Loading...
12-17-2008 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES -FINAL 17 December 2008 Committee Members Present: Bill Cathcart Adrienne Gladson Tim McCormack Craig Wheeler Joe Woollett Committee Members Absent: None Staff in Attendance: Ed Knight, Assistant Planning Director Chad Ortlieb, Senior Planner Dan Ryan, Senior Planner, Historic Preservation Robert Garcia, Associate 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. No changes were noted and no additional input from Staff. Committee Member Cathcart made a motion to adjourn the Administrative Session. Administrative Session adjourned at 5:11 p.m. SECOND: Tim McCormack AYES: Bill Cathcart, Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Joe Woollett, Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. Regular Session - 5:30 P.M. ROLL CALL: All Committee Members were present. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Opportunity for members of the public to address the Design Review Committee on matters not listed on the Agenda. There was none. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 2 of 17 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: None City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 3 of 17 AGENDA ITEMS: Continued Items: 2) DRC No. 4294-07 - COLBURN RESIDENCE A proposal to review the final landscape plan for a contributing 1923 Provincial Revival Residence. The Planning Commission approved the residential addition and garage expansion on September 15, 2008. 205 North Pine Street, Old Towne Historic District Staff Contact: Dan Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan(a~cityoforange.org Landscape Review Continued from the August 20, 2008 DRC Meeting DRC Action: Final Determination Senior Planner, Dan Ryan, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Kristi Colburn, address on file, stated regarding the pre-cast post for the patio, she asked if it was a personal opinion issue or was it something that they could be told by the DRC that they could or could not do? Applicant, Steve Colburn, address on file, stated initially when they began the application process the interpretation was that for anything behind the fence or in the backyard any materials or design for the hardscape could be used. In the front yard they understood Staff and the DRC could tell them what to do. He asked if they had been misinformed? He felt with the driveway stepping pads that it was his decision whether he wanted the stepping pads or not as they would be located in the backyard. Public Comment Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the OTPA, stated the plan looked very good. He agreed with Staff on the material for the columns and that the concrete porch should remain concrete. The walkways and the driveways were most likely originally concrete and they should remain concrete. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion. Committee Member Cathcart stated he appreciated the applicant wanting to use large plant materials, however, he felt they would be creating a problem and suggested using smaller plantings. One of the problems he noticed was that a notation that the tree should not be planted 10' over a gas line. He pointed out on the landscape plans that there was a 60" box tree in an area where the gas line appeared to be. Mr. Colburn explained where the meter was located and where the gas lines ran. He proposed that when the addition began construction that the meter be moved and the gas lines rerouted. Committee Member Cathcart stated when they excavated for the tree they would run into a problem. He suggested reducing the size of the tree. It would be cheaper and the tree would City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 4 of 17 grow better if they started out with a younger tree. He stated there was a call out for Holly ilex, and assumed it was for a Holy Oak tree. The canopy of that type of tree would not fit into the location they had it placed on the plans and suggested re-evaluating the type of tree they would use. Committee Member McCormack stated he felt the applicants had done a great job. He pointed out the surface material proposed for the fountain. Mr. Colburn stated there would be some type of water proofing on it, some type of membrane added. It was actually very small area. Committee Member McCormack stated the applicant might want to ask the question of their landscape architect. Pebbletech was a similar plaster surface, or they could use a traditional plaster with a thin the on it. The other thing was the decomposed granite needed to be 3" thick. He could not tell what the depth was. Committee Member McCormack laid out a copy of his plans with comments he had noted. Committee Member Cathcart stated on the planting plan it called out for root barriers. There were several types of root barriers. One was a type that was on the outside closest to the hardscape that the roots could affect and another type that wrapped around the tree roots. He suggested they use panel-type that moved out toward the hardscape that could be affected and not use the container root barriers around any of the trees. Committee Member McCormack stated he agreed with that suggestion and to protect the hardscape and allow the roots to go where they wanted to go in the unprotected area. He had a concern regarding the parking spaces and the way the electronic gate would work, and pointed out the areas of concern on the plans. The key thing was to advise their landscape architect that the top of the footing needed to be pushed down 18". If the guy who constructs the