Loading...
11-07-2001 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES for Wednesday, November 7, 2001 Committee Members Present: Leonard Filner (Vice Chair) Susan Secoy Alice Angus Joe Woollett (Chair) Staff in Attendance: Chuck Lau, Associate Planner Howard Morris, Landscape Coordinator Debbie Ritchey, Recording Secretary Committee Member Absent: Mark Paone Administrative Session - 4:30 P.M. The committee met for an administrative session beginning at 4:30 p.m. The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:00 p.m. Regular Session - 5:30 PM REVIEW OF MINUTES: A motion was made by Committee Member Alice Angus to approve the August 22, 2001 minutes with the following corrections: Page 1, Committee Members Absent amended as follows: Leonard Filner ~`~~~e-^~:rT (Vice Chair) DRC #3559 Lis Guisto, page 4, paragraph 1, sentence 2 amended as follows: The proposal is to use an alternate wood siding material that has a slightly different profile than the sample wood siding that was approved at the September 13, ~'~ 2000 DRC meeting. SECOND:Susan Secoy AYES:Alice Angus, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:None ABSTAINED:Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2001 Page 2 1. DRC No. 3669 -DONALD BERNARD New landscape planter and replacement brick staircase at the front porch of an existing residence in Old Towne. 230 S. Grand Street (Contributing Structure) Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner -Historic Preservation DRC Action: Final Determination Continued from 9-5-2001 & 10-10-2001 DRC meetings) A request from applicant was received to continue the item) MOTION was made by Committee Member Mark Paone to continue the project. SECOND:Leonard Filner AYES:Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:None ABSTAINED:None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2001 Page 3 2. DRC No. 3675 -TOWN & COUNTRY CARWASH Modifications of an existing freestanding sign for a carwash facility. 2747 E. Chapman Avenue Staff Contact: Chuck Lau, Associate Planner DRC Action: Final Determination Applicants Barry Konier and Tom Olsen gave brief description of the project. They purchased the carwash a year ago in January. When purchased the sign was all blue with blue trim. They painted the sign approximately 6 or 7 months ago with a brown trim on it. They hired a consultant to help them decide what color to paint the sign to attract more attention to the building, and one of the recommendations was to paint it the current yellow color. They did not realize that they needed to obtain a permit to change the sign. They were told that someone had called the City and complained of the bright yellow color on the sign. Mr. Konier and Mr. Olsen went up and down the street themselves to see if there were any signs with similar colors and found the Shell and Unocal stations also had bright colors. They understand that the recommendation from the City is to paint the perimeter white and the applicants are asking to keep it yellow. The carwash also has the yellow on the gates as people enter the carwash. It was painted at the same time the sign was painted. Committee Member Mark Paone asked staff member Chuck Lau -Associate Planner, what the original color of the columns were; Mr. Lau answered they were white originally and then changed to blue. There was never any complaint about the blue because it didn't draw attention to it the way the yellow does. Committee Member Susan Secoy spoke of the original plans with the white and how everything was white to tie it all together. Committee Member Mark Paone discussed procedures and the committee's task of looking at the whole project, the design of the building, the design of the sign, the color and how the committee has to make sure the project is consistent with the environment and neighbor's contents. When someone complains it comes back to the committee. Committee Member Mark Paone does not believe the yellow is consistent with the cottage look of the carwash. The color does not necessarily need to be white, however, white is the easy answer. The items that have been painted yellow are a deviation of the original Conditional Use Permit. Applicant Barry Konier was of the understanding that they could paint the building any color they want and the City has no control over that. Committee Member Mark Paone stated that was not correct under the provisions of a conditional use permit, and Committee Member Alice Angus agreed. Originally the project went through a process, colors and the design scheme were called out, and any change to that has to come back through an approval process. Applicant Tom Olsen asked if they need to come back to Design Review if they want to change the color of the building. Committee Member Alice Angus answered yes. The applicants had the building reviewed for compliance with "Feng Shui" (the Chinese Art of Placement) and to advise them on exactly what needed to be painted to draw more attention to the business. Applicant Barry Konier also stated that in the time they have owned the business, there have City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2001 Page 4 DRC No. 3675 -TOWN 7 COUNTRY CARWASH (Continued) been no complaints from their neighbors because they cooperate with everybody. He thinks the sign is attractive and that it draws attention to the business. There was a