commons, Creativity Lab Administration Buildi NNiNG
Review Board Submission
November 18 t
\ 2014
EHDD
In response to the Review Board's (DRB) thoughtful comments
made at the November 4th DRB the design clements
and comment at the November 18th Design Review Board meeting.
Landscaping:
requests for more
been revised lind provided for
a. A was made Jeff Kent and Serge to the parking
10[, and additional f01<eground to the proposed In response, new trees have
added pex the site plan, and shoW11 \:fl the The prOiDo:sea
(Sycamore, 36" box) match the pattern and species
Updated Site 6, and View from Trellis Drive Rendering, page 7).
b. Jeff Kent and we <:.lI.IJ1UJlC evergreen trees to fill in any
visual gaps in lan,as,ca~)e the tear yatds These will be
reviewed wherever requested, to ensu.re I.n"", .. "'!!
a. It was mentioned Chait Lentini lhat a study be subm;tted, that no light
spill over reached the properties.. A lighting was provided for the initial
ORB that included both a as well as cut sheets for the proposed
These documents demonstrated that all exteriot'lighting does noc spill into
11,-p'.'1f",,-nl submitted lightingpockage-Photomehic Stt(f:fy)
b. the shielding
to avoid splll onto adjacent nrt,t"\F,.1'I,~~
'f}/U'~J1,ap_[:lOm:U1U t'JIl sheets)
c. There was discussion about of windows at night. We ate that aU 'Windows
on the Trellis Avenue side have shades that dosed any events after dark.
a. Day School agrees Huntsberry and DRB members' concetns abollt
need to quiddy and effectively dose down the campus as needed. \'{1e are in the
process of engagmg an independent consultant to options, and p.rovide
concepts and methods doing so at all entries to the main campus, -at the front
1
Material and Color Palette:
a. We heard the requests by members Eric Spielman and Chair Lentini to revise tbe fa~ade,'and
provide revised proposals to make them warmer and more welcoming. The foUowing revisions
were made and are provided:
l. We propose changing the wood siding fioish to a warmer, natura] finish, western red
cedar. (see colored elevationJ included, and revised matcriaLr board -10 be supplied Jor the 11/18
D RB meeting)
ii. We propose a lighter warm grey exterior metal finish to replace the darker bronze
previously proposed. (see reviled Material, Board)
Painting Plan for the Remainder of Campus:
a. In order that the rest of the school blend more harmoniously with the existing school colors, at
the request of Chair Lentini, Mark Day School agrees to repaint the existing buildings as
follows:
1. Repa1l1t the buildings adjacent to the new structure along the Trellis Avenue side of the
campus within 5 years of completion of new construction (Gym, Existing Library Building,
and Science & Arts building).
11. Repaint the remainder of campus withm 10 years.
Revisions to the West Elevation (Facing Trellis Drive):
a. The following elevation revisions were requested, and have been provided with this package:
J. In response to Bob Huntsberty and Eric Spellman's concerns that the clerestories gave the
impression that there was a rhi.rd floor on the building, or were too dominant, we've
reduced the height of the clerestories by over 20%, and lightened the trim color to reduce
contrast. The previous glass height of 3'-6" in the previous version of the clerestories has
been reduced to 2'-4" in the current verSlOn.
u. 'To address El1c Speilman's concerns about the visual impact of the centtal eotty roof, we
reduced hejght of the central entry roof and lightened the trim color to reduce contrast
ill. At Bob Huntsbetty's suggestion, we raised entry portal ceiling as much as possible, without
impacttng the structure and mechanical duct runs, from 9'-0" to 9'-6" (ste Section, page 8)
b. In addition, based on Bob Huntsberry and Eric Speilman's comments, we've provided a variety
of options for the front fac;:ade. We a.re now providing simple, colored Elevations with this
package, as requested, including:
1. The ongmally proposed scheme provided for the November 4th DRB meeting (previously
only shown in cover page rendering, or uncolored elevation in Architectural set. (See page 1).
11. The originally proposed scheme, with the revisions outlined above, in a. i-iii. (reduction in
clerestories, reduced central entry roof heJght, lightened trim color, and raised entry portal)
(See page 2).
2
ill. The revised scheme showing no clerestories (See page
lV. The no central roof 4).
.v. revised scheme showing no cleJ:estones or central roof (See page
VI. Pkase note that to the building's main air handler location behind the centrlill entry roof
(with no other feasible we were not able to develop a option that
lowered .toof below that level of main roof. Sedion page
\Ve look forward to the merits of these with you at the November 18ih Design Review
Board If YOll need additional information or visual please us know.
