Loading...
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