03-04-2009 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MINUTES -FINAL
March 4, 2009
Committee Members Present: Bill Cathcart
Tim McCormack
Craig Wheeler
Joe Woollett
Committee Members Absent: Adrienne Gladson
Staff in Attendance: Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager
Dan Ryan, Senior Planner, Historic Preservation
Sonal Thakur, Assistant Planner
Sandi Dimick, Recording Secretary
Administrative Session - 5:00 P.M.
The Committee met for an Administrative Session beginning at 5:05 p.m.
Chair McCormack opened the Administrative Session with a review of the minutes. Corrections
and changes were noted.
Planning Manager, Leslie Aranda Roseberry, stated everything on the Agenda appeared to be
moving forward, she had heard from Committee Member Gladson that she would not be present.
At the last meeting Chair McCormack had asked for information on the City Goes Green
program, she handed out a memo that contained information on the program. If the Committee
Members wished to receive additional information or a presentation from the Advance Planning
Staff they could let her know at the next meeting and she would set something up. Jennifer Le
had prepared the information but she had been out most of the last week and a half; therefore,
she hasn't had an opportunity to review the material. However, Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated
this memo would be very informative.
Chair McCormack asked if they should schedule a review for the next meeting?
Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated they had prepared the information for the Committee Members
review and she would forward a copy to Committee Member Gladson. At their next meeting,
after reviewing the information, if there was a consensus that the Committee cared to chat with
the Planners they could set something up for another meeting.
Committee Member Woollett asked if the information had been recently prepared and was it in
response to the Committee Members request?
Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated Jennifer Le prepared the cover memo and had pulled together
information for them.
Committee Member Woollett asked if the Orange Goes Green framework was completed by
Jennifer Le?
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 2 of 25
Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated she believed it was put together by Jennifer Le and Anna
Pehoushek.
Chair McCormack stated the memo read that on February 10, 2009 the Orange City Council
adopted the Orange Goes Green program, and were there any ordinances in the program that they
could cite when reviewing applications?
Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the program was currently voluntary. Specific standards had not
been adopted; there were incentives such as priority processing for people who used a more
green approach. The City was completing something on a City level that dealt with some
building retrofit and with their fleet vehicles. The City had not yet adopted anything that stated
thou shall do A, B and C. There would be UBC updates in 2010 and that would be more specific
to that. Until that time the City had not adopted anything over and above what existed.
Chair McCormack asked if Staff would bring the program up at the counter level, so the
applicant's would at least know about the program?
Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated she believed there would be handouts available; she would double
check on that.
Chair McCormack stated if the applicant was unaware of the program and Staff had not spoken
about it, the Committee Members could not bring it up to the applicants.
Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated none of the program suggestions were mandatory.
Committee Member Woollett made a motion to adjourn the Administrative Session.
Administrative Session adjourned at 5:27 p.m.
SECOND: Bill Cathcart
AYES: Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Joe Woollett, Craig Wheeler
NOES; None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 3 of 25
Regular Session - 5:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL:
Committee Member Gladson was absent.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
Opportunity for members of the public to address the Design Review Committee on
matters not listed on the Agenda.
There was none.
CONSENT ITEMS:
All matters that are announced as Consent Items are considered to be routine by the
Design Review Committee and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate
discussion of said items unless members of the Design Review Committee, staff or the
public request specific items to be removed from the Consent Items for separate action.
1) APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
a) January 21, 2009
Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve the minutes from the regular meeting of
January 21, 2009 with the changes and corrections noted.
SECOND: Craig Wheeler
AYES: Tim McCormack, Joe Woollett, Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Bill Cathcart
ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson
MOTION CARRIED.
b) February 4, 2009; and (c) February 18, 2009
Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve the minutes from the regular meeting of
February 4, 2009 and February 18, 2009 with the changes and corrections noted.
SECOND: Craig Wheeler
AYES: Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Joe Woollett, Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 4 of 25
AGENDA ITEMS:
Continued Items: None
New Agenda Items:
2~ DRC No. 4368-08 -ORANGE GATEWAY
A preliminary proposal to develop a new commercial center with a 2,510 sq. ft. stand-
alone restaurant building with adrive-thru, and a 7,200 sq. ft. multi-tenant commercial
building, on a vacant parcel.
SW Corner of I-5 and Chapman Avenue
Staff Contact: Sonal Thakur, 714-744-7239, sthakurncityoforan~e.org
DRC Action: Preliminary Review/Comments
Assistant Planner, Sonal Thakur, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
Applicant, Tracy Lindquist, address on file, stated they had done a lot of work for Jack In The
Box and he wanted to expand upon some of the items in the proposed project. There was an
actual fireplace, it was a prefabricated fireplace that sat behind a glass panel and was self
contained. It would be visible from inside and outside of the facility. The design that was being
presented was a new design theme for Jack In The Box Corporate; they were moving away from
their typical red and white building and moving toward a more contemporary design. They were
using beige with a deeper reddish color.
Committee Member Woollett asked if there would be no more Jack?
Mr. Lindquist stated it would be Jack In The Box, the new logo was more "Jack" than "In The
Box"; they were attempting to differentiate and go with a higher standard. The new logo was
pictured in the proposal. They wanted to make the building blend in with the surrounding
neighborhood.
Applicant, Greg McCafferty, address on file, stated Jack In The Box was trying to make their
look more contemporary and to appeal to a broader crowd. The design was duplicated from a
design in Boulder, Colorado, which had been refined as it appeared on the presented elevations.
