Loading...
10-01-2008 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES -FINAL 1 October 2008 Committee Members Present: Bill Cathcart Tim McCormack Craig Wheeler Joe Woollett Committee Members Absent: Adrienne Gladson Staff in Attendance: Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Howard Morris, Senior Landscape Coordinator Robert Garcia, Associate Planner Sonal Thakur, Assistant Planner Sandi Dimick, Recording Secretary Administrative Session - 5:00 P.M. The Committee met for an Administrative Session beginning at 5:10 p.m. Chair Wheeler opened the discussion with a review of the Agenda. Planning Manager, Leslie Aranda Roseberry, stated she had information pertaining to Item No. 4, the Aguirre Residence. State Law precluded Cities from rendering discretionary action on accessory second units. The City had standards in the Zoning Ordinance that referred to size of the unit and there were design guidelines that indicated that the design reflected the design of the primary unit. The City had not changed their code or design guidelines to reflect that there would not be discretionary action, including Design Review Committee (DRC) action for those units. In preparing the Agenda and reviewing the Staff Report, it occurred to Staff that the item should not be presented to the DRC. The DRC would review an accessory unit when there was an addition to a house or second story that Staff felt had not met the in-fill design guidelines. In essence, it would go before the DRC on appeal, as the project had not agreed with Staff's determination and a permit had not been issued. The applicant's option at that juncture would be to have the project presented to the DRC. Assistant Planner, Sonal Thakur, was the project planner on the Aguirre Residence accessory second unit and she had spoken with the applicant and communicated with them that if the suggestions Staff had made were agreeable to him; which were to incorporate like materials in the accessory unit as those that existed in the primary unit, the project would be signed over the counter. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated that the applicant's fee would be refunded to them as the project should not have been brought to the DRC. The applicant was amenable to the changes suggested by Staff, and therefore, Item No. 4 would be removed from the Agenda and handled at a Staff level. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated, in the future, if the Committee Members were in their own neighborhoods and noticed an accessory second unit that was being built and realized they had not reviewed the project it would be due to the same reason and would have been handled at the Staff Level. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 2 of 18 Committee Member Woollett asked if Staff would want to hear his comments on the project? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated no. Chair Wheeler asked if he could make a recommendation on the project? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated she could not take suggestions or recommendations on the project as it was not to have been presented as an Agenda item. In the future, if the City Code would change to include more strict standards, than those projects would potentially go before the DRC. Currently, the State had taken those types of projects out of their hands with no discretionary action to be taken and to be handled as over the counter items. It would be inappropriate to take comments on the Aguirre project. In the future there would be changes to the City Code and Design Review Guidelines. She was not 100% certain if the DRC could continue to review second unit accessory structures in Old Towne and Staff was investigating that guideline for clarification. Committee Member McCormack asked how that was different, when in the late 90's, the Zaner Residence accessory structure had been brought before the DRC? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated she was not familiar with that project. The State Law stated that the City could not take discretionary action, but they could have standards. The argument for projects in Old Towne would be that there was extenuating circumstances within a registered historic district, and therefore, discretionary action should be allowed. Staff had not received a final word on that piece. Committee Member Woollett asked who would provide the final word? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated that Staff would receive their directive from the City Attorney's Office. Assistant Planning Director, Ed Knight, had also completed some research on other Cities that had historic districts and how similar projects were handled. Their action needed to be defensible in whatever approach they took. Chair Wheeler asked if the workshop on the Old Towne Design Standards was still being held on October 2, 2008? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the Stakeholders Meeting would be held on October 2, 2008, in Conference Room C. The schedule was as follows: 8:30-Downtown Merchants 2:30-Orange Community Historical Society 3:30-Architects and Contractors Active in Old Towne 4:30-Former DRC Members 5:30-OTPA Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the question that had been proposed by Staff was that at sometime in the future; Staff would present to the DRC the information from the Stakeholders Meeting and gather input from the DRC on the Design Guidelines. One suggestion would be to have the City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 3 of 18 Administrative Session of a DRC Meeting begin earlier, possibly 4:00 or 4:30 p.m., with the alternate being a separate workshop on a different day other than a DRC Meeting day. Chair Wheeler stated he would prefer the information be presented during an earlier Administrative Session. Committee Member McCormack asked for clarification on the times of the Stakeholders Meeting and if he was required to attend? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the participants were attending based on an invitation only request. She was not certain who would be in attendance; the idea was to obtain information from various groups who had interests in Old Towne. Chair Wheeler had been invited based on his work in Old Towne, and a perspective of Architects working in Old Towne. Former DRC members had also been invited. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated in reviewing the minutes from the September 17, 2008 meeting, she had contacted the Assistant City Attorney, Gary Sheatz, and asked if he could be present at the next DRC Meeting when all members would be present. The reason for his attendance would be to re-emphasize the guidelines for addressing public comment, and in particular the situation that was presented through the comments of Mr. Frankel. He would also be available to clarify the different options the Committee Members had in rendering suggestions and a decision on projects such as the skilled nurse facility that they had reviewed. Another issue would be clarification on bifurcating projects, and he would be giving his insight from a legal perspective to ensure that everyone had a good understanding of the issues. There were no problems on those projects that had been previously presented; however, Mr. Sheatz, wanted to re-emphasize the role of the DRC and how the Chair controlled the meeting. Although the DRC Meetings were set up informally in furniture and structure, the meetings were formal meetings and he wanted to present further information for dealing with different situations. The Committee reviewed the minutes from the August 20, 2008 meeting. Corrections were noted. Chair Wheeler asked if there was any further discussion. There was none. Committee Member Cathcart made a motion to adjourn the Administrative Session. Administrative Session adjourned at 5:30 p.m. SECOND: Tim McCormack AYES: Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 4 of 18 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: August 20, 2008 Committee Member Cathcart made a motion to approve the minutes from the August 20, 2008 Design Review Committee Meeting with corrections as noted. SECOND: Tim McCormack AYES: Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 5 of 18 AGENDA ITEMS: New Agenda Items: 2) DRC No. 4308-08 -FEATHER HILL-NEW RESIDENCE A proposal to construct a new 4,047 sq. ft. single-family residence with an attached 890 sq. ft. garage. 2421 Feather Hill Drive Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, r~arcia(ae,cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Committee Member Woollett stated he would be willing to approve the project without discussion. Chair Wheeler stated he had concerns with the project. Associate Planner, Robert Garcia, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Richard Hudson, stated the house was similar to the residence at 2409 Feather Hill, which was in its final completion stage. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion by the Committee. Chair Wheeler stated he had concerns and had asked Mr. Garcia to bring in the plans from the previous approval for the other homes. He reviewed the plans with Mr. Garcia and stated what concerned him was that what was being built was not the plan that had been approved. The coved soffit was not being used and the window trim was not there. Mr. Hudson stated the window trim would be added. Chair Wheeler stated the plans called for an arched window with a transom over the entry and neither occurred on the residence. Mr. Hudson reviewed the plans with Chair Wheeler and stated possibly he switched Lot 2 with Lot 3 windows. Chair Wheeler stated the lack of the soffit made a big difference in the feeling of the houses. He felt that the homes should be built as approved, or they could go back to the Planning Department and ask if the project should be reviewed again. For compatibility sake, they would also need to verify that the other proposed homes would be built according to plan and approval. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 6 of 18 He had another concern with the front stairs and had not understood how they would be constructed without infringing on the front setback. Mr. Hudson stated they had reviewed that setback area. The setback would be adjacent to the garage doors, the stairs would be brought down to meet the sidewalk which would curve back. Chair Wheeler asked if that would place the stairs in the front setback. Mr. Hudson stated there was a 10-foot setback. Chair Wheeler stated the plans showed a 20' setback to something that had not appeared on the floor plans and with the stairs coming down there should be a landing. He had not measured the stairs; current code called for a minimum tread of 10" and a maximum riser of 7 3/0". That could change what the applicant had laid out. He suggested rather than deferring the stairs to the landscape plans that they should be included in the drawings they were reviewing. Mr. Hudson stated the other projects had been approved with a deferral to the landscape plans, which includes the stairs. Chair Wheeler felt it may have been an error on their part to approve the project in that manner. Mr. Hudson stated the landscape plans were currently under construction. There had been a notation that prior to issuance of building permits the landscape plan would be approved and the stair component would be included in that approval. Chair Wheeler stated in reviewing the current design and setback requirements he was concerned that the front stairs would not work. Mr. Hudson stated if he ran into problems he could come back to request a variance or administrative review. Chair Wheeler asked if he was assuming correctly that the stairs could not encroach on the front setback? Mr. Garcia stated as long as the stairs were 42" in height they were okay. Chair Wheeler handed Staff a sheet that gave information on setback requirements. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the setback was generally for the building. Mr. Hudson stated he had spoken with the building inspector and the only requirement was the height restriction that was measured from grade. Committee Member McCormack stated it appeared there was the same issue with the driveway. Mr. Hudson stated they were okay with the driveways. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 7 of 18 Chair Wheeler stated the driveways were 109 at the sidewalk and 110 at the door, and they appeared adequate. Committee Member Woollett had asked where they had measured from, as the dirt could be raised to be less than 42"? Committee Member McCormack asked if 13' was being made up to get to the garage pad to the sidewalk? Mr. Hudson stated no. Chair Wheeler asked Committee Member McCormack if he had looked at the upper floor elevation in error? Committee Member McCormack reviewed the plans with the applicant to clarify his concern. Chair Wheeler suggested that the drawings match what was actually being built and he felt the stairs should be worked out. Mr. Hudson stated the stairs had been a part of the prior approval. Chair Wheeler stated his vote would be to change that and have the stairs included in the architectural plan and not in the landscape plan. Mr. Hudson stated it would be a mute point as he was required to have the landscape plans approved prior to issuance of the building permit. Chair Wheeler stated he was trying to avoid having the applicant run into a problem with the other two houses and resolve the stair issue before he got too far along in the project. Mr. Hudson stated the stairs would be addressed with the landscape plan. Chair Wheeler stated the stairs and landscape plans would need to be brought in together for approval. Committee Member Woollett stated he understood that the houses that were being built would receive the molding that was approved on the plans? Mr. Hudson stated that was correct, the window molding would be added. Chair Wheeler stated he understood the coved soffit would not be included. Committee Member Woollett stated that presented a dilemma as the plans had been approved with that element. They would need to decide if they insisted on having that element added, or if the soffit should not be included on the current plans they were reviewing. Chair Wheeler stated he was not certain they could make that determination on the current submittal and asked Staff if the previous submittal should be resubmitted? City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 8 of 18 Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated generally for projects that were in process they would only be brought back if they were asking for a final on a project that had not appeared to be the same project that had been approved. Before a final, if the applicant would not make the changes the project would be brought back through the process. Staff had not wanted DRC Members driving past a project that was very different than what had been approved. For purposes of the stairways in the proposed project, they had the ability to do a bit more digging to verify they had the right answer. For the house that was being built and measured out according to plan, they could not bring that project back. Chair Wheeler stated that was the discussion as it had not been built according to plan. Mr. Hudson stated the only detail not included was the coved soffit and if it was a huge concern he would be willing to go back and make the change. Chair Wheeler stated that would present a problem as one of the DRC's finding was to ensure compatibility with the other homes in the neighborhood, and to have one of the homes have that detail and the other three homes without it would be incompatible. He felt the four houses should not include that detail. He asked if the change was significant enough to require the DRC to go back to review the plans on the other homes and make a recommendation? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the Committee Members were making a finding on the project before them, not a previous submittal. They were reviewing the project in relationship to the other homes, however, they would only bring those back if at final submittal the homes had not appeared to be built as approved. Chair Wheeler stated they could recommend on the proposed project that the coved soffit be removed and the window changes be made. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the Planner would go out to conduct the final as well, and the applicant would not get power or a final until the Planner signed off on the project and verified the project was built as approved. No changes to the architecture could be made out in the field without either returning to the City for approval or going back through the process. If Mr. Garcia was to go out to final the project and opened up the plans and realized components of the project were missing, the applicant could add back those missing elements or return to the City for review of the project. If the Design Review Committee approved the changes and the fourth house was different, the applicant could encounter a problem. Committee Member McCormack stated they would not know what the Planner's recommendation would be when he went out to final. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the Planners were told that the approvals were very black and white; what was on the plans should be on the buildings. She had gone out on site to address differences on previous projects, and had been told that things had been changed in the field. Those applicants were then told that they would need to make the changes that were consistent with the approved plans -the structure needed to match the plans. Committee Member McCormack asked if that pertained to the site and landscape plans as well? City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 9 of 18 Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated yes. Committee Member Woollett stated he felt the drawings should be left the way they had been presented and the applicant was aware of the situation. Mr. Hudson stated he would rectify the situation. He asked if the 20' setback was resolved with the stairs and the sidewalk? Committee Member McCormack asked if the stairs, driveway, and walkway would be consistent on all four homes? Mr. Hudson stated they would all have the same layout. Chair Wheeler asked Staff if they had a chance to review the sheet on setback requirements and if they felt there were any concerns? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated there was a section that stated the structures and features permitted within a front yard setback were walkways, driveways, and uncovered patios at grade. She was not certain that stairways were included in that area. There could be further definitions in the code section and a few other places Staff could look to gain clarification. Mr. Hudson stated they had been reviewing the stair situation and the access to the front doors. Committee Member Woollett stated the applicant was aware of the situation and the concerns that had been presented. Committee Member McCormack pointed out a potential step wall problem between two of the elements that could present a visual problem from the driveway. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated that would be reviewed. The 42" requirement was intended to allow a view from sitting in a car. The view was from above 42". Mr. Hudson stated much of the height would be gained from the garage and back to the windows. They also planned on curving the walkway around. Chair Wheeler stated he had done a quick calculation and the applicant would need approximately 16' 8" of running distance for the steps, plus the landing at the top. Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve DRC No. 4308-07, Feather Hill, new residence, subject to the conditions contained in the Staff Report and with a change to Condition No. 2: 1. Applicant to submit final landscape plans to the Design Review Committee and that the landscape plans include the stair plans. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 10 of 18 SECOND: Joe Woollett AYES: Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson MOTION CARRIED. The following discussion continued after the motion was made: Mr. Hudson asked if he was able to pull his building permits? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated there was a 15 day appeal period, and once everything had been signed off and stamped the applicant would be able to pull the permits. Mr. Hudson clarified that the landscape plans would return to the DRC. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated those plans would be submitted to Mr. Garcia. Mr. Hudson asked if he would be able to pull permits while the landscape plans were with the planner? Ms. Aranda Roseberry asked the Committee Members if they wanted to review the landscape plans prior to permits being pulled? Committee Member Woollett felt that the applicant should have Staff approval of the stair situation. Mr. Hudson stated there was still a lot to be completed on the structures prior to the stairs going in. Committee Member McCormack stated the applicant was not certain how the stairs would interface with the structure. There were issues of waterproofing and where the grade would be, whether it was a soil surface or a concrete surface. Mr. Hudson stated they were addressing that with the current structures. Committee Member McCormack stated it would be to the applicants benefit to have the plans reviewed prior to permits being issued. Mr. Hudson stated he had waited four months to get to the DRC, and to wait another four months was unreasonable. Mr. Garcia stated before Staff could sign off on the other two homes that were near completion, the landscape plans would need to be submitted. Mr. Hudson stated he needed to pull building permits and get started on the project. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 11 of 18 3) DRC No. 4357-08 -TACO BELL FACADE CHANGE A proposal to remodel an existing fast food restaurant. 4035 West Chapman Avenue Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, r ag rciana,cit o~ge.org DRC Action: Final Determination Associate Planner, Robert Garcia, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Pedro Blanco, address on file, stated they agreed with the Staff Report and they had worked with the City and Taco Bell to get to that point. Applicant, de Koven James, address on file, stated they had worked with Staff and arrived at a prototype for that location. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item to discussion by the Committee. Committee Member Woollett stated he had noticed there were trellis elements and in reviewing the south elevation there was an arch trellis; however, he could not find the details for them. The existing building had a wood trellis that had not weathered very well. Mr. Blanco stated the proposed trellis treatments would be made from an aluminum material that would have a bronze color to them. They would be 2 '/z feet from the building and pointed out a side view of the trellis elements. Mr. Garcia stated he had photos of the actual location for the Committee to review. Committee Member Woollett asked for clarification on the stucco areas? Mr. Blanco stated the area he was referring to was stucco joints. The color would be monotone with accent joints. There was a theme that was incorporated in the dining room that had a wood panel with the same type of joints. Committee Member Woollett stated the design was a big improvement. Chair Wheeler stated in reviewing the landscape plan it stated that all landscape and irrigation would remain and there was no change to those on the proposed application. When he had visited the site the palms were Queen palms and the landscape plans had not matched what was on site. He asked if the landscape plans were for a different location or project? The Committee Members reviewed the plans with the applicants. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 12 of 18 Committee Member McCormack stated if the note had not been contained on the plans, what was submitted in regard to landscape would be assumed to be the proposed plan. Mr. Blanco stated the landscape plan was taken from another plan. He presented photos to the Committee for further review. Committee Member McCormack stated the handicapped stalls were in a different place. Mr. Blanco stated the handicapped stalls had been moved to be in line with the new design of the building. The new design conflicted with the wheel chair ramp and it was moved to the right with the parking moved. Chair Wheeler stated there was a potential problem with that. There was a measurement on the west side that showed 6' from the curb to the building and it only appeared to be 4'. He pointed out another area that showed a 7' distance and he had come up with 4' 6" and with the towers the walkway would be much too small and suggested they re-work that. Committee Member McCormack stated with cars pulling all the way up to the curb there would be a two foot overhang. Mr. Blanco stated they would have wheel stops. Committee Member Cathcart stated he thought they were reviewing a different site plan with a prototypical architecture. Mr. Blanco stated they had taken the plan from another building and if there was a variation they would correct that. There could be the need to move the curb out. Chair Wheeler asked if they had room to move the curb out in order to maintain the parking dimensions? Mr. Garcia stated that would encroach on the parking configuration which would create other issues; there would need to be a site review and compliance with the parking requirements if the curb was moved out. Mr. Blanco stated if there was 4' 6" from the building to the curb they would need to modify the tower elements to meet the requirements not to extend more than 18", as 3' would be the minimum. Committee Member McCormack stated for handicap the requirement was 4'. Mr. Blanco stated it was a protrusion only. Committee Member Cathcart stated the requirement was 48" unobstructed. Mr. Blanco stated they could check the code and comply with the requirement. He understood the requirement was a continuous 48" with protrusions allowed. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 13 of 18 Committee Member Cathcart stated it was 48" of clear path of travel. Committee Member McCormack stated they dealt with that everyday, it was 48" clear. Mr. Blanco stated they could make it 48" without any protrusion of the towers onto that area. Committee Member McCormack stated that included no car overhang into that area. Mr. Garcia stated the plans showed parking space depths of 18' and no wheel stops would be needed. Mr. Blanco stated they would add wheel stops. Committee Member McCormack stated at the Orange Library the curbs were pulled out to 15' 6" in one straight line with the curb complying as the wheel stop for the handicap stalls. Mr. Blanco stated realigning the curbs would take them through another process that they might not want to get involved in. Mr. Garcia stated that could take them down a different road. In re-configuring the parking lot, current codes would need to be complied with and many of those requirements would not be met. Mr. Blanco stated he felt the wheel stops would solve the issue. Chair Wheeler stated if his measurements were correct the front tower element would require some drastic changes. Mr. Blanco stated they could move it in. Chair Wheeler asked if that element changed would they want the project brought back again? Committee Member Cathcart stated there were many changes, the landscape plan was not clear and they might want to review it again. Chair Wheeler stated there was a relocation of the menu board which appeared to run directly into one of the Queen palms. He felt the design was a great improvement. He suggested popping up the tower more on the Chapman elevation to emphasize that side more. Mr. Blanco stated if they were to consider that they may reduce the size on the west elevation to make the focal point pop out more on one side. Chair Wheeler stated the existing building had roof mounted lighting and he wanted to ensure if they were keeping that lighting that it appeared on the plans. Mr. Blanco stated they had not incorporated that lighting as the arches would contain the lighting. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 14 of 18 Chair Wheeler pointed out lighting that appeared on the photos. Mr. Blanco stated there would be wall sconces and the arch and signage would have lighting. Chair Wheeler stated it appeared that additional lighting may have been added to illuminate the parking area. Mr. Blanco stated they had obtained photometric lighting results that had not been part of the package submitted to the DRC. Committee Member McCormack asked if the applicant would come back with a signage program? Mr. Garcia stated the signage would be submitted separately. Chair Wheeler stated on the west elevation the canopy was not shown on the plans. Mr. Blanco stated they had not planned on having a canopy. Chair Wheeler pointed out where the canopy appeared on one of the drawings. Mr. Blanco stated that was an error as they had decided not to have the canopy. Chair Wheeler stated there were curved eyebrow trellis elements that had not appeared on the plans. There was a call out for an expression panel and he wanted to verify that was not for an advertisement of Taco Bell's latest food feature. Mr. Blanco stated there was a bell cut out on a false window; it would not be for food advertisements. Chair Wheeler encouraged the applicants to go out to the site to re-measure and not rely on the as-builts. Committee Member Woollett asked if the parking presented met the minimum requirements? Mr. Garcia stated there should be 18 parking spaces, and it appeared they were short one space. It could have been that the handicap stall had been an original parking stall with the original building. They were finding that to be the situation on a number of projects that had been built prior to ADA requirements. Chair Wheeler asked if they could move the handicap parking space? Mr. Garcia stated that would only require re-striping. If they were to actually move spacing around that would be a different ball game. Chair Wheeler asked the Committee what was there feeling on wanting to have the project return to them for review. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 15 of 1 S Committee Member McCormack stated there were site-related issues that would affect the architecture and he felt the project should come back to the DRC for their review. Committee Member Cathcart stated there appeared to be a lot of conflict in the plans presented. Mr. Garcia suggested continuance of the item to have the applicant return with a revised landscape plan and to allow the applicant to re-design and move the tower elements. From a Staff perspective they would suggest having the item return to avoid any potential problems upon final of the project. Chair Wheeler stated he would not want to continue the project based on his estimated measurements. Committee Member Cathcart stated he felt they should continue the item as the applicant was not certain of the measurements and there was some conflict in the landscape plan that was submitted. Committee Member McCormack stated the landscape plan was not clear. The applicants stepped out into the hallway for their own discussion. Applicant, Steve Smith, was present and included in the applicant's discussion. Mr. Blanco stated they had discussed the building history and that a parking space had been lost due to the ADA requirements. Chair Wheeler stated that the consensus of the Committee was to continue the item to allow the applicant to re-check measurements and revise the landscape plan, and to check the possible conflict of the sign. Also, to take into consideration the suggestions for the towers. Committee Member McCormack asked if it would be possible to get the sign program at the same time when the item returned to the DRC? Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated the applicant would not qualify for a sign program as they only had building signage. Mr. Garcia stated the signage would not come back for approval; it would be reviewed against the City code by Staff. Committee Member McCormack stated he had brought the signage issue up as there had been the possible conflict with the menu board and the Palm tree. Mr. Blanco stated the menu board was the existing menu board which would not be moved or replaced. Mr. James stated the menu board was a new board that had been previously permitted and approved. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 16 of 18 Committee Member Cathcart made a motion to continue DRC No. 4357-08, Taco Bell Facade Change, to allow the applicant to correct the landscape plan, incorporate tower suggestions, and to clarify the conflict in the plans presented. SECOND: Joe Woollett AYES: Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October I, 2008 Page 17 of 18 4) DRC No. 4371-08 - AGUIRRE GUESTHOUSE A proposal to construct a new 640 sq. ft. accessory second housing unit. 1331 East Palm Avenue Staff Contact: Sonal Thakur, 714-744-7239, sthakur@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination The item was removed from the Agenda per the information presented by Planning Manager, Leslie Aranda Roseberry, during the Administrative Session of the meeting. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 1, 2008 Page 18 of 18 ADJOURNMENT: Committee Member McCormack made a motion to adjourn to the next regular scheduled meeting on Wednesday, October 15, 2008. The meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m. SECOND: Bill Cathcart AYES: Bill Cathcart, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Adrienne Gladson MOTION CARRIED.