Scott ~heU
Anders
EHDD
3
MARK DAY SCI-IOOL
Design Review Board -November 18, 2014
EHDD's Response to Revisions Requested at November 4th DRB Presentation
RECr,:~V;;.i)
NOV 122014
PLANNING
West Elevation Option 1 -November 4th Scheme
• Desiqn Review Board -November 18, 2014 MARK DAY SCI-IOOL 1
--~ L;JI -~-' J :-~ifi ri a l" -"''1'+1
West Elevation Option 2 ~ Lower Central Entry Roof / Lower Clerestories / Revised Materials Palette
• DesiQn Review Board -November 18, 2014 MARK DAY SCHOOL 2
West Elevation Option 3 -Lower Central Entry Roof I No Clerestories I Revised Materials Palette
• Design Review Board -November 18, 2014 MARK DAY SC~OOL 3
West Elevation Option 4 -No Central Entry Roof / Lower Clerestories / Revised Materials Palette
• Design Review Board -November 18, 2014 HARK DAY SCI-IOOL 4
West Elevation Option 5 -No Central Entry Roof / No Clerestories / Revised Materials Palette
B Design Review Board -November 18, 2014 MARK DAY SCl-tOOL 5
,. I ,I l'-~_'\ I'" --__ .... ""--'.-.. ':-;~-_ -----===------==:.:::--_______ , ___ .-~:==-~--"/' I I I , ~. ~ ------:-:---... -----==::----~~ __
" --; L ; ~ . ./ I -, .. -.... -.--=--.. ..... :..~=-:=-----l -----
I If·, I I ',,· ..... L/-.~ ..... --..:.. -~.:-:---
/
'.1---1 ,. /t-,i 'f -__ ~ -~~_,
j}\.," / /1 Ii '...... ' __ • J.-:::::: _____ -......:::;:.--===---~_
'')-_ I lr-fl --_: r r '~ j '-__ .. --,--__ _ ..c::c-==-_ ---1 L '; , " ,. ~ I ~ , '--~r-_ ------=---=-=~ r ~ -" I I in ' 1,-I ~_ _ 'i '----___ --_~--"'_~-----1..J ----===~,,-__ f ' I -----if '~ ,----, ------I -', .. , i ( I ' -:.,,"; / '," . I '., ~,--T --'--i'l _-"---\
-~---~-""\
I I 11 I J ",_ J -I "1 I I ..", I . _--,--~_.
I , ---• I F i _R i I , '/ j",: I ---. I .r-~ Jf. ~ r r::-"J I l I I ,-... -\" " JF';:~-.::"--111 ,-"., " _ ,'-.,,-_ __ I r • -, "/".,..,: ~ " 'I .. ~~ ij I I I , . -~ --.. --I ['__ I ..... L" ~ ~
{'-r;' I -, ,.' i' ',' /' I / / : i ,I ~ '"j r "--= 'I -__ -=-~ "/'" --"~i -":" , ' , __ -
..... ' -". ,I , vi " ,r , If ", I... .---1 I \, \.2---" \ """= ',;',--",', ~,' · I. / ,1 /---'---" " N (N). EES ......... "".--1-t.1 -\' I ~ I ' _ I I f Ir-...... I • l \ \
J
--.::...-~,~~! ---~ '--/ ~-, :' I ! ! t (Sy~" <D~'\ ) \ L J I ~.J\ \ ..... "-' ~, -, , 1 I ,......-?,"', I 1 --\ \;
\ -" ,J I "" \' ,
-, ---'-...--------( I r I I' "j /' \ I, I '
.. /~-, " -, I ----------...J '--------.J ' "-... ... r " \ . \
J --( ~ , -~"-" .. ~" ~~If .-! -r i . r~", r,'..... I -RL I '~ \\ 'I , \ \.------~ '-~ . t " J 1 " I -r ':i] I -~ --' , f1 _......... / .... ~ _ ~ .. ~. I __ ~~
\\ \1 ~\ ;'
(
\
\ \ \-\
\1 \\
\1 1\
\\ \\
I
'I
J\"
\,
\
"
\
~-----p 'I ~:lJ~Et=i ~o $~JI I ,.,~_.I~~, I ! \
\
Updated Site Plan --showing new proposed planting in parking lot & adjacent to neighboring lot
• Design Review Board -November 18, 2014 MARK DAY SC I-f OO L 6
View from Trellis Drive
View from Trellis Drive -with new proposed parking lot trees for screening
~ Design Review Board -November 18, 2014 MARK DAY SCHOOL 7
DUCT RUNS ROOFTOP MECHANICAL UNIT
DASHED PROFILE OF ROOF BEYOND
-----
"-".
I
MEETING I GALLERY RECEPTION
"-
"-/ I I BALCONY I ' ..
, "'
/ ,
"-
/ "-
"-
/
FL00R
(21 " MAX DEPTH)
" /
DUCT RUNS I, I ~'I(';; '. ... "' " . "-
OOR ErQTRY PORTAL BREEZEWAY
/
'.
". "-
/
Building Section -showing structural & mechanical constraints re lative to roof shape & portal height
• Design Review Board -November 1.8,2014 MARK DAY SCHOOL 8
Section through Learn ing Commons -showing daylight distribution with clerestory windows
• Des ign Review Boa rd - N ovem boer 18, 2014 MARK DAY SC~OOL 9