discussion between Committee Members and applicants on different options that could be done. Committee Member Mark Paone advised the applicants to paint everything back to the same white as the trim on the building and get rid of all the yellow and if the applicants want to make a color change they have to re-submit. If they are planning on painting the building, they could probably tie it in right now and continue the item, but if it's going to be 6 months before painting the building, the Committee cannot wait 6 months to get rid of the yellow. Applicant Tom Olsen asked what had to be submitted to change the color on the building to which Committee Member Mark Paone answered that staff member Chuck Lau could walk them through the process. MOTION was made by Committee Member Mark Paone to approve the project, subject to the following conditions: 1. The freestanding sign structure shall be painted white to match the architectural trims and details, and other design elements of the existing carwash building. 2. The yellow presently on the carwash building shall also be painted back to the original approval (white) on the Conditional Use Permit. The approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed signage incorporates design elements including materials, lettering style, space, color, illumination and sign type that are integrated. 2. The proposed signage utilizes materials, colors, and design motifs that are compatible with the building that is being identified. 3. The proposed signage will not adversely affect surrounding land uses or obscure adjacent conforming signs. 4. The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards and their required findings. SECOND:Alice Angus AYES:Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:None ABSTAINED:None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2001 Page 5 3. DRC No. 3679 -STEAK ESCAPE Fagade remodel and wall signs for a new restaurant in an existing building. 445 S. Main Street Staff Contact: Mario Chavez-Marquez, Planning Aide DRC Action: Final Determination Elizabeth Koh -Architect representing the Steak Escape presented the project. The Steak Escape is taking a portion of the building on 445 S. Main. Half of the building is currently occupied by a check cashing business. The tenant is actually asub-lessee. They are proposing to modify the exterior of lease space and there will also be an interior tenant improvement. They want to define their space from the tenants space by creating a parapet on the store front that faces the parking lot and one facing the main street. They propose to sandblast the exterior white paint that covers the existing brick facade so that it will bring the natural brick color out. They propose to install a main entrance. There are currently two existing exit/entrances and they want customers to come in through the front. One of staff s recommendations noted that the window graphic had exceeded the allowed square footage. The applicant indicated that if they are not allowed to put up the graphic, they will either white it out or put frosting on the window so you can't see in at all. The color concept will be simple beige stucco coloring for the parapet and green awnings and green trim around the edge. The aluminum storefront will also be painted green to match. New channel letter signs will be installed, internally lit, monument signs will be replaced, and gooseneck lighting is proposed to be installed to highlight the parapet. The site plan has been modified to comply with drive aisle vehicular stacking requirements. They also have to re-stripe the entire parking area. As sub-lessee this is beyond their scope of work, but they are willing to do it. They are also willing to modify and improve the existing landscaping. They will follow the same design pattern all around (front, side and portion of back area). Committee Member Joe Woollett spoke regarding the glass area that the applicant wants to obscure. Ms. Koh stated they want to do that as they have to build a restroom in that specific area. The graphics will be installed from the inside (frosted graphic). Committee Member Joe Woollett stated his understanding was that this was against the rules per the City, and that the City sees that as a sign and will not permit it. Staff members Chuck Lau and Mario Chavez-Marquez stated that up to 25% of the window area is allowed for window signs. Ms. Koh responded that they would take the graphics out of the plans (as it would look very odd to only have 25% graphics) and just frost the side so you can't look in, but it will blend in with the existing windows. It's an application that you put on the window and looks frosted or opaque, and you can't look in or out even at night time. Committee Member Mark Paone had some concern about putting on a film type material to obscured glass, and that it changes the characteristics of the glass a bit, sometimes enough to crack it. Ms. Koh stated they have used this particular material several times and have had good luck with it. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2001 Page ~ 3. DRC No. 3679- STEAK ESCAPE (Continued) Committee Member Mark Paone also asked about the remodeling inside the building that was being done and asked if a new mechanical system was being installed and Ms. Koh said that a new mechanical system would be installed that will have a hood protruding through the rooftop. The current parapet obscures the units from all sides. Committee Member Mark Paone stated that documentation should clearly state that parapet blocks views from all sides. He also wanted the applicant to know that one of the committees tasks is to make sure that every project is internally consistent and that committee is struggling with this project where only half of the building is being improved and remodeled. Ms. Koh understands the consistency the committee wants to have the whole building upgraded to same type of architectural style. But this is a problem as the landlord has a very good thing going with the check cashing business next door and has no incentives to make any improvements including parking and landscape and the check cashing business has no intentions to spend money to upgrade their own place. So the burden is on the applicant to do the improvements themselves. The building now is very inconsistent as they have two different facades, the cash and check place has black aluminum all around and existing space has orange, yellow and blue. One idea is to paint all of the aluminum black to match the check cashing business. Staff recommended to jog the parapet and install a separate awning. Committee Member Mark Paone said this is part of the problem. He wants to look at the project and get an answer that works for the building. The primary tenant does not seem motivated at this time to make any improvements. ~He said that the other tenant needs to come up with an idea how the whole building could be upgraded, resolve sign problems, and bring the whole thing together. Ms. Koh stated again that they have no plans for upgrading and that they can't make them change to go along with their plans of remodeling. Committee Member Mark Paone offered suggestions on ways the applicant could handle the situation with the landlord to possibly get some cooperation from them. Ms. Koh feels this puts her client in a difficult position, so that they can't open the business because they don't have cooperation from tenants or landlords. After more discussion, Committee Member Mark Paone still has a problem making a finding that says this is an internally consistent solution. Committee Member Susan Secoy concurs with the negotiation process saying she too is an architect and involved quite often with retailers and what they negotiate with the landlord who owns the property. It is part of the process and not an easy battle. Some homework needs to be done. She likes the proposal but has a real problem with the parapet and the inconsistency of taking such a small building and chopping it up even further, into smaller pieces. She cannot support this particular proposal. Committee Member Joe Woollett's primary concern is "fit", because it is such a small building. He is concerned about the relationship of the building to the community as well as the building itself. He would hope something can be worked out to change the existing parapet. Ms. Koh stated they could take the parapet out if that was the main concern or she could propose to keep the space as is and just paint the exterior, sandblast their side, put up a sign, and keep the parapet as is, to which Committee Member Mark Paone stated maybe that was the solution. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2001 Page ~ 3. DRC No. 3679- STEAK ESCAPE (Continued) Committee Member Joe Woollett understands there is a problem with the sign at the check cashing place and asked if Ms. Koh was aware of this to which she answered, "Yes, and that she had been told". Ms. Koh wanted to get input and suggestions what they need to do to keep the project moving along. Committee Members all agreed that a re-submittal was necessary with elevations and an evaluation of sign placement, etc. Other work needs to be done such as showing detail on landscaping/vegetation, handicap access, parapet, and irrigation. Ms. Koh stated the project would be re-evaluate and go with the original proposal, to keep the building as is MOTION was made by Committee Member Mark Paone to continue the project SECOND:Susan Secoy AYES:Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:None ABSTAINED:None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2001 Page 8 4. DRC No. 3681 -CON-WAY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. New freestanding sign for a newly expanded trucking terminal facility. 2102 N. Batavia Street Staff Contact: Chuck Lau, Associate Planner DRC Action: Final Determination Approved as Consent Item) MOTION was made by Mark Paone to approve the project as submitted. SECOND:Susan Secoy AYES:Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:None ABSTAINED:None MOTION CARRIED City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for November 7, 2001 Page 9 5. DRC No. 3885 - KAUFMAN & BROAD Proposed 122 dwelling unit residential subdivision. Tract No. 14360 (North of Serrano Avenue, west of Nohl Ranch Road) Staff Contact: Christopher Carnes, Senior Planner DRC Action: Final Determination A request from the applicant was received to continue the item) MOTION was made by Susan Secoy to continue the project per the applicant's request. SECOND: Alice Angus AYES: Alice Angus, Leonard Filner, Mark Paone, Susan Secoy, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None MOTION CARRIED DRC 11-07-01 Minutes