The colors were deeper and rich, and the font on the wall signs was more contemporary. Tracy
had attempted to take some of the universal elements in the architecture and bring those into the
restaurant, with keeping respect for what the City had done across the street. They also
attempted to keep their Corporate identity with Jack In The Box.
Public Comment
Nonee
Chair McCormack opened the item for discussion.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 5 of 25
Committee Member Wheeler stated he felt the roof would be very prominent from the freeway
and next time they came before the DRC that the applicant would bring roof plans and their
plans to screen mechanical equipment, and show where the higher elements returned back over
the roof.
Committee Member Woollett stated the section should include an elevation from the freeway.
Chair McCormack asked if there was an iteration that showed the buildings switched? He had
asked the question because in driving, there was a Denny's and a Jack In The Box built in that
configuration and people driving west bound on Chapman would assume that they could pull
into the Denny's lot and get to Jack In The Box. What appeared was a typical Southern
California development; however, there was not access to Jack In The Box through the Denny's
parking lot. It appeared to be a full development and not two separate parcels. He felt if the
building position was switched there would be more visibility and he asked had an alternate
position for the restaurant been explored? Typically in a shopping center the fast food restaurant
would be located further out and closer to the street. He stated if the site plan was the best
position that they had explored he wanted to see the site plans that had not worked and why. He
suggested that they explore a cut through; he just knew it would be a problem.
Mr. McCafferty stated early on in the project they had attempted to open a dialogue with
Denny's and the owner had not wanted anything to do with them or with the City, due to some of
the things that had happened to his property with regard to the freeway. They had attempted on a
number of occasions to be part of an integrated project and it had not happened. The challenge
was, and they worked with the engineering staff, to find a solution with all of the project
constraints. The access that was being presented was a culmination of $30,000.00 of traffic
engineering work and about five months of back and forth with City Staff to finally get an access
point that met the line of sight criteria, gap analysis, and queuing. The reason they had placed
Jack in the Box tucked in the corner was to be able to have enough of a drive-thru queuing and
not conflict with any of the drive aisles or parking spaces.
Mr. Lindquist stated also the configuration of the site, which was a triangle that they ended up
with, the current design allowed the maximum square footage on the site.
Mr. McCafferty stated he understood that typically a fast food tenant would want to be out on the
street, to have visibility to be able to drive through and get out. The site that they dealt with
dictated the design.
Mr. Lindquist stated it was a triangular piece of property and they were only able to get the
building pad in the location that had been presented.
Chair McCormack stated the street frontage that was created on the other side of the street had a
more urban-type feel and he suggested that possibly the structures should be closer to the street
instead of having parking separate the building from the street. He was just asking questions on
how the site plan had been generated.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 6 of 25
Mr. Lindquist stated the other argument was that in moving the building to the front there was
not room for the parking stalls and drive aisles and it would create unusable space at the top of
the triangle. Working with a triangle site was very difficult.
Mr. McCafferty stated if they took the retail building and gave it more of an urban edge closer to
Chapman he was not certain whether their access would remain the same, and according to the
City's Traffic Staff they could not go any further west on Chapman as it would not be an
approved access. They had that site constraint to consider. Moving the building would create a
need to reconfigure the parking and loading/unloading considerations.
Chair McCormack stated in the past the Committee had heard the argument, however, had not
seen how an alternate design would not work. His preliminary comments were to have the
applicant show him a plan that had not worked. He wanted to see another option, moving the
building closer to Chapman created a gateway and would stop people from pulling into the
Denny's parking lot. He wanted to see the designs that had not worked.
Committee Member Cathcart stated that when the applicant returned to the DRC he would want
to see a cross section of the site, not just from the standpoint of a cross section, but they were
using some very interesting plant materials that would get very large at maturity and they were
proposing those in a very small space. If the plantings were on a slope it created another set of
problems. He felt they were attempting to squeeze some very large trees into a small spot.
Chair McCormack stated it appeared that they had more trees than they needed.
Committee Member Cathcart stated in the turn-around area there would be a lot of canopy that
would be hanging over the road.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he noticed some Coast Live Oak in the plant palette,
however, could not find that symbol on the drawings.
Mr. McCafferty stated he had noticed that as well, and felt that was an error.
Committee Member Cathcart stated there was a Platanus acerifolia which would grow larger
than the spot it was would be planted in.
Committee Member Woollett stated he understood the logic in what the applicant was proposing.
He wondered if the primary street marketing was related to the freeway more than it would be
related to Chapman and he asked if that was the case?
Mr. Linguist stated they would get traffic from the people coming off the freeway and people
across the street; there would be traffic from three or four different directions, it would become a
well known site.
Committee Member Woollett stated he would go to the Denny's on a regular basis for a weekly
meeting and it was difficult for people to find the place; once they knew where it was they had
no problem locating it. He would expect that the applicant would want to have signage that was
visible from the freeway.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 7 of 25
Mr. McCafferty stated in addition to the signage shown on the Jack In The Box elevations, they
intended on returning with a sign program that included a monument sign on Chapman and
signage for the retail business. He had spoken with the property owner and their early discussion
with Jack In The Box was that the positioning of the building was an intent to take advantage of
the freeway exposure. In traveling north bound on the 5 Freeway the property was visible.
Committee Member Woollett stated it was a narrow piece of property with freeway frontage and
they were concerned how things looked from the freeway. He felt they had planned it fairly well
and if the signage was tasteful he had no objections to the project. Whether they were visible to
their market or not was not the DRC's problem to solve. In relating to the neighborhood, he had
no strong feelings towards that. In looking at the project in a broader sense the aesthetics of the
building were fine, he had no objection to the sheet metal and he thought the colors were fine.
He would want more information on the sheet metal. From the standpoint of the City's concern,
he felt the City should not be concerned with the site. The Jack In The Box and design was a
part of their marketing theme and he felt the building was much more attractive than Denny's
and he wished that they had more projects moving in the same direction. It was a difficult site
and he felt the applicant had done the best that they could to make it work in terms of the traffic
and other issues they had spoken about. Whether it worked from a marketing standpoint was the
concern of the applicant not the DRC.
Mr, Lindquist stated they were attempting to work out a deal through the Economic
Development Department as they owned two pieces of land they needed, and they were also
trying to develop a public well site.
Chair McCormack stated the trees along the freeway side were deciduous, and if they had
wanted screening year-round that the applicant may want to use an Evergreen tree.
Committee Member Woollett stated that was along the west side and that would be the view
from the freeway.
Chair McCormack stated the fireplace was located along the north facade, and in reviewing the
project data there was 67 parking spaces, and there had been 72 spaces provided. He felt there
was an opportunity to eliminate cars from parking directly in front of the fireplace and he
suggested taking two of the parking stalls out to provide more visibility to the fireplace.
Mr. Lindquist stated the other thing they had fought with was to get cars closer to the entrance.
Chair McCormack stated there was a handicapped parking space and two regular stalls.
Committee Member Wheeler suggested using those spaces for an outdoor eating area.
Mr. Lindquist stated sometimes that was done, however, the applicant preferred not to have an
outdoor area to avoid having to deal with people loitering on the property.
Mr. McCafferty asked, regarding the screening, if the trees were Magnolia trees?
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 8 of 25
Committee Member Cathcart stated it was a mix of trees.
Committee Member Wheeler asked on the art that was noted in the Staff Report had that
exceeded the allowable signage area?
Ms. Thakur stated it had, and that was something that Staff had discussed with the applicant, and
suggested when the applicant returned to the DRC with their sign program that those posters
would be removed. The Code currently read that in a building there would only be one sign per
tenant, per elevation that was allowed.
Committee Member Wheeler stated there had been a precedent set with the KFC on Tustin, and
art had been allowed on the walls which were pictures of chickens. Could they state that a
picture of Jack In The Box's recently recovered spokes person was art?
Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated she would check the approvals for KFC and do a drive-by of that
location. Jack In The Box was not having their sign program tied into the rest of their
entitlement and it would give Staff a bit more time to work out something.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he felt it would be nice to have art, however, if it was
advertising it would not be appropriate. He pointed out that on Item No. 9, which was noted as a
pre-formed galvanized metal screen, that it appeared to be a cornice. He would appreciate
having more detail on the metal features.
Mr. Lindquist stated they could provide a materials board. The building was one of the first
generation of that type of building that they proposed, the metal feature at the top which had
horizontal grill lines in it, and the other feature (which he pointed to on the drawings) was a
galvanized metal flashing and it was the same material that would be used on the retail building.
Committee Member Wheeler suggested on the mechanical equipment screen that they could pick
up the same form or use of material to create a nice repetition.
Mr. Lindquist stated there should not be a need for screening due to the height of the building.
Committee Member Wheeler stated there would be visibility from the freeway.
Mr. Lindquist stated there was not much of a grade difference.
Committee Member Wheeler suggested on the west elevation they could use a green screen.
Committee Member Cathcart stated if they used deciduous trees a green screen would be helpful.
Mr. Lindquist stated they would consider that, as they also had a sidewalk that went around the
building with a setback and they would need to study the area for the feasibility of adding a
green screen.
Chair McCormack stated on the Magnolia tree, the Russet Magnolia would not get that big, it
was a little tree and would not get larger than 12' maximum. He suggested not getting the
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 9 of 25
biggest Magnolia tree, but getting larger ones if they intended to use the trees for screen. In
reviewing the connection between the galvanized fireplace in Jack In The Box and it appeared to
be repeated on the commercial building and he asked how Jack In The Box used it as a type of
tower element and he if they had any issues with one being higher than the other?
Committee Member Wheeler stated they would not need to match and he had not reviewed
anything objectionable and he felt it was a nice balance of forms. He felt the buildings would be
compatible.
Chair McCormack stated he would like to see a lighting plan when the applicant returned.
Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the plan was when the project returned to the DRC, it would be
returning for a final determination or recommendation to the Planning Commission. The project
contained an Environmental document, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, which would be
forwarded to the DRC for the aesthetic sections of the project. It had been mentioned during
discussion that the Committee wanted the applicant to return with alternate plans, and she asked
if they wanted to see those plans at a separate meeting or at the meeting where the Committee
would be making a recommendation? She asked the question because the Environmental
document was based on the site plan, if there would be changes to the site plan it would be best
to have that done prior to circulation of the Environmental document. They could probably put
another meeting together once they received the information from the applicant.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he concurred with Committee Member Woollett and he was
not concerned with the site layout, he had not objected to it and he was o.k. with it.
Chair McCormack stated he wanted to see that the proposed layout before them was the last
resort for the conditions and issues he had called out, primarily the access and way finding
issues. If the applicant could not make it work, they just could not make it work, he would like
to see a sketch that gave some details of why it would not work. It would not have to be a
computer generated sketch.
Mr. McCafferty stated they probably already had them.
Mr. Lindquist asked if they returned to the DRC with all of the suggestions and
recommendations with the alternate site plans, would the Committee be in a position to make a
recommendation at the next meeting?
Chair McCormack stated he believed that would be the case.
Ms. Aranda Roseberry asked for confirmation that the alternate site plan would be just additional
information?
Chair McCormack stated that would be fine.
Committee Member Wheeler suggested that they look into the screening, as he felt this was
important.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 10 of 25
Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated they might want to talk about how the sections from the freeway
would be rolled into the Environmental documents. Mr. McCafferty concurred.
Committee Member Cathcart suggested the applicant review the plant palette to ensure proper
size and types of planting.
Chair McCormack stated he would want to review the Civil Plan.
Mr. Lindquist stated they had received preliminary approval from WQMP and they called for
either filtration or retention; as they moved down the line that would be decided.
Chair McCormack stated it appeared that all the water on site was going into a funnel and he had
been curious as to how the water collected, and would want that information when they returned.
There was no further discussion.
No motion was made as the project was presented for a preliminary review.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 11 of 25
3) DRC No. 4405-09 -GRAND ST. CENTER-LETTER BOARD SIGN
A proposal to install a new changeable copy wall sign on the Grand Street Center
building.
146 N, Grand Street (Old Towne Historic District)
Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dr.~(a~cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Final Determination
Committee Member Woollett was recused from the presentation due to his affiliation with the
owner on the project.
Senior Planner, Dan Ryan, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
Applicant, Darlene Johnson, address on filed stated over the years (since the 1940's), the YMCA
and the YWCA had identified themselves with that location. It had been difficult over the last
three years that they owned the property for the community to catch on that it belonged to the
Presbyterian Church and they wanted to establish the church at the Grand Street Center. They
wanted to have a vehicle to let the community know what they were doing there and they wanted
the sign to display what was going on inside of the building.
Mr. Ryan stated the sign would have an aluminum frame that would be powder coated the same
color as the lettering.
Ms. Johnson stated the color would be charcoal gray. They felt that the jet black was too black
to match the other sign.
Public Comment
None.
Committee Member Cathcart stated he felt the sign was appropriate. He thought it was too bad
that Chapman University fell within the Specific Plan, as he had not appreciated the blinking,
Staples, Honda Center sign they had that was so un-Old Towne. He liked the sign the applicant
was proposing.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he had no problem with the sign itself and asked the
applicants if they had thought of another placement for the sign? He loved the building and they
had done a good job of maintaining it, but to hang the sign on the building would in effect be
hurting the building. He suggested having afree-standing sign out front so it would not do
damage. He felt the sign on the building would accumulate dirt and eventually there would be
dirt streaks coming down around it.
Chair McCormack agreed with Committee Member Wheeler and he asked if they had thought
about mounting the sign in the same manner as the other existing sign?
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 12 of 25
Ms. Johnson stated they had understood that they could not mount the sign on the other wall due
to the historic nature of the building.
Mr. Ryan stated they had the building to consider, but there was also the wall out front.
Ms. Johnson stated they had not felt afree-standing sign would work with all of the trees, that it
would not be visible from the street. They had considered that and the cost of afree-standing
sign was not an option. They had considered mounting the sign on the wall, but had not wanted
to cut into the wall. They reviewed photos and pointed out the area they spoke of.
Committee Member Wheeler stated they could mount the lower half of the sign to the wall with
stand-offs, to allow the sign to go past the wall cap. It would be similar to the sign that was
mounted to the north of that wall.
Chair McCormack stated he felt having the sign on the building was not the right placement as it
just looked added on and was not compatible with the placement of their other sign.
Ms. Johnson asked if they had no objection to the sign being mounted on the other wall?
The Committee Members concurred that mounting the sign on the wall would be appropriate.
Chair McCormack stated he looked at the project in total and they would be simply copying the
sign that existed and mounting it in the same manner. That would allow the building to remain
clean and pristine.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he had designed houses of the same type of architecture and
there would be masses of wall with the undulating stucco and the clients would feel there was
too much bare wall. He felt that was the whole point to have a beautiful wall.
Applicant, Bruce Johnson, address on file, asked if they had the option of either mounting the
sign on the wall or cutting into the wall?
Committee Member Wheeler stated if they hung the sign on the wall he suggested the use of
stand-offs.
Ms. Johnson asked if they liked the idea of having the sign on the north side?
Committee Member Wheeler stated he felt that would be an ideal place for the sign and it would
be very visible. He felt the sign could be mounted using two sets of bolts on either side and
having it project above the wall in the same manner as the current sign. They could use some
stand-offsa
Ms. Johnson asked if he felt it would be very costly?
Committee Member Wheeler stated he had not felt the cost would be great and the sign would be
so much easier to maintain and would look so much better.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 13 of 25
Committee Member Wheeler made a motion to approve DRC No. 4405-09, Grand Street Center-
Letter Board Sign, with the conditions contained ire the Staff Report and with the following
additional conditions:
1) The sign preferably be mounted on the northern segment of the free-standing wall in
front of the structure at a height similar to the existing sign on the church with the use
of stand-offs to hold the sign to the wall and clear the wall cap.
2) If Condition No. 1 could not be done, that Staff approve an installation in the location
as presented and that the sign shall be mounted with stand-offs.
SECOND: Bill Cathcart
AYES: Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson
RECUSED: Joe Woollett
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 14 of 25
4) DRC No. 4406-09 -OLD TOWNE GRINDER-BLADE SIGN
A proposal to install a projecting blade sign on a Plaza commercial building.
177 N. Glassell Street (Old Towne Historic District)
Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan(a,cityoforange.or~
DRC Action: Final Determination
Committee Member Wheeler was recused from the presentation due to the location of his office.
Senior Planner, Dan Ryan, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
Applicant, Bill King, address on file, stated they had worked hard to be within compliance of the
City and they had restored the historical painting that was on the front of their building.
Public Comment
Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the Old Towne Preservation Association (OTPA),
stated they preferred a blade sign rather than a sign slapped on the wall. They agreed with Staff
in regard to plastic lettering and would prefer wood, metal, or painted lettering. He felt the sign
should be bolted to the mortar joints vs. mounting the sign to the bricks. The blade sign was
appropriate for the building.
Chair McCormack opened the item for discussion.
Committee Member Woollett stated the concern to mount the sign to the mortar joints was so
there would not be damage to the bricks. He felt the electrical conduit should be mounted on the
mortar joints as well.
Mr. Ryan stated the former blade sign was in the same position and there may already be conduit
at the site.
Committee Member Woollett stated using vinyl with adhesive on the back technically was not
very different from using paint. They had not gone into an analysis of what the paint was made
of, however, they would certainly allow synthetic paints and there could be some advantages to
using a vinyl film. It might last longer and not have the deterioration that they would have with
paint. Calling the film plastic was a stretch and they could call the paint plastic if they looked
into what it was made of.
Mr. Ryan stated one of the issues was if there was a matte finish on the vinyl and how it would
be applied. With epoxy base paints and clear coating they could have a sign that would last over
a great deal of time. There was a concern with vinyl delaminating over time.
Committee Member Woollett stated the sign would be in a very exposed location. They used
vinyl a lot inside or in areas where it would be shielded.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
gage 15 of 2S
Mr. Ryan stated the sign code would be re-visited when they updated design codes, however,
painted metal signs or metal letters on a metal background was historically appropriate.
Committee Member Woollett stated he felt the sign was very appropriate for Old Towne and he
supported the project.
Committee Member Cathcart stated he did not have a problem with the sign.
Chair McCormack agreed with his fellow Committee Members; however, he questioned that the
Staff Report stated to replace the vinyl letters with metal letters or painted letters and he asked if
the sign was internally illuminated?
Mr. King stated no it was not.
Chair McCormack stated there was red neon around it.
Mr. Ryan stated the sign would have white painted letters or metal cut out letters mounted to the
background with neon around it.
Chair McCormack stated the neon would stand off and if it was metal letters how would those be
mounted on the metal cabinet?
Mr. King stated they preferred to use vinyl letters; he was not certain what the Code called for.
He agreed in using vinyl paint he would be using plastic. The letters would be cut out and he
was not sure how thick they would be.
Committee Member Woollett stated in using vinyl it would be a very thin material and that it
was available in a matte finish. A person looking at the sign would not be able to tell if the
lettering had been painted or if it was adhesively attached.
Chair McCormack stated historic letters would look more historic.
Mr. Ryan stated he was not certain how the letters would be mounted.
Committee Member Woollett stated if they wanted to be truly historic the letters would have
been painted on the sign and in three years the sign would be faded.
Chair McCormack stated if that was the case someone would need to repaint those letters, and
paint around the neon and probably get paint on the neon. He felt they would want to use metal
letters,
Mr. King stated they had looked at metal, however, the letters were $45.00 each for each letter to
be cut out, it was expensive.
Chair McCormack asked if anything that was red on the sign was neon.
Mr. Ryan stated yes, that was correct.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 16 of 25
Chair McCormack stated he would prefer metal but understood the applicant's concerns. He
would leave it up to Staff. He asked how the conduit would be mounted?
Mr. King stated there was an existing sign in the same location and the conduit came through the
wall.
Mr. Ryan stated the conduit could be painted. The previous conduit had come through the wall
and would be very close to the sign.
Chair McCormack stated he would not want the sign to have a nice black mounting plate with
some galvanized screws and he suggested all the hardware be black.
Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve DRC no. 4406-09, Old Towne Grinder
Blade Sign, with the conditions contained in the Staff Report.
SECOND:Bill Cathcart
AYES:Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Joe Woollett
NOES:None
ABSTAIN:None
ABSENT:Adrienne Gladson
RECUSED:Craig Wheeler
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 17 of 25
5) DRC No. 4411-09 - FREEBIRD CAFE
A preliminary proposal to convert amulti-unit contributing residence into a mixed use
project consisting of one 545 sq. ft. residential unit and 920 sq. ft. of interior restaurant
space with approximately 1,173 sq. ft. of outdoor dining area.
193 N. Lemon Street (Old Towne Historic District)
Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan(a,cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Preliminary Review/Comments
Senior Planner, Dan Ryan, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
Applicant, Chris Letourneau, address on file, stated they were looking forward to a collaborative
effort on the project. The City had many architectural issues and specific plans that governed the
over all direction. He and the property owner looked at the project as an opportunity in a
neighborhood that needed rehabilitation. Across the street there were parking lots with chain
link fencing and in working on the project it was an area that could use some new energy on the
corner. One of the challenges was to work within the building itself, realizing it was quite old
and had been added to over time. They primarily left the building alone and attempted to
incorporate a restaurant into the residential components and to have the floor plan dictate some
of the openings to the exterior. The roof would be left untouched; they would be using the
existing footprint and not adding any additional square footage. They had proposed to add wood
trellises to the site and awrap-around wood deck with perimeter stairs that would engage the
area. There would be an informal seating area that skirted the perimeter of the property that
would engage pedestrians and some cluster-like seating with Adirondack chairs and fire pits.
There would be 36" box Maple trees along the property as well. The intent was to work with the
City to propose additional street trees to add additional vegetation to the corner. The trash
dumpster would be screened behind a 6' fence so that it would not be visible from Lemon Street,
with the location of the receptacle being critical. It would be important to have it adjacent to the
proposed kitchen location and tying that in with aback-up loading zone which would all be
engaged in one area. There would be bike storage and additional landscape treatments added
along the perimeter.
Public Comment
Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the Old Towne Preservation Association (OTPA), he
stated the project was confusing, not only were the plans confusing on what was labeled historic
and non-historic. Since the applicant had not proposed removing any of the additions, he was
concerned with any removal of fenestration, relocation and doors and he felt it would be a good
idea to identify which openings were original and which ones were not original and to work
around it in that manner. Working with the various documents involved, that some of the
proposed elements, for example the French doors on astreet-facing facade, that French doors
would be an inappropriate design for the building. He suggested a more traditional entry door,
A wrap-around deck would obviously be inappropriate for a residential use; however, it would
be something that could be removed in the future without impairment to the structure. The brick
wall around the property would be inappropriate for the style of the property and he suggested a
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 18 of 25
wooden fence would be most appropriate if a fence was needed. Mr. Frankel stated limiting any
alterations to the original structure and even though there had been many additions, and in
reviewing the Sanborn Maps, many of those additions were there during the period of
significance which was 1922. The additions should be treated as if they were part of the original
house. Obviously the removal of the vinyl windows would be a plus and the replacement of
double-hung wood windows. He noticed the entrance doors appeared to be French doors and he
suggested that the applicant find something that was more historic and appropriate for the house.
There seemed to be many modifications to the openings and he felt it would be nice to clarify
which openings were original. He was not certain when the property had become amulti-unit
structure. He pointed out on Page No. 4 of the Staff Report, if the applicant met all of those
criteria it would be a plus.
Janet Crenshaw, address on file, representing the OTPA, stated the brick fence was not
appropriate. The photos of the proposed project looked very inviting. She was not certain if the
front porch which faced Maple was an original porch; however, it certainly would not have had
French doors and would not have been enclosed. The deck would not ever have been a part of
the original residence. The Sanborn Map had shown the porch to be original; it should be left as
a porch and opened up, not be enclosed.
Chair McCormack opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
Committee Member Wheeler had prepared aprint-out of his suggestions and concerns with the
project. He handed out copies to the Committee Members, applicants, and Staff. He stated there
had been items on the drawings identified as non-historic and he asked the applicants what
evidence they had that they were non-historic? The Sanborn Map identified a porch, and the
aerial photographs from 1938 also showed the same things and he felt they were historic
elements. They might not have been original, however, they were historic and should be left in
that manner. On Sheet 3.1, the north side windows were called out as being vinyl and from the
street they appeared to be wood windows. On Sheet 12.1, there was a note that existing
perimeter wall to be veneered in brick/add stone cap, however, the renderings showed a wall that
was much higher than what existed on the site. He asked how high would the wall be? From the
renderings it appeared quite tall and he felt a wall of that height would be inappropriate for the
site and for Old Towne. Rather than a brick or stone wall he suggested a wood picket fence if
they were attempting to separate the sidewalk from the eating area. There were two locations on
Sheet 4.1; there was an entry called out with an elevation of 105'-5/8", he felt there could have
been an error and it might have been an annotation that had been dragged from another page and
he felt the measurement should read 103'.
Mr. Letourneau stated in the front yard there existed some built-up grades and there was a
concrete retaining wall that was approximately 12" to 18". There was actually quite a bit of
grade that was built up on the survey. They were attempting to create a happy medium and
create a flat level wall and the top of the wall would be approximately 24". On Sheet A4.1, the
perimeter was loose gravel, compacted seating area and there would be a 6" difference from the
top of the wall to the natural grade. The outside wall would be approximately 24" from the
sidewalk to the top of the wall.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 19 of 25
Chair McCormack pointed to an area on the drawings and stated if he counted there would be
three 6" steps which would be 18". That would be the reason for a wall, rather than a picket
fence.
Mr. Letourneau stated that was correct. By the time the area was re-graded there would be 18"
of natural grade.
Committee Member Wheeler stated the drawings suggested that the wall would be
approximately 3' or 4' high.
Mr. Letourneau stated that might be a little high as it was a conceptual rendering. In reality, in
looking at the grade it was not their intent to create a wall higher than 24". They had not wanted
a tall massing around the perimeter. The wall would address the grade issue.
Chair McCormack stated if it was 18", he questioned the need for a guard rail; 24" was as high
as they would want to go.
Committee Member Wheeler stated they might not need to go that high. According to the call-
outs it had not appeared to be more than a 1' difference between the top of the wall and the
sidewalk.
Mr. Letourneau stated there was a cross load traveling from the back area (which he pointed to
on the drawings); it was closer to 24" and there would be finished grading that would need to be
done on the site.
Committee Member Wheeler reviewed the drawings with the applicants. He suggested the use
of concrete if in fact they would need the wall, rather than the brick that was proposed in the
drawings.
Mr. Letourneau stated they would not want to demo the wall and re-create it. They had wanted
to add a brick veneer to cover the brick, which could appear monolithic.
Committee Member Wheeler stated when the applicant returned with the project he suggested
bringing accurate exterior elevations that would show the actual height of the wall. It was very
misleading.
Mr. Letourneau stated the drawings and presentation was very preliminary and the project being
presented was the conceptual ideas presented for discussion. The comments were well taken and
he would take the suggestions.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he agreed with the OTPA about the use of the French doors
and they had not fit into Old Towne Orange. There were so many of them and they would be
replacing the historic fenestration. With that many doors on the plan he felt they would be
cutting down on the interior seating area. He suggested the use of single 36" doors.
