02-09-2000 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MINUTES
for Wednesday, February 9, 2000
Board Members Present: Leonard Filner
Jack McGee
Mark Paone
Susan Secoy (Chair)
Joe Woollett (Vice Chair)
Staff in Attendance: Chuck Lau, Associate Planner
Howard Morris, Landscape Coordinator
Administrative Session - 4:30 P.M.
The board met for an administrative session beginning at 4:30 p.m. The meeting adjourned at
approximately 8:40 p.m.
Regular Session - 5:30 PM
REVIEW OF MINUTES:
A motion was made by Joe Woollett to approve the January 19, 2000 minutes with the following
corrections:
DRC No. 3475 -NORTH ORANGE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: page 3, bullet point 5, amended as
follows:
The building elevations have been revised to include the use of panel siding consistent with
the existing material used on the °~~°+;n,. ~+r..^+„r^~ church building. The lower wainscot is
painted precision block for maintenance considerations.
DRC No. 3503 - TEREZIA GIURGIU: page 8, paragraph 3, sentence 1, amended as follows:
Susan Secoy stated that although she appreciates the applicant's effort in being sensitive to the
residential neighborhood, she is not comfortable with the proposed architecture and
landscaping as there is still le#s a lot of work to be done on the design of the project.
SECOND:Leonard Filner
AYES:Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett
NOES:None
ABSENT:None
ABSTAINED:Jack McGee
MOTION CARRIED
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for February 9, 2000
Page 2
1. DRC No. 3373 -BURGER KING RESTAURANT
New freestanding sign and revised wall sign for a new restaurant.
4402 E. Chapman Avenue
DRC Action: Final Determination
The project was presented by Bill Carrig with Burger King restaurant. The proposal is to
construct a new freestanding sign in front of the building perpendicular to the street. Also
proposed is to revise the signage along the north building elevation because the previously
approved wall sign is apparently too large for that fascia area. The revised plans shows
individual channel letters mounted on a raceway installed on the mansard roof.
The DRC did not have a problem with the freestanding sign, but felt that the wall sign was not
appropriate. The applicant still has the option of installing the previously approved wall sign on
the fascia wall, if all the required conditions can be met.
MOTION by Jack McGee to approve the project with the following condition:
1. The proposed freestanding sign is approved as submitted.
2. The proposed wall sign shall be eliminated.
SECOND: Leonard Filner
AYES: Leonard Filner, Jack McGee, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
MOTION CARRIED
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for February 9, 2000
Page 3
2. DRC No. 3468 - CITY OF ORANGE
Demolition of an existing bank building (former Bank of America) and replace with a
public parking lot.
345 E. Chapman Avenue (non-contributing structure)
DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission
The DRC stated that they cannot adequately review this project and render a proper decision
because the correct set of plans were not received until just earlier this afternoon.
MOTION by Susan Secoy to continue the project.
SECOND: Jack McGee
AYES: Leonard Filner, Jack McGee, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
MOTION CARRIED
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for February 9, 2000
Page 4
3. DRC No. 3501 - PROTHERO ENTERPRISES, INC.
Sign program for an existing office building
1045 W. Katella Avenue.
DRC Action: Final Determination
Continued from 12/22/99 and 01/19/00 meetings (Formerly submitted as Republic
International Marketing)
The project was presented by Steve Prothero, owner and architect. The project had originally
started as a proposal for a secondary tenant wall sign, formerly submitted as Republic
International Marketing. The DRC has requested for submittal of a more comprehensive sign
program for the entire building rather than a separate "piece-meal" submittal. The proposed
sign program identifies the allowable square footage and locations of the tenant wall signs. The
wall signs are individual channel letters, illuminated (internally) or non-illuminated. The existing
freestanding sign structure would remain the same (except for changeable tenant panels).
Joe Woollett expressed concerns with the style and colors of the existing monument sign not
being consistent with the wall signs.
Mr. Prothero explained that the colors of the monument sign will most likely be dictated by the
future primary tenant wall sign along the top of the building. The exact color(s) of the primary
wall sign has not yet been determined. It is not his intent to limit the colors based on any one
single tenant. Perhaps the sign program can be limited to a few different colors (i.e. white, blue
red) ,and if the future tenant proposes to use any other color, then they would be required to
make a separate submittal to the DRC for approval.
Joe Woollett felt that tenant signage should relate to each other in some way in terms of style
and colors, so that it would not be so disparate.
Mr. Prothero understands this, but felt that the signs have completely different faces, different
planes, different heights, different dominance, and are far enough removed from each other
that it would not have that problem.
Joe Woollett stated that this is a very plain building, and the signs that are installed on the
building becomes primary elements of the design.
Mark Paone stated that his main concern is the compatibility of the primary tenant signage. He
would also like to see the joints of the building acknowledged in the sign program, and establish
how the proposed signage relates to the joints. Are the signs to be centered, closer to the
building corner, etc.?
Mr. Prothero does not see the logic in doing such. Until the exact size and dimension of the
tenant signs are known, it is difficult to establish this criteria. He fears that this may lock him
into a potentially worst situation.
Mark Paone stated that some type of design principle should be identified and incorporated into
the sign program to achieve compatibility.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for February 9, 2000
Page 5
3. DRC No. 3501 - PROTHERO ENTERPRISES, INC. (Continued)
Mr. Prothero stated that perhaps the application for the sign program can be withdrawn until at
such time (approximately 5 to 6 months) that the primary tenant signage can be establish. In
the mean time, the secondary tenant signage can be submitted separately on an individual
bases.
MOTION by Mark Paone to accept the applicant's request to withdraw the sign program
application.
SECOND: Jack McGee
AYES: Leonard Filner, Jack McGee, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
MOTION CARRIED
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for February 9, 2000
Page 6
4. DRC No. 3509 -TARGET
Expansion of an existing retail store to include a 9,700 sq.ft. building addition.
2191 N. Tustin Street
DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission
Approved as consent item)
MOTION by Susan Secoy to recommend approval of the project as submitted to the Planning
Commission as submitted.
SECOND: Jack McGee
AYES: Leonard Filner, Jack McGee, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
MOTION CARRIED
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for February 9, 2000
Page 7
5. DRC No. 3511 -CHRIS AND HARRIET WHELPLEY
Addition of a new 2-story studio unit on property that contains an existing single family
residence.
621 N. Glassell Street
DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission
The project was presented by the owner Harriet Whelpley and Project Architect Rick Fox. The
proposal is to construct a new 2-story detached second unit at the rear of the property. The
building design, architectural details, finish materials and color would match the existing
residence. The site plan has been modified per the Staff Review Committee's (SRC)
comments to eliminate the circular driveway approach and replace instead with aturn-around
area. The project is not location within the Old Towne District, and is not listed as a historically
contributing structure.
The DRC complimented the architect for his sensitivity in design towards the existing structure.
The DRC did raised concerns with the proportion of the windows in relationship to the horizontal
trim detail underneath the sill which seemed out of balance. Perhaps the horizontal trim can be
further studied by slightly lowering it to see if the proportions can be improved. The addition of
some type of period lighting fixtures over the garage door openings might also help to give it
more balance. Submit revised plans with cut sheets of lighting fixture. Some refinement is still
needed, otherwise, the project is well done and the DRC supports the overall direction of the
project.
MOTION by Susan Secoy to continue this project based on the discussion above.
SECOND: Jack McGee
AYES: Leonard Filner, Jack McGee, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
MOTION CARRIED
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for February 9, 2000
Page 8
6. DRC No. 3514 - AIRTOUCH CELLULAR
New wireless communications facility to include a 60 ft. high monopole antenna located
within an existing multiple tenant industrial complex.
504 W. Chapman Avenue. (non-contributing structure)
DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission
The project was presented by John Koos, project consultant. The proposal is to construct a 60
ft. wireless communications antenna in the parking lot of an existing industrial complex.
Although the project is located within the Old Towne District, the industrial complex is
contemporary design and therefor not listed as historically contributing. Airtouch has already
considered many other site in the downtown area, and after exhausting many options, they
have determined that this is the most suitable location given the numerous constraints including
engineering design problems and uncooperative property owners.
Mark Paone stated that while the concept of locating the antenna in an industrial complex is
good approach, he is concerned that in this particular case, it is only a small sliver of industrial
space surrounded by residential uses in a historic district. The proposed 60 ft. high antenna is
significantly higher than anything in the surrounding area, and may have a negative impact
upon the historic district.
Susan Secoy stated that she sympathizes with the need for improved technology, but there are
no other buildings of this same extreme height in the area. Perhaps the antenna equipment
can be installed on one of the taller buildings and still accomplish the same objective? Or
perhaps if more horizontal space can be obtained, can the antenna equipment be lowered by
spreading it out in a linear direction?
Mark Paone offered the applicant that perhaps City Economic Development Department staff
can help negotiate with the property (i.e. Sunlight Church) owners, otherwise he cannot support
the project because it is incompatible with the historic district.
The applicant appreciates Mr. Paone offering the City's help to further explore other options and
alternatives. However at this time, he is opting to proceed forward to the Planning Commission.
MOTION by Mark Paone to recommend denial of the project to the Planning Commission with
the following findings:
1. The project as proposed is not compatible with the existing structures in the surrounding
area of the historic district.
2. The project as proposed is not consistent with the Old Towne Design Standards.
3. The project as proposed is not consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards.
SECOND: Leonard Filner
AYES: Leonard Filner, Jack McGee, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
MOTION CARRIED
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for February 9, 2000
Page 9
7. DRB No. 3384 - LEMAR LUNDQUIST
Review construction/material options to re-side historic single-family home.
133 S. Shaffer Street
DRC Action: Final Determination
The project was presented by the owner Mr. Lemar Lundquist, and his contractor Mr. Pat
Lenahan. This is a proposal to re-side an existing single family residence that is listed as a
contributing structure within the Old Towne Historic District. The City Council has upheld the
decision of the Planning Commission and the Design Review Board to deny the use of
composite wood product as replacement siding for this project. The residence is currently sided
with sheets of plywood covered over the existing wood siding.
The DRC discussed with the applicant the different options of re-siding the house in a manner
that is consistent with the Old Towne Design Standards. The options included: 1) removal of
all the new plywood down to the original wood siding and repair what was damaged. 2)
removal of the new plywood and the original wood siding and re-side with new redwood siding.
3) leaving the new plywood in place and install the new redwood siding over the plywood. The
new redwood siding would be custom milled to original profile and specifications.
The DRC asked if there were anyone in the audience that would like to address the DRC
regarding this project.
Ms. Joan Crawford - O.T.P.A. stated that although it is more labor intensive, it is preferable that
the new plywood be removed and patch/repair the original redwood siding underneath.
The DRC further discussed the window trim and framing details with the applicant, and asked if
a mock-up window detail can be fabricated so the DRC can visit the site before the next
meeting?
Mr. Lundquist agreed to a continuance of the project for further study.
MOTION by Susan Secoy to continue the project, and request that the DRC conduct a study at
the project site to review amock-up of the applicant's preferred siding option and window
framing detail.
SECOND: Joe Woollett
AYES: Leonard Filner, Jack McGee, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
MOTION CARRIED