Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout051401 OTLRB MinutesCALL TO ORDER MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE OLD TOWN TEMECULA LOCAL REVIEW BOARD MAY 14, 2001 The Old Town Temecula Local Review Board convened in a regular meeting at 9:04 A.M., on Monday, May 14, 2001, in the Community Development Conference Room of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ROLLCALL Present: Board Members: Allen, Blair, Montgomery, *Ross, and Chairman Harker. Absent. None. Also Present: Associate Planner Anders, Development Processing Coordinator Noland, Redevelopment Management Analyst Hillberg, and Minute Clerk Dettmers. *(It was noted that Board Member Ross arrived at 9:07 A.M., and had to leave the meeting at 10:10 A.M.) PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Minutes of April 9, 2001. It is noted that Board Member Ross arrived at 9:07 A.M. MOTION: Board Member Montgomery moved to approve the minutes, as written. The motion was seconded by Board Member Blair and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. R:lOIdTownlLRBIMinutes/051401 1 BOARD BUSINESS 2 Addition to Dwellinq, New Paint and Facade Improvements (28681 Puiol Street) (Applicants: Otto and Nancy Baron) RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 That the Old Town Temecula Local Review Board review, provide comments, and take action with respect to this improvement plan. Relaying the goal to provide a Victorian style appearance, via an addition and fa(;ade improvements to an existing residence, Mr. Otto Baron, the applicant, provided an overview of the conceptual design plans, highlighting the plan to add a faux two-story element (tower) in the front, an iron and glass awning which would be mounted over the door, to revise the entryway, clarifying that the existing location of the door would be the proposed location of the window, and that the existing location of the window would be the proposed location of the door. Addressing the questions of staff and the Board, Mr. Baron noted the following: for Board Member Blair, that the dimensions of the building would not be changed dramatically; for Chairman Harker, that the elements denoted on the roof were dormer skylights; for Associate Planner Anders, that the maximum height of the tower would most likely be under 25 feet, that the wrought iron treatment on the roof was for decorative purposes; that there was a proposed bay window; that the original footprint would not be significantly revised; that the desire was to use a gray and white paint application, and that after reviewing the color palette standard the colors Colonial Revival Gray (SW2832) and Classical White (SW2829) would be the colors utilized; for Board Member Allen, that the desire was to have clapboard on the tower element, that specific areas would have board and batt wood siding and alternate areas would have horizontal siding; that the existing treatment above the windows would be continued on the new windows, that all the windows would be similar in style, and that the lightning rod would serve as a decorative element, as well as a practical one. Additional discussion ensued regarding the roofing material, Mr. Baron relaying the plan to utilize a style with a wood shake appearance. With respect to the existing antique vehicles on the property, for Board Member Blair, Mr. Baron advised that it was his desire at a future point in time to construct a carport, which would extend from the trailer with Roman-styled columns and latticework on the sides. Development Processing Coordinator Noland added that if vehicles are operable, that the cars would be permitted to be parked outside, while if the vehicles are not operable, the cars would be required to be stored in an enclosed structure. For Development Processing Coordinator Noland, Ms. Nancy Baron noted that the trailer was placed on the property by the previous owner and had been utilized as a rental, relaying that at this time the plan was to utilize the area for family visitors. In response to Board Member Ross, Mr. Baron relayed that there were no outstanding Code violations associated with the property. R:lOIdTown/LRBIMinutes105140'l 2 MOTION: Board Member Montgomery moved to approve the proposed plan with the colors specified by the applicant as Colonial Revival Gray (SW2832) and Classical White (SW2829) from the color palette. The motion was seconded by Board Member Allen. (Ultimately this motion was amended; see below,) For Board Member Ross, Associate Planner Anders advised that this project plan would not need to go before the Planning Commission. In response, Board Member Ross noted his reluctance to have this review be the final approval due to the lack of specificity with respect to the plan, recommending that the motion reflect approval of the conceptual plan and that the applicant bring back the detailed plans. Associate Planner Anders relayed that if there are no existing Code violations (which could be further investigated for assurance), then this review process will not include addressing the numerous antique cars on the properly. Board Member Allen relayed concern regarding the visual appearance of a roof constructed of varying roofing styles and materials. In response, Mr. Baron advised that a material consistent with the existing roofing material could be utilized to provide consistency. AMENDED MOTION: Amending his motion, Board Member Montgomery moved to approve in conceptual form the proposed plan with respect to the proposed colors [Colonial Revival Gray (SW2832) and Classical White (SW2829)], the proposed architectural style, and the materials, and to direct