Mr. Letourneau stated one of the challenges was to create an indoor/outdoor restaurant, with the
wrap-around deck and stairs that would go down to the informal seating area. They wanted to
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 20 of 25
incorporate natural light. With many of the restorations one of the challenges was the lack of
natural light. The goal on their project would be to gain more natural light and to have the
restaurant be more extroverted. They wanted to strike a balance in utilizing mahogany French
doors with true divided light, increasing the size would allow more light in.
Committee Member Wheeler suggested keeping as much of the original fenestration as they
could.
Mr. Letourneau asked how would they document any of the original fenestration, for example on
Sheet A3.1 the initial pop-out that was enclosed was vinyl, including the double-hung windows.
Committee Member Wheeler stated on the north elevation it appeared that there were three
historic windows there and it appeared from the plans that they would all come out. There were
other non-historic windows and it would be nice to have those replaced. The only historic
fenestration that would be left would be the doors and they had proposed to replace those, with
what he felt were incompatible French doors.
Mr. Letourneau stated the challenge was in proposing a restaurant in a house, at a certain point
they had to make those decisions.
Committee Member Wheeler stated the intent was to meet the Old Towne Design Standards as
closely as they could and it was not the DRC's interest to get light and air to the project if it was
not compatible with those standards.
Mr. Letourneau stated he felt two exits would be required and the elevation they spoke about
would need a door.
Committee Member Wheeler stated they would need a door and suggested not damaging too
much of that elevation. He asked how had they planned to patch the exterior siding?
Mr. Letourneau stated the exterior siding needed a tremendous amount of work. He assumed
everyone had been out to the site and had walked up close to the project to examine the actual
nature of the building. The site required a lot of work and retrofitting, which was another
challenge in working with the older sites. They ran into situations were they took out walls and
added hardy frames and especially on a restaurant working with a structural engineer to ensure
the site was safe was a challenge. There would be much of the lath removed and replaced with
in-kind materials.
Committee Member Wheeler suggested doing as little of that as possible. In changing the
windows and adding the doors they would be adding a whole new area that would need patching
or replacement. He asked what they intended to do with the original wood windows that would
be removed?
Mr. Letourneau stated there would be opportunities to reuse the windows. They would be
cleaned up and certainly not destroyed.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 21 of 25
Committee Member Wheeler stated some of the wood windows were not on the drawings and
they could use some of the wood windows in those areas. The trellis on the west side had not
appeared to be compatible with Old Towne Orange, and he had not seen that element used
anywhere else in Old Towne. He felt the porch could be restored and returned to an original
front porch. They could make that a welcoming entry to the project. The north trellis had not
bothered him much as it would a side trellis, however, he felt the square post and canter rafter
ends were not appropriate and he suggested turned posts or period posts, and to use trellis rafters
with a square or plum cut and space them closer together. As far as the deck, he suggested a
concrete deck. It would be more compatible and with a food service business it would be easier
to clean and maintain. When the project returned to the DRC he wanted to see orthographies of
the proposed and existing elements.
Committee Member Woollett stated the project was challenging and one of the things they could
not ignore was where the project was located. It was an area in transition, it was Old Towne;
however, the parking lot was not historic. They had done away with the old railroad yard which
could have been kept as a historic feature. It seemed to him that the most important thing they
needed to do was to agree on a way to approach the project. He felt a restaurant in that area was
a very good idea. The parking lot was being .utilized more, with more people using the train.
Furthermore, the project would help in developing that area, which the City was interested in
having happen. He had been looking at that house everyday and the changes it had gone
through. He agreed with a lot of what Committee Member Wheeler had stated. The challenge
was to find the fine line between the boutique restaurant, which we felt modern day clientele
would be intrigued with, and creating it in a manner that respected the Old Towne preservation.
They needed to work a little harder to be truly authentic, to respect the historic building that was
there, There were things on and in the building that were not originally there. He felt it was
unrealistic to believe a tri-plex was the best use for the site from the City's point of view. He felt
they had done a lot of good things and he had not wanted to add on to the details that Committee
Member Wheeler provided. He felt the applicant was headed in the right direction. He favored
the project.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he too favored the project and it would be a great asset.
Chair McCormack asked what type of food would they serve?
Applicant, Steve MacEachern, address on file, stated they would serve sandwiches and salads.
He and his wife were Chapman Alumni and they found Old Towne Orange to have a lot of
charm and they bought the building seven/eight years ago. It was in a dilapidated state and
during that time his mother was struck with cancer. She chose to take alternative routes, which
were organic and natural foods and supplements and once they finished up they found that the
building was in such a good location, adjacent to the film school, and they decided to turn it into
something that would really serve the community. They chose to go organic and try to create a
quality product and utilize and maintain the historic qualities of the building. They were
enamored with the building. They wanted to go with good, wholesome, natural sandwiches,
salads, and other specials.
Chair McCormack asked if they intended to serve coffee, and alcohol-was it zoned for that?
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 22 of 25
Mr. Ryan stated the applicant had not applied for that type of license.
Committee Member Cathcart stated he wanted to follow-up to what Committee Member
Woollett had stated; there needed to be an honest approach with regard to materials. No add-on
materials. What bothered him about the retaining wall was that it would turn into a bench and he
had not wanted it to turn into a bench, the height might control that. By adding a cap to the top
of the wall they would be inviting people to sit there, and possibly that was what they were
looking for. He was sorry that the way the property was graded that it would not lend itself to a
wood fence because it would go along with the furnishings. On the deck he suggested that they
explore apre-formed or concrete deck, he was not opposed to wood. With health department
standards often times they would need to use a high density wood to meet their standards. One
of the issues he had was with the tree choices, to take every street in the City and attempt to use
those street tree names to fit into the project was trouble. With Maple trees it would be difficult
to find one that would sit in the area that it was placed and that would remain there. Rather than
going with a Lemon tree and a Maple tree, he suggested plantings that would be more conducive
to maintenance. He was not entirely against using Maple trees, as some of them were very
pretty, he just suggested that they look into maintenance issues of that type of tree. He thought
the project was wonderful and it was a great use of the site. They would not have a shortage of
patrons with the film and television studio there. There was work being done in the City to make
Maple a pedestrian connector between the Depot and inside Glassell and beyond.
