Downtown Fullerton: The Brick Myth, The Reality of Brick Veneer, and The Legacy of Schlock

We published a couple of posts a few days ago on the new parking structure planned on Santa Fe Avenue, and how it is proposed to be faced with brick veneer here and here .

You may remember that I got to thinking about why the city staff would tell the RDRC that the $40,000,000 parking structure must have brick veneer; and that I asked one of the RDRC Board members that very same question, and the answer I got was that staff told the Committee that the City has to use brick veneer because it was a “State” requirement to meet the CEQA guidelines. (I also noted that the use of fake brick is in complete contrast to the sustainable design the General Plan Advisory Committee has spend the last 3 years discussing and recommending to the City Council).

CEQA? Yes CEQA he said, because there’s a provision in the CEQA guidelines that requires mitigation of any visual impacts. In other words, since the new parking structure was being built with structural concrete, and the surrounding downtown has many brick-looking buildings, using the brick veneer would cause no visual impact on the environment. I say “brick-looking” because so many of the buildings in downtown Fullerton are faced with fake brick veneers, facades that are not historic, and some of which, in fact, were stuck-on older buildings during the course of Redevelopment in the last 30 years. And many of these were subsidized by the taxpayers of Fullerton.

How do I know this? I did a building facade survey of downtown from the RR tracks to Chapman and from Malden to Pomona. I documented the principal “building skin” of each structure. The results didn’t surprise me, but they may surprise you; they should shock the Redevelopment and Planning Department “experts” who not only have been tolerating, but actually promoting this material over the years – seemingly in an effort to keep downtown “historical” looking. Boy, did they get it wrong.

Here are the results of the survey:

24 Brick veneer

2 Flagstone veneer

9 Real brick & clay block

3 Glazed & fluted brick

24 stucco & plaster

20 Concrete, concrete block & terra cotta

And here is a useful overhead image with the various exterior materials colored in on each of the building’s footprint. Notice how few real brick buildings there are; and of these only a couple are red brick – the crap of choice among Fullerton’s bureaucratic tastemakers. The buildings with substantial brick venerers are pink.

Downtown Fullerton

Using CEQA to bolster the poor design choices of the past is pretty bad. Let’s hope this post will help end the travesty of bad and cheap looking architecture based on erroneous assumptions, and that California’s environmental laws will never be used again by city staff to foist this garbage on us.

The RDRC and Jay Eastman Take A Curtain Call

DSC00132

Don’t say we didn’t warn you. Because we did. In previous posts  here and here, we tracked the progress (if you really want to use that word) of the strip center at Euclid and Rosecrans. Well, the scaffolding has come down and what’s revealed ain’t purty.

Our theme here was wasted space and building materials and of course, The City’s dubious commitment to the idea of sustainability. And our purpose was not to dwell upon the poor aesthetic choices made by the owner of this center. Instead we chose to focus on the City’s role in this aesthetic disaster. For some reason the Development Services Department (they serve developers) decided that this non-subsidized, private remodel needed to go to the hapless Redevelopment Design Review Committee – even though it is miles from a Redevelopment area.

Planner Jay Eastman made it clear that the RDRC intended to impress its preferences unto this site – no doubt assisted by Mr. Eastman himself. Let’s let Barbara Giasone help us with our narrative from a May1, 2008 story:

“The proposed remodel was reviewed by the Redevelopment Design Review Committee last week, but the panel felt the design was commonplace and didn’t reflect the character of the neighborhood, Acting Chief Planner Jay Eastman said. The architect was asked to look at the surrounding neighborhood with terms like “country,” “rural” and “equestrian,” Eastman added.”

Country. Rural. Equestrian. Got it?

The ensuing visual train wreck of disjointed parts, shed and gable roofs, the weird confusion of masonry veneer and stucco, and all the wasted attic space with its dinky windows provide a suitable denouement, fifteen months later,  for this cautionary tale. If the property owner had been left to his own devices it is hard to conceive anything worse being done – and it could have been done a lot less expensively.