the applicant to bring back to the Board detailed architectural plans to the June 11, 2001 meeting for final approval. The motion was seconded by Board Member Allen and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 3 New Paint for The Stampede (28721 Old Town Front Street) (Applicant: Roqer Epperson) RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 That the Old Town Temecula Local Review Board review, provide comments, and take action with respect to this improvement plan. For Board Member Blair, Mr. Epperson, the applicant, clarified that the four color samples panels (painted on the building at the site) were the options presented for the base color of the building, noting the possibility to use a varying shade on the recessed portions. Board Member Ross relayed that while he was not satisfied with any of the yellow color samples for utilization as the main paint application, that Color Sample No. 3 would be the most appropriate; and opined that the proposed bright yellow hues would not be visually pleasing, specifically since this building is the south entrance point to Old Town. Providing clarification for the applicant, Associate Planner Anders advised that she could not support a plan to paint the entire building one solid color due to the large expanse (i.e., 300 feet). Mr. Epperson noted a desire to obtain approval from the Board with respect to an acceptable color, advising that the recommended color could be lightened and darkened and applied to the building in varying hues in order to create visual interest. Noting the color gradations on the south side of the building, Board Member Allen advised that those particular colors appeared to be more appropriate for this project. In response, Mr. R:lOIdTown/LRBIMinutes1051401 3 Epperson relayed that the alternate property owners had not been in favor of utilizing those particular colors. For Board Member Allen, Mr. Epperson confirmed that it was the proposal to paint all the concrete the same color, and that the verticals would have green trim with classical white inside, as well as the dormers and the wood elements. Board Member Allen recommended that the main color be as muted as possible due to the size of this building, and that the details be accentuated. Chairman Harker relayed that three out of five Board Members were in favor of Color Sample No. 3, which was the muted yellow tone. Relaying that there did not appear to be a distinct difference between the proposed trim color and the main color, Board Member Ross queried the final visual appearance with utilizing a trim color very similar to the main colors. For Board Member Ross, Mr. Epperson clarified that various partners of the business had specifically requested that the building be painted a yellow tone. Noting that if a property owner desired to paint his building a certain color, and if that particular color was included on the Old Town color palette, Board Member Montgomery opined that it would not be appropriate for the Board to deny the color choice. In response to Board Member Allen's queries, Mr. Epperson relayed his preference for the base color to be Color Sample No. 3, advising that in the recessed portions of the building a darker hue could be applied to provide variation. Board Member Montgomery recommended utilizing the cr~me colored sample for all the wood elements in order to break up the massing. Concurring with Board Member Ross's comments, Mr. Epperson relayed that there was very little distinction between the base color and the trim color if Color Sample No. 3 was chosen, querying whether the Board would desire to recommend a replacement trim color; and for Associate Planner Anders, confirmed that the applicant was willing to provide a color elevation in order to assure that there was an adequate contrast prior to the entire building being painted. It was the consensus of the Board to recommend that the base color be Color Sample No. 3. Mr. Epperson queried whether the Board desired for the applicant to bring back a computer- generated elevation or for a portion of the building to be painted. In response, the Board recommended that a portion of the building be painted with a 25% darker hue on the recessed areas. Associate Planner Anders added that for the record the applicant would need to submit some type of elevation with the colors specified for the files. MOTION: Board Member Allen moved to recommend that staff approve the conceptual color DE143 Charlemagne with a 50% variant in hue for the base paint; and that the applicant work with staff (after the portion of the building has been painted) to address the expanse of the building by adding adequate color variation for visual interest. The motion was seconded by Board Member Montgomery and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. R:lOIdTownlLRBIMinutes1051401 4 4 New Paint for The Chaparral Buildinq (28465 Old Town Front Street) (Applicant's Representatives: Matthew Faqan, Steve Tiritilli) RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 That the Old Town Temecula Local Review Board review, provide comments, and take action with respect to the sign plan. Relaying that after visiting the site and reviewing the sample stain on the building, Board Member Montgomery opined that the proposal was a good solution for the problem, (i.e., deterring the wood from further deterioration), relaying that the proposed gray matched the existing gray color. For Board Member Ross, Mr. Tiritilli, the applicant's representative, clarified that the left sample was newly-stained wood, whereas the right sample was a section of the building which had been power-washed which would