wall in a normal way the footing would sit only so far under the ground and it would not allow them to plant their 5 gallon shrub which would be 12" deep. He suggested pushing the top of the footing down. He could not find what type of hardware was to be used on the gate, and asked if it would be the black antique hardware, carriage hardware? Ms. Colburn stated they would use some type of an oil-rubbed bronze type of finish. Committee Member McCormack stated there was acall-out on the plan for stucco and then there was a notation that the finish was to match the architecture which was plaster. He stated they should remove the word stucco. With the Staff recommendations, on No. 3 which requested to change the pre-cast material on the column of the new detached patio to wood columns, he suggested the use of redwood if the columns would not be painted. Mr. Ryan stated typically the trellis supports would have been wood using like for likes. The surfaces could be painted or stained. Committee Member Woollett asked why there was the requirement for the use of wood. Mr. Ryan stated on historic sites typically wood was used. In attaching a trellis, wood was used rather than the use of pre-cast columns. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 5 of 17 Committee Member McCormack stated it was difficult to get a large piece of wood for the columns. Mr. Colburn stated it would be a 6' post which would be very flimsy. Committee Member McCormack stated they could use four posts column configuration if wood was used. Mr. Colburn stated if they used wood it would need to be something complimentary to some detail on the house. Committee Member McCormack stated a single post as a column would look funny. On the irrigation plan a comment was noted in the Staff Report on the water requirement. The two zones with the Oak trees, and he suggested Coast Live Oak, should be valved differently to control the water to the trees. There was no irrigation shown for the front area. Typically with such a detailed planting plan they wanted to have head to head coverage. There was a plant, Heliotrope, which could start to block the irrigation and pointed out areas of concern on the plans. He agreed with Committee Member Cathcart on the 60" boxes; he would never plant any tree closer than 8' from a structure. Planting a tree that close would cause problems and look funny. He agreed that the 60" box was great, but going with a 48" box would be a cost savings and still allow the applicant to get what they were looking for. He was not clear on whether a tree was Ilex Rotundaloba or was it a Quercus ilex, he was confused. He suggested the use of 15 gallon size plants, planted closer together for screening. Committee Member Cathcart stated all the trees that were called out would get much larger than was noted, and he suggested looking at what type of trees to plant. Committee Member McCormack stated design-wise, to use only one Coast Live Oak. Mr. Colburn asked what he suggested as they were looking for shade in an area he pointed out on the plans. Committee Member McCormack stated he would suggest using something that grew faster, possibly a Sycamore. On the plant palette, his experience with Heliotrope was that it was treated as an annual, it could be pushed as a perennial and if they had a very cold winter it would become an annual and die out. Chair Wheeler stated on the columns he saw an advantage in using concrete. It was much easier to conceal steel post in concrete. To attempt that with wood it would require steel braces. He felt the type of column the applicant proposed was a Mediterranean column and suggested the use of a column that was more a Tudor, using more a style that was Norman in design. He presented some sample photos of typical Norman-style columns to the applicants. He was not recommending the manufacturer, just suggesting the style. On the feathering of the path he stated he liked the idea and it was a nice transition from the brick driveway. He was always suggesting that a parking area would not need to look like a parking area; it could look like a patio or garden. He stated he liked what they had presented. He agreed with Staff that the porch should remain concrete. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 6 of 17 Ms. Colburn stated there were areas on the porch that collected water and they would need to address that, however, they were not opposed to the use of concrete. Committee Member McCormack stated with the use of concrete they should keep the same finish as what had existed. Ms. Colburn stated currently the finish was a painted finish. Chair Wheeler stated he understood why they wanted the height on the fence pilasters. He recommended asking for an administrative adjustment. With 72" being the maximum height, they could go to 6' 7" with 10%. Mr. Ryan stated 6'6" was the maximum; otherwise it would go to a variance. Mr. Colburn stated on the side that they were asked to have it stepped back, the wall was very low and they wanted to add height. Committee Member Woollett asked if the fence would be level or follow the elevation of the sidewalk. Mr. Colburn stated it would be level. Committee Member Woollett stated they might be able to work with the rule and follow the sidewalk elevation to gain some height. Ms. Colburn pointed out the pump on the fountain that there had been an issue with. Mr. Colburn stated there would be a small pump in the backyard for the water feature. Committee Member McCormack stated another thing to look at with the fountain was if there was enough fall to empty the fountain