Chair McCormack agreed with Committee Member Cathcart, that he supported the project and it
was all good. The beauty was in the details. He suggested Platanus to get the nice shade and
sunlight onto the property. On Lemon Street they could just match the Magnolia trees. They
could place Lemon trees in pots as a theme. On the wall, he had a bit of an issue with the wall
directly backing to the sidewalk. Being up on the deck, with a 24" exposure was unsafe and it
invited a fall. He suggested, as they needed a retaining wall, to fit back in to the residential feel
that they use a hedge. They could use a concrete wall with a hedge.
Mr. Letourneau asked if he was suggesting a hedge that would run inside the perimeter?
Chair McCormack stated yes, that was correct. He would pull the wall in 18", and add a hedge,
with the hedge first and then the wall.
Mr. Letourneau stated one of the challenges was to keep cost down and possibly they could keep
the existing wall and work around it. He felt some type of landscaping on top of the wall would
work.
Chair McCormack stated he would figure out a way to have exposure to the street to be a hedge
and it would be a way to introduce some green. He felt it would be a good idea to decongest the
whole house and get rid of those things (he pointed out a feature on the drawings), and he agreed
with what Committee Members Wheeler and Woollett had suggested. With the amount of steps
they proposed there would be the need for railings every 80". If they went less than 80" they
would not need hand rails and they may want to rework the design to get rid of some of the steps.
Committee Member Wheeler stated with fewer stairs they would have more seating area.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 23 of 25
Mr. Letourneau stated there was an issue with handrails, however, as soon as a stair was
terminated, because there would be a fall of more than 30" it would require a handrail anyway.
In cutting out the top they would also need a guard rail. It was a good point and he had gone
back and forth on the drawings. The design was pulled from the whole Spanish steps ideology.
It was a backdrop for social gathering and they were attempting to pull from all walks of life.
Chair McCormack stated, as it was a residential unit, he was not certain how the steps would be
stepped back against the windows.
Mr. Letourneau reviewed the drawings with the Committee Members and explained what would
be done in that area. The whole structure would become a restaurant and they would get rid of
the living component; it was an option and they wanted feedback on from the DRC.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he had no problem with that.
Mr. Letourneau stated they would need to duplicate the same ideology that they had on the front
to the back of the site. There was a wood fence that concealed the back of the house and the
dumpster area. In the Staff Report, Staff had an issue with the location of the dumpster.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he felt it was in the best location.
Mr. Letourneau stated the issue was to ensure accessibility by the trash trucks.
Committee Member Wheeler stated they might be able to keep the existing concrete curb that
lined the perimeter and do a hedge with a new concrete curb to meet the grade height.
Mr. Letourneau asked, if in their opinion, did the site wall have historical content?
Committee Member Wheeler stated one of the problems in Old Towne was that everyone wanted
to upgrade, and many times people wanted to change their concrete to brick. Concrete was an
original material and they encouraged people to maintain the concrete.
Chair McCormack stated if they kept the handrails it would be another opportunity to do
something special, some jewelry, and they could look into what other types of handrails they
could use. He asked if they intended to use DG or concrete in the seating area?
Mr. Letourneau stated he was proposing using infield baseball field clay. It had a good feeling,
or they could use some type of gravel.
Committee Member Cathcart stated they would want to use something that was compacted.
Chair McCormack stated they would want to use a material that would stand up to the furniture
being moved over it. If they used gravel it would need to be very small and something that
would compact on itself. DG was a good choice. In planting trees in DG, he cautioned them, as
the trees wanted to be on the top side. It might be easier to put a simple concrete grate, or metal
grate, and the tree would sit in there and flourish. The DG would be able to go through the grate
and not cause a slippery situation. He asked what type of fire pits would they be using?
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 24 of 25
Mr. Letourneau stated they had thought about using a vertical face pit with a stone or brick
veneer.
Chair McCormack stated many of the pre-cast fire pits looked very contemporary and not very
historic.
Committee Member Cathcart stated they could choose a design that looked a little rough.
Mr. Letourneau stated they could use some board form concrete treatment if that would be more
appropriate.
Committee Member Wheeler stated he would not have a problem with having landscape features
that were a bit contemporary. He suggested that they not use brick.
Committee Member Woollett stated the style would need to come out of historic elements and it
was a fine line to do; it was difficult to not go where their contemporary sensibilities would want
to go. The elements could be just as good or better in maintaining a historic feel.
Committee Member Wheeler stated there was an issue when the City upgraded street lighting,
and they had fought to maintain the original acorn fixture which was a humble design and
Orange was a humble community. There were small houses and it was an agricultural
community. It was not Pasadena.
Committee Member Woollett stated integrity would win every time.
Mr. Letourneau and Mr. MacEachern thanked the Committee Members for their input.
There was no motion made as the project had been presented for preliminary review.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for March 4, 2009
Page 25 of 25
ADJOURNMENT:
Committee Member Cathcart made a motion to adjourn to the next regular scheduled meeting on
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 at 5:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 7:42 p.m.
SECOND: Joe Woollett
AYES: Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson
MOTION CARRIED.