have a transparent stain over it. Board Member Ross, echoed by Board Members Blair and Allen, noted his preference over the sample which appeared to be the same brown as the color of the building at this time, only newer; and relayed support regarding the sample gray color and the window trim. In response to Board Member Allen, Mr. Tidtilli provided additional information regarding the application of the product. In response, Board Member Allen commended the applicant for his cooperation in working with the Board. For Chairman Harker, rVlr. Tiritilii specified that both the new and old wood would be stained in order to create a more consistent appearance. MOTION: Board Member Allen moved to approve the proposed colors, as provided by the applicant on the actual building. The motion was seconded by Board Member Blair and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. It was noted that Board Member Ross left the meeting at 10:10 A.M. 5 New Paint for The Hitchinq Post Center (28480 Old Town Front Street) (Applicant: Heather Manley). RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 That the Old Town Temecula Local Review Board review, provide comments, and take action with respect to the sign plan. Noting that one of the tenants came to staff with potential new signage and a landscape plan, Development Processing Coordinator Noland noted that he had relayed to the applicant the need to bring in the paint colors that were utilized for the new paint application (which had already been completed) in order to the Board to take action on that project, and that subsequently the landscape plan could be presented; and noted that the applicant has had discussions with staff regarding obtaining new signage. R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/051401 5 Board Member Blair noted his frustration with this property owner who first replaced a roof without Board approval, and now has re-painted the building without approval. In response to Board Member Montgomery, Associate Planner Anders relayed that while a comprehensive sign program would be preferable at this site, she was not sure if there would be a comprehensive plan. MOTION: Board Member Montgomery moved to recommend approval of the color scheme at this site, which has already been painted. Chairman Harker seconded the motion. (Ultimately this motion was withdrawn; see below.) Board Member Allen retayed his reluctance to support approving a project, which has already been completed, Board Member Montgomery noting his concurrence with Board Member Allen's comments. Additional discussion ensued regarding the roof, which was placed on the building prior to Board approval. Acknowledging that staff could approve a project the Board recommended denying, Board Member Blair opined that it was more appropriate for the Board to deny a project that did not seek approval prior to completion of the project, in order to not perpetuate Old Town merchants completing their projects and subsequently seeking Board approval. At this time Board Member Montgomery withdrew his motion. MOTION: Board Member Blair moved to recommend to Planning staff that this application be denied. The motion was seconded by Chairman Harker and voice vote reflected approval of the motion with the exception of Board Member Ross who was absent and Board Member Allen who abstained. BOARD MEMBER'S REPORTS In response to Board Member Blair's queries regarding the clearing of the land and buildings in the Pujol Street area, Redevelopment Management Analyst Hillberg relayed the plan to build townhomes in this area (which would be dwellings for sale); and for Associate Planner Anders, noted that at this time there was no information to present to the Board regarding this project. Addressing Board Member Allen's comments regarding projects that had already been completed in Old Town and were subsequently brought to the Board for approval, Associate Planner Anders acknowledged that Board's desire to make a philosophical point and to deny the applications due to the improper process the applicant pursued, relaying that to the best of her understanding the Board did need to take action and to either recommend approval or denial, for legal purposes, and not just ignore the project, since the item was agendized; and clarified that the Board could deny these applications. Board Member Montgomery advised that it was important that the record indicated that the Board's action to deny these applications was based on the applicant not adhering to the proper process. R:lOIdTown/LRBIMinutes1051401 6 Associate Planner Anders provided additional information regarding the items that staff brings to the Board for action and input; and for Board Member Allen, and Chairman Harker, relayed that if Board action is not required for certain projects, these items could be placed on the agenda as informational (i.e., with a recommendation that the Board receive and file this repod), if that was the desire of the Board. For Board Member Allen, Associate Planner Anders differentiated between the Consent Calendar Items, and the Board Business Agenda Items. Board Member Montgomery recommended that the applicants be able to choose the color of their choice for their buildings as long as the owner abided by the Old Town color palette standards. STAFF'S REPORT No further comments. ADJOURNMENT At 10:32 A.M. Chairman Harker formally adjourned this meeting to Monday, June 11, 2001 at 9:00 A.M. in the Community Development Conference Room, City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 Chairman William Harker ~ ~'"'Ass~ate PIi~nner Patricia Anders R:/OIdTownlLRBIMinutes105140'l