at curb face, it all had to be to code. If it was too deep it would need to be vented and drain to the sewer. They might want to have their fountain person look at that. Mr. Colburn stated they would have a sewer line which would be vented. There was a sink in the garage with a waste line going to that. Committee Member McCormack stated there were two trees that appeared to be planted in the DG and there was nothing shown on the irrigation plan for those. He asked what the shape of the pots would be? Ms. Colburn stated they would have an octagon base with a smaller top. Committee Member McCormack stated they may want to incorporate the column design suggestion from Chair Wheeler into the pots. Were the vines going on the trellis or the wall? The planting plan appeared to show them on the wall, and he suggested they go on the trellis. He pointed out the area on the plans. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 7 of 17 Chair Wheeler stated there had been a Public Comment regarding the walkways and that the walkways should remain concrete. Mr. Ryan stated the building had brick accents, including brick steps on the landing approaches. Chair Wheeler stated they had denied brick in the past, however, that was with a Craftsman style. Committee Member McCormack asked how the applicant proposed to get matching brick? Mr. Colburn stated they had been told that there was similar brick available. They wanted to match the brick. Committee Member McCormack stated if it could not be matched he suggested the use of concrete. On the driveway with vehicle loads the concrete should be 6" thick, not 4". Committee Member Gladson stated she was not opposed to brick, however, if the match could not be achieved she suggested the use of concrete. Chair Wheeler suggested the use of concrete walkways with a brick trim. Mr. Colburn stated he was not a ribbon guy. He would go with all brick or concrete. Committee Member Woollett stated his questions had been answered and he agreed with Chair Wheeler in terms of the architecture and the column suggestions were good. He found no reason to require that the applicant use wood. His concern had been with the Mediterranean style. There was something to be said with what the applicant could do behind their fence. The difficulty was how to approve the application; there had been many suggestions and not too many requirements. Chair Wheeler stated that they generally had not required landscape plans for a single family residence that only the items that had been previously addressed should be conditions and all other issues should be suggestions. Mr. Ryan stated on the brick and concrete that the suggestion should be spelled out and also on the columns. Committee Member McCormack stated he wanted to add the recommendation about the 8' distance for the trees and the footing depth suggestion. Ms. Colburn stated if they received their approval for 6'6" it would slope toward Glassell. Mr. Ryan stated each pilaster would be measured for code compliance. Chair Wheeler stated to hang in there for the 6' 7" as 10% of 6' was 6' 7". Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve DRC No. 4294-07, Colburn Residence, subject to the conditions contained in the Staff Report and with the following conditions: City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 8 of 17 1. Reduction of the pilasters to enable the applicant to apply for an Administrative Adjustment. 2. The height of the decorative urn in the front not to exceed 42" total. 3. Remove Condition No. 4, and allow the use of the elements in front of the garage. 4. To maintain, repair or replace original porch landings in concrete. 5. To change the design of the columns to something more architecturally appropriate. 6. Provide the manufacturer's sound information on the pump for the fountain. 7. To provide manufacturer's information on the mechanical gate. 8. To review the watering for the landscape. 9. To maintain 8' from the structure for any tree planting. 10. Depress wall footing at least 18" on the south side garden wall to allow for planting. SECOND: Bill Cathcart AYES: Bill Cathcart, Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 9 of 17 New Agenda Items: 3) DRC No. 4364-08 - IRV SEAVER BMW A proposal to demolish a 1,500 square foot service building, add 3,850 square feet to the service department, add a 6,875 square foot second floor over the existing and proposed first floor. 607 West Katella Avenue Staff Contact: Robert Garcia DRC Action: Final Determination Associate Planner, Robert Garcia, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Jon Califf, address on file, stated BMW had been requesting that Mr. Bell expand and perhaps modernize the facility closer to their standards. There was only a limited amount he could do based on the size of the property. The proposed project was enough of what BMW wanted and Mr. Bell was able to obtain more storage space for his facility. Mr. Bell was currently leasing three other storage facilities. Applicant, Evan Bell, address on file, stated BMW had told him if he would not expand that they would put another dealer in Orange County. Presently he was the only BMW Motorcycle Dealer in Orange County and he wanted to keep it that way, in the City of Orange. Mr. Califf stated the operation had been in the City, under three different owners, for 97 years. Committee Member Cathcart stated it had started in the Plaza. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion. Committee Member Woollett asked how the applicant proposed to achieve the seamless extension of the masonry wall? Mr. Califf stated it would not be completely seamless. It would be smooth on the property line wall and it would be split face where the sign and the roll-up door were located. They had placed design elements to draw attention away from the seam. The building was originally a tan split-faced block, although it was faded. Committee Member Woollett asked if the current color was a natural color? Mr. Califf stated "yes", that there had not been any color or stain added. The idea would be to go with a block that was as close in color to what existed and apply a block stain to take the warm tone out of it and get a gray color. The split face had a salt and pepper nature that they did City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 10 of 17 not want to lose. Rainguard had run some samples, which he shared with the Committee Members. Committee Member Woollett asked for clarification on the joint between the first and second floor? Mr. Califf stated there would be a stucco trim that would step up beyond the block. It was approximately 15" or 16" high. It would step out a bit beyond the block, go up and then an additional step out return back to the wall face. It was not a belly band but a similar idea. It would be stucco. Committee Member Woollett stated it would be a little shelf with some metal in there. Mr. Califf stated he had not played with the design a lot and thought it would be stucco with a metal cap. He had also looked at doing the entire profile in metal. Committee Member Woollett asked about the colors of the masonry and the plaster? Mr. Califf presented color samples and stated the darker color would be the doors, trim, top cap and store front, anything that currently had a dark trim. The middle color, which he pointed out, would be the color of the block. They wanted some of the aggregate colors to show through. The stucco would be in the same tone. BMW would like it to be white; he had not wanted it to be white and presented a color sample he proposed to use. Committee Member Woollett stated there were horizontal expansion joints and there were two vertical together. Mr. Califf stated it would be a channel reveal with two lines with a single "w" shape reveal expansion joint with a single line. The background color would be the same as the stucco. It stuck out more in the drawing than it would in actuality. There would be some all the way around the back. The existing building was currently single story. Committee Member Woollett asked if the glass would be a gray glass? Mr. Califf stated it would be clear on the show room but all other glass would be shaded, possibly a number 9. Committee Member Woollett asked why there was so much height above the windows? Mr. Califf stated there was a 30" parapet requirement at the property line wall and because of the property line wall they had to slope away from there and ended up with a parapet that was 5' or more high on the side with the windows. There was clear spanning with trusses, there would be 30" open web trusses. They tried to move it down. When they went to engineering and had the actual size for the members he would try to lower it. Based on clear height that was wanted inside and the 30" parapet requirement they had ended up with that design. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 11 of 17 Committee Member Woollett stated it appeared to be a bit high. Chair Wheeler asked if he had considered doing the expansion joints in that plane, which he pointed out on the plans, but less of them above and below. It seemed liked there were a lot of them. Mr. Califf stated he could certainly take a look at that. Chair Wheeler stated they probably would be painted out. On sheet A2.4, on the east wall there was something called out as a false window. Mr. Califf stated it was a stairwell or an electrical room. He was not certain what that was. Chair Wheeler stated he had not seen that element on the outside elevation. Mr. Califf stated it was possible that they had worked around it and the call out was in error. Chair Wheeler stated on the drawing there was a canopy labeled existing and he believed it was the new one. Mr. Califf stated it was existing out front. Chair Wheeler stated if there was an advantage to add a curb and planter, he pointed out the area on the drawing. Mr. Califf stated there was a trailer that needed to get through that area. Committee Member Cathcart stated the new methodology was that new irrigation and landscape plans would go back to Community Services. Mr. Califf stated they wanted to get through the process understanding that part would require approval; they wanted to get enough landscape on the plans to meet the tree requirement. Mr. Garcia stated that Howard Morris, Senior Landscape Coordinator, had reviewed the plans and had submitted his recommendations which were included in the Staff Report. Committee Member Cathcart suggested the applicant find plant material that would not require a lot of work. Mr. Califf stated there were existing Junipers on site. Mr. Bell stated they were trimmed once a year and watered. Committee Member Cathcart stated something that was green and would not require a lot of attention as the site was not about gardening. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 12 of 17 Committee Member McCormack stated when he reviewed the plans he believed that the tree count was used to create shade in the parking lot. There was a conflict obviously due to the trailer and the areas of trees were becoming a literal forest. The intent of the tree count was to shade the parking and paved areas and how could they achieve that; currently, the trees were crammed all on the side. He asked the applicant if the entire area needed to remain open? Mr. Califf stated the tree count was based on the frontage, and they had two frontages. There were no internal property lines. Generally much of the tree count went along the interior property line to buffer or create a screen with the neighbor. Unfortunately there was an alley and a property line wall and they still had the same tree count requirement due to the frontage area. Committee Member McCormack stated they had a triple whammy, with the double frontage and the zero lot Line. That had created a funniness and how would they solve that? Some of the trees could work, but on the 15-gallon trees the only way to make that work would be to create a Eucalyptus forest. The tree count would not work for the site. Committee Member Cathcart stated there were instances when the tree count formula had not worked, and in this proposed project it would not work. Committee Member Gladson asked if they could apply for a variance? Mr. Garcia stated it would depend, if it was within 10% they could apply for an administrative remedy. Committee Member McCormack stated they could create diamond planters in the parking lot and would the area be wide enough to get through? Mr. Bell stated when a semi display truck was brought in it took the entire area to make the turn. The truck would be parked during an event and they would not be able to do that with the diamonds. Committee Member McCormack stated the tree count was developed to shade asphalt. The tree count was the same for The Block At Orange, for Albertson's, and for everybody. It was a hardship for the proposed project. He would not want to design the project and at this point he would not know how to resolve it. Mr. Califf stated with an Administrative Adjustment, you take four trees away and there would still be 31 trees. Committee Member McCormack stated 31 was still a lot, but with the right tree they could create something that would work. Committee Member Woollett stated that was what a variance was about, when a zoning regulation would not work. There were reasons why the requirement for this site would not work and there must be something more than 10% that could apply to the application. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 13 of 17 Mr. Garcia stated the applicant could apply for a variance. From a Staff perspective, what was unique about the parcel that would allow them to support a variance? He could not, from a Staff perspective, make the findings. Committee Member Woollett stated if he was writing up an application for a variance he would notate the fact that there was a piece of property with four sides to it, with one side being a zero lot line and two sides being street. It was a very uncommon situation and there would be justification for a variance. Mr. Garcia stated the DRC or Planning Commission could make that finding. From a Staff perspective, he could not. Committee Member Woollett stated the only way they could obtain that variance was to have the applicant go to the Planning Commission. Mr. Garcia stated that was correct. Committee Member McCormack stated there were millions of types of trees and he had seen the problem resolved using Italian Cypress trees. They could work with the architect and have the trees right up against the side of the building and use the trees as a vertical element. Committee Member Cathcart had suggested Palm trees, theoretically they could use those, but they would be more expensive. He pointed out an area that trees could be added for shade. It was a design challenge. Committee Member Cathcart stated if it was his design he would immediately take out most of the trees and do it in a good horticultural manner and apply for a variance. Committee Member McCormack stated he had not believed that they could get 31 trees. They could address the need for shading and also the operational uses. He pointed to the plans, and stated it looked funny and the trees there could cause a huge problem. Committee Member Cathcart stated the area looked like they were selling trees not motorcycles. Committee Member Gladson asked if she had heard earlier that the site had junipers? Mr. Bell stated that was correct. Committee Member Cathcart stated that was a shrub not a tree. Mr. Califf stated they were in the photos. Committee Member Gladson stated there must be some type of tree that would help to get close to the numbers. Committee Member Cathcart stated it would need to be a Palm or Italian Cypress tree and it would still look like a picket fence. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 14 of 17 Committee Member McCormack stated in Lake Forest or places similar to that, the spacing on the Eucalyptus trees had created problems. Applicant, Lois Bell, address on file, asked if there was a landscape firm that could come up with a solution to the situation? Mr. Califf stated that would be the next step to take. Committee Member McCormack stated that he and Committee Member Cathcart would both look at the plan and come up with two different solutions or maybe the same. Mr. Califf asked if a plan with a creative solution, such as those that had been mentioned, would be approved by Community Services or by the DRC, or would it require Planning Commission approval? Committee Member McCormack stated he believed they needed to prove the point and apply for a variance. The landscape architect would need to take a look at it and see how close they could get. Committee