We wonder just what sort of idiots our staff and their RDRC think inhabit rural equestrian areas.

DSC00135

DSC00129DSC00144

DSC00130DSC00141

Fullerton Junior College Subjected to More Horrors!

Just in case you thought the North Orange County Community College District couldn’t possibly inflict any more architectural damage to what was once a quite lovely campus at FJC – you’d better think again.

The latest addition to an already overbuilt campus is this multi-storied monstrosity that bears all the hall-marks of the new bond-built FJC buildings: hollow and stuccoed walls, fake arches, and an overbearing presence that sort of sucks the life right out of you. No need to guess what’s coming:McSpanish Dinosaur!

A new monster to contemplate...
A new monster to contemplate...

Pretty soon all those wasteful hollow metal stud walls will be wrapped in lathing and then plastered to present the appearance of masonry; Styrofoam cornices will be tacked on to gratify the sort of taste that demands a hat on a mannequin; phony wrought iron accoutrements will be lagged into the plaster and then the administration can pat itself on the back for another job well-done.

Geez, that's really gonna be awful..
Another embarrassing erection at FJC...

By the way, if you look carefully you’ll notice some sort of cupola emerging on the roof. Is another foolish clock tower avec dome on the way? We’ll be sure to keep you up to date on the latest architectural embarrassment at FJC.

Redevelopment Hard at Work on South Raymond? Big Toy #1?

Hey, that's not a bad looking elevation!
Hey, that's not a bad looking elevation!
Fullerton has a whole gaggle of Redevelopment “project managers” looking for something to do. One of them, Nicole Coates, was quoted in an August 4th, 2009 Barabara Giasone Register article with regard to the sale of the old Stone Container plant on S. Raymond Avenue –part of the new redevelopment expansion area. Hmm.

Supposedly the property is being sold out of a bankruptcy court to a Newport Beach developer for a song. According to the article the new owners are going to try to use the physical plant on an interim basis, until it can be demolished – and, presumably, redeveloped.

Here today, gone tomorrow...
Here today, gone tomorrow...

But redeveloped as what, and with whose money? In the article, the new owner makes no promises after “demolition.” Will the land remained zoned for industrial use? Maybe. Maybe not. Barbara didn’t ask.

We’re picking up the strong vibe of a big new toy for our redevelopment staff to play with that will provide job security and lots of new property tax increment. What kind of toy? Use your imagination. “Mixed Use” springs most readily to mind, although the site is a loser for commercial retail – which means the usual formula would be applied: lots of housing and some facade commercial just for appearances.

But they did such a nice job at the Platinum Triangle!
But they did such a nice job at the Platinum Triangle!

It seems pretty obvious that the Redevelopment expansion map-makers have had their eye on this site for some time. We wonder if discussions with redevelopment staff were going on before the City Council even voted for the Redevelopment expansion.

And we wonder what they are planning for us.

The City is Violating Its Own Law in Hillcrest Park

hillcrest3837792771_0217528a41

If you’ve driven along Brea Boulevard lately you will have noticed that the north hill side of Hillcrest Park has been completely scraped as part of the so-called Lions Field improvements. Well, the hillside was suffering from total (and I mean complete) negligence on the part of the City for decades. What is being built, are large retaining structures to “stabilize” the slope. The only problem is that what the slope needed to stabilize it was appropriate landscaping – a solution that the parks Department ignored for years.

The addition of retaining structures in the park is inappropriate. More than that, it’s illegal. Hillcrest Park is a designated Fullerton Landmark (#6) and as such the types of alteration being proposed  should have been reviewed in a public hearing by the Landmarks Commission. This never happened. It’s true that Hillcrest Park doesn’t fit into any of the categories included in the watered-down version of the Landmarks Ordinance passed by the City about 12 years ago. But adherence to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards is one key. Another issue is that of demolition and replacement of historic elements. Even the watered down code has a spirit that has not been observed.

Once again the City has ignored its own laws, laws that you or I would be expected to follow. It has specifically ignored the Landmark Ordinance once again, a part of the Zoning Code that the City has habitually and serially abused over the years (if you want I’ll make a list).

For years the City has turned over the park to pervs and low-lifes while ignoring the historic built environment. And now it seems they are embarked on another form of abuse of an historic resource.

The North Platform Fiasco – Allegro Molto e Vivace

Loyal and Patient Friends, our sad narrative of The Great North Platform Disaster now draws to a merciful conclusion. We have shared all the dismal failures of the landscape architect, Steve Rose, the Redevelopment manager in charge, Terry Galvin, and Design Review Committee members that were evidently incompetent or unqualified.

Trees and planters block the platform; staff obstruction was almost as bad.
Trees and planters block the platform; staff obstruction was almost as bad.

The design failure was complete and palpable. Yet as diverse groups of citizens displayed their unhappiness with the ludicrous and costly elements of the project, the City Staff dug in their heels in a rear guard action to deflect blame by ignoring the obvious and fighting to keep the mess they had created. Newly minted City Manager Jim Armstrong led the effort to defend the indefensible. He went so far as to accuse one of the leading critics of the design mess of  “making the City look like shit.”

Former Fullerton City Manager Jim Armstrong shovelling hard.
Former Fullerton City Manager Jim Armstrong doing what he did best: shovelling hard.

The City Council, to its credit, would have none of it. They ordered construction halted. Even the Fullerton Observer demanded to know who was in charge. In what may have been the last show of independence by a Fullerton City Council, the majority demanded that the incongruous and useless elements be removed. The lone dissenting vote was that of Molly McClanahan, the eternal staff suck-up, who as Mayor tried backdoor sabotage with the State – which was also providing funding for the project. City staff was going into attack mode behind the scenes.

well fed and ready to attack...
Honest citizen tastes like chicken?

In the end the Council (with the sole exception of Chris Norby) lost its collective nerve and settled on a partial removal of the worst offending aspects of the project. The huge planter was split into pieces, allowing platform access through the middle.

Well, that's better than it was...
Well, that's better than it was...

The miserable trees were completely removed.

Look ma, no trees...
The urban forest retreats. Civilization on the march...

The canopies were salvaged though the construction of alcoves cut out of the still useless block bulkhead wall.

Fullerton platform "alcove" designed by our City Council...
Fullerton platform "alcove" designed by our City Council...

The wretched benches and comical little trash cylinders remain to this day. Go to the depot. You can check it out for yourselves.

It was never disclosed whether Steve Rose was back-charged for the cost of all the changes that had to be made, or whether he actually billed the City for remedial design work. Thousands upon thousands of dollars were wasted on building useless construction and then having to remove it. And what happened to the parties responsible for this complete fiasco? You mean you can’t guess by now?

We'll be hanging on to this card...
Oh, we'll be hanging on to this...

Nothing, of course. The proponents of sensible and functional design were blamed by staff for making the City look bad; the whistle blowers were turned into the villains of the melodrama. Chalk up another big win for the escape artists at the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency.

The North Platform Fiasco – Adagio Molto

Useless walls and canopies, obstructive planters, and trees on the platform: The Great North Platform Disaster was shaping up to be one of the jewels in Redevelopment manager Terry Galvin’s cockeyed crown. Local landscape architect Steve Rose had outdone himself in a seeming effort to waste money and to foist comical design elements onto the public and the taxpayers of Fullerton. But, there’s more.

Ah, historical bench! Quick, put it in a museum. Or a landfill.
Ah, historical bench! Quick, put it in a museum. Or a landfill.

The historic benches on the platform were  jettisoned; they were to be replaced by “street furniture” that was comprised of modernistic plastic coated wire chairs, and undersized waste receptacles, and that had nothing to do with the Spanish Colonial Revival architecture of the depot. It was later realized that ash trays had been omitted.

What is this, an episode of the Jetsons?
What is this, an episode of the Jetsons?
Can anyone say "overflow?"
Looks a bit like a robot. Can anyone say "overflow?"

It just didn’t seem possible that the design choice could have been any more inappropriate or comical. And yet there it was, the final insult added to injury. What would the public reaction be? What would Fullerton’s City Council do? What would City staff do to put a happy face on the disaster?

You’ll find out tomorrow!

The North Platform Fiasco – Scherzo

Dear Friends, in our painful relation of the The Great North Platform Disaster of 1993, we have already narrated the construction of a useless wall, non-functional canopies, and positively detrimental block planters on the passenger platform. And now we turn our attention to perhaps the most ludicrous aspect of the new additions. In musical tempo description “scherzo” means joke.

A group of four trees was planted on the platform, adding more obstacles for hurried commuters to negotiate. Trees. On a train platform.

An unwelcome addition to the urban forest.
A most unwelcome addition to the urban forest.

It seemed to observers almost as if the “designer,” local well-connected landscape architect Steve Rose, was intentionally trying to harass commuters by throwing up barriers in their path, not to mention obscuring the great southern elevation of a National Register structure.

Steve: I know. let's hide that historic structure! Terry: sure, why not?
Steve: I know. Let's hide that historic building behind some nice trees! Terry: well, okay, if you say so, Steve.

Well, Steve Rose wasn’t finished, and neither are we. So stay tuned, Friends…

The North Platform Fiasco – Trio & Menuetto

Ah, Friends! Would that we could end this sorrowful tale of the Fullerton train station north platform without taxing your delicate sensibilities further. Yet, alas, we cannot. We have already detailed the story of the useless block wall that was built right in front of an existing wall, as well as the comically useless canopies built therein. But the “designer” was far from finished with the addition of masonry!

When you're late for your train there's just nothing quite as exhilarating as leaping over a block planter!
When you're late for your train there's just nothing quite as exhilarating as leaping over a block planter!

A huge block planter was placed in the middle of the platform – blocking direct access to the trains; a smaller one was inconceivably built on the footprint of the future elevator tower without anyone noticing. The idea of placing this practical barrier right between passengers and their destination seems odd to us non-professionals, but not, apparently to landscape architect Steve Rose who drew it there on his plans, nor to Redevelopment’s in-house Master of Disaster “manager” Terry Galvin, whose job it was to review the plans; nor even to the Design Review Committee which at that time included two interior decorators.

A pallisade of block on a train platform! What were they thinking?
A pallisade of block on a train platform! What were they thinking?
Good Lord! it looks even stupider from up here!
Good Lord! It looks even stupider from up here!

Well, Loyal Friends, in case you thought that things couldn’t get much worse, you would be wrong. Stay tuned as we continue the lachrymal tale of The Great North Platform Disaster!

Fullerton Redevelopment History, The Gift That Keeps on Giving; The North Platform Fiasco – Introduction & Allegro

Before Redevelopment got a hold of it...
Before Redevelopment got a hold of it...

A few months ago when we were running our award eligible series on the manifold history of Fullerton Redevelopment boondogglery, we promised our Friends that we would relate the biggest mess of the whole kit and caboodle. We have been a bit dilatory about this and so we apologize for being remiss. But now the time has come to tell the tale of The Great North Platform Disaster.

Way back in late 1992 and early 1993 the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency, under the management of Terry Galvin and the direction of brand spanking new Director Gary Chalupsky, began construction on the north platform at the Santa Fe train depot. The work was “designed” by one Steve Rose, a well-connected local landscape architect, and was intended to “improve” the platform area for the increasing number of train commuters. The design passed through the process of staff review by Galvin as well as the scrutiny of the Fullerton Redevelopment Design Review Committee. The budget for construction was in the neighborhood of a million bucks.

The project was bid, the contract was awarded. But as construction proceeded it became very apparent that something had gone wrong. Terribly, terribly wrong.