Member Gladson stated before them was the project with the whole package. If the applicant, in hearing the discussion, wanted to apply for a variance that would be a separate application. They could add in their discussion something that the DRC would be open to. Perhaps they move it along and bring back the landscape plan for the DRC to review. Committee Member Cathcart stated he felt they should move on the architecture and the site plan and the landscape plan would need to return. The underlying notation would be that there were too many trees required for the site, it just would not work. He felt there was not a way to get that number of trees on the site. Committee Member Gladson stated she appreciated hearing the observations from the landscape experts and the heaviness of the trees on the site. It had looked as if they were just cramming in the trees to meet the numbers. Mr. Califf stated they were working with the Orange Municipal Code. Committee Member Cathcart stated it was a unique site and a variance might be acceptable. Committee Member Woollett stated it occurred to him that the type of motion they were speaking of could be a problem. A different approach to the landscaping might change the parking on the site. Committee Member Cathcart stated being on the site a multitude of times and understanding the way the motorcycle and semi-trucks pulled in. Motorcycles parked anywhere they could find a spot and he felt they would not want to restrict that. Planters next to the building would not work. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 15 of 17 Committee Member Woollett stated he had not understood if there was a planter against the building a motorcycle could be parked up against the planter. Committee Member Cathcart stated his point was that there would be motorcycles and motorcyclists and if there would be small planting areas that they would not survive. Mr. Califf stated they had looked at adding planters, however, as there were no sidewalks it would encroach on the right of way. Mr. Garcia stated the zoning was a C-R Zone which had a 10' side yard set back with no parking in that area. Committee Member McCormack asked how many semi-trucks would they have at any given time? Ms. Bell stated for an event they would have one. Committee Member McCormack reviewed the plans with the applicants to gain clarification on set-up for events. Mr. Califf stated he felt the way to approach it would be to understand it was to come back. If the landscape architect was to propose a planter or something else, they would need to submit that for review and look at what the impacts would be at that time. Mr. Bell stated they would not want trees too close to the building. Committee Member Cathcart pointed to an area on the plans and asked if that was used for display? Mr. Califf pointed to an area that was used for display and stated they had a site triangle with landscape and signage. They would maintain the current layout and the area was used for bike display. Trees could be added, however, there would be a visibility issue. Mr. Bell stated the monument sign was required by BMW. Committee Member Cathcart asked if the other sign could be located on the new addition? They needed to deal with signage and the tree issue at the same time. Ms. Bell stated it was something they needed to think about. The Committee Members and the applicants discussed the signs and possible alternate placements. Committee Member Cathcart stated most of the discussion they had been involved in for the last 20 minutes would make the case for a variance. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 16 of 17 Chair Wheeler stated he felt they should ask for a return of the landscape plan and to explore ways to meet the tree requirement and if it could not be met to suggest that they return for a variance. He stated the cornice on the drawings had not appeared on their plans of the west side and he asked if it was a paint stripe? Mr. Califf stated the building would be the same all the way around and they had wrapped it around the building. Committee Member Gladson stated the success of the building was the addition to the southern edge and moving some of the activity to the new location and she had not wanted that to be overshadowed. She would want to bring that to everyone's attention and commend the applicant on wanting to do that. If she ventured to guess, the area was not initially commercial/recreation as the area appeared to be industrial and they were stuck with many of the things that existed. She felt it was going in the right direction, was in support of the project and concurred with Staff's recommendations. She would want to review the landscape plan. It was a good project. Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve DRC No. 4364-08, Irv Seaver BMW, subject to the conditions contained in the Staff Report and with the following conditions: 1. A landscape plan be resubmitted to the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. In the case that the applicant could not reasonably meet the tree requirement, to recommend they consider a variance. SECOND: Joe Woollett AYES: Bill Cathcart, Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for December 17, 2008 Page 17 of 17 ADJOURNMENT: Committee Member Cathcart made a motion to adjourn to the next regular scheduled meeting on Wednesday, January 7, 2009 at 5:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 7:07 p.m. SECOND: Adrienne Gladson AYES: Bill Cathcart, Adrienne Gladson, Tim McCormack, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED.