Loading...
051302 OTLRB MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE OLD TOWN TEMECULA LOCAL REVIEW BOARD MAY 13, 2002 CALL TO ORDER The Old Town Temecuta Local Review Board convened in a regular meeting at 9:01 A.M., on Monday, May 13, 2002, in the Main 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: Director of Housing and Redevelopment Meyer Director of Planning Ubnoske, Development Processing Coordinator Noland, Redevelopment Management Analyst Hillberg, Chief Building Official Elmo, and Minute Clerk Savage. * It was noted that Board Member Montgomery departed at 1:08 P.M. **It was noted that Board Member Ross arrived at 9:05 A.M. and departed at 12:15 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Aqenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of May 13, 2002. 2. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Minutes of April 8, 2002. MOTION: Board Member Montgomery moved to approve Consent Item Nos. 1-2. The motion was seconded by Board Member Blair and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Board Member Ross who was absent. (Board Member Ross shortly arrived after this vote.) R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 1 BOARD BUSINESS Plannin¢l Application No. 02-0163 - Certificate of Historical Appropriateness to demolish a single-family dwellin,q and two detached accessory buildinqs at 28731 Puiol Street (Continued from the April 8, 2002, meeting) RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Staff is recommending approval for this project. Development Processing Coordinator Noland advised that no one has come forth with a set of plans regarding the purchase and improvement to Code of the parcel at 28731 Pujol Street (the Property) since the April 8, 2002, Board meeting, including Mr. Tom Bland who spoke to the Board at that meeting. Although there have been several inquiries expressing interest, no one has followed through with plans, as the City requested. At this time, Chairman Harker invited public comments. Mr. Richard Fox, 32800 Hupa Drive, Temecula, on behalf of his wife, Charlotte Fox, read a public comment letter from Mrs. Fox. Mrs. Fox was unable to return to this meeting, having been invited to do so by the Board at the April 8, 2002, meeting, due to answering a jury summons. Significant portions of her letter stated, however, that "In the intervening month I did review property tax bills and assessor's records for the years 1920 to 1927, and another individual examined the 1920 census records for information about Angel Ramirez. Based on the public record, there is scant historical information on which to document this individual's background or his contribution to Temecula. "... In its present condition, the house does appear an unsafe and unsavable structure, and a potential liability for the City. Demolition appears inevitable. "But I truly hope that an appropriate partnership can develop and that we can work together to address the status of remaining fragile historic structures within Old Town Temecula, so that demolition is not the first, nor (seemingly) the most appropriate end result." Chairman Harker noted that in Judge Harelson's arbitration decision dated January 2, 2002, concerning the Property, that if nc action was taken by the owners within 30 days of the date of the decision, the City was authorized to abate the nuisance of the property by removing the items of nuisance, i.e., demolishing the house and sheds, and to assess the demolition and cleanup costs as a lien on the Property. For Chairman Harker, Mr. Noland clarified that the cost of moving a building is not determined only by how far it would be moved, but the condition the building is in. Chief Building Official EImo, asked to join the Board to comment on the Property, concurred with Mr. No[and that, not knowing the condition of the residence's floor and foundation, strengthening the residence in order to move it could possibly add $5,000 to $10,000 to relocation costs. He added that to move the residence to another location for display, the building would need to be rehabilitated to meet historical building codes in order for visitors to safely view the interior. Chairman Harker noted that the master plan for the Vail Ranch historical area does not include a location for the residence even if it could be saved. R;/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 2 Chairman Harker asked if the Fire Depar[ment might be able to use the Property's buildings for training. Mr. EImo said that was a possibility. However, Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that the possible presence of asbestos could make burning hazardous. Mr. Noland noted that an asbestos review is currently underway and added that contractors have advised that many landfills no longer accept burnt building remains. Chairman Harker requested comments from the Board. Board Member Blair noted it appears that the only importance the Property seems to have is that it has been located in Old Town Temecula for many years. If no one is willing to step forward to improve the residence, then it may be best to demolish it. Board Member Allen requested clarification regarding historical Building Codes concerning the foundation of the building. Mr. Elmo noted that since the house has been vacated and has deteriorated, if it were ear-marked as a historical building, the City could do what was needed to maintain historical building features such as the granite foundation. The granite foundation likely would remain in place but with a supplemental foundation placed around it for safety. For Board Member Allen, Mr. Fox confirmed that Mrs. Fox's statement clearly indicates that she does not feel that the Property has significant historical value, adding that historical status is often determined by architectural design or unique features, or if an important historical event occurred at a site. None of these criteria meet the Property's background. The Board concurred that since the Property's residence does not have a significant representation of an identifiable architectural style, nor is the building famous because a historical event occurred there, it does not appear to have enough historical significance to warrant its rehabilitation. Thus, demolition would be appropriate in this case. MOTION: Board Member Ross moved to accept Staff's recommendation for this project. The motion was seconded by Board Member Allen and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 4. Planninq Application No. 02-0237 Install detachable fabric awninqs to the roof fascia of the north and east elevations of an existinq restaurant buildinq in Old Town Temecula RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Staff is requesting that the Old Town Local Review Board evaluate the color, materials and design of this proposal and provide direction for staff as to its consistency with the Old Town Specific Plan. Development Processing Coordinator Noland noted that in order to make the outside eating area of Mad Madeline's Grill more accessible and comfortable during extreme heat and rain conditions, the Applicant proposes installing two removable awnings to the existing roof fascia on the north and east sides of the restaurant's outdoor eating area. Mr. Noland confirmed that: · The awning material planned is "crimson red" which ties into the current red paint plan and which is compatible to a like copper red Preservation Palette color; · The awning fabric material is fire resistant; R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minute$/05-13-02 3 · The awnings would not contain signage; · The awnings are detachable but the likelihood of the awnings being regularly removed was likely slim; · The awning frame and support sections appears to be of galvanized-style metal and do appear to be removable; · A plan to paint or conceal the awning framework was not presented; "Clear" curtain-type covers would also be part of the awning construction, i.e., so the clear cudains could be pulled down to counter height in case of rain (the clear portion of the awning appears to not be visible when not in use, per the drawings provided); and · The restaurant is part of a larger building. Mr. Noland encouraged the Board to consider an appropriate finish to the metal framework and Director of Planning Ubnoske suggested that the Board could require that both the awnings and framework be removed when any part was disassembled. Chief Building Officer Elmo noted that from an enforcement standpoint, confirming removal at irregular intervals would be difficult to enforce. Board Member Montgomery, having previously discussed the awnings with the Applicant, stated that it is unlikely that the awnings would be removed as they will expand the service area of the restaurant, enabling the outside area to be used evenings and in inclement weather. He added that the Applicant may consider adding heating as well. Ms. Ubnoske clarified that addition of heaters would have to be considered as a separate issue. Ms. Ubnoske noted that given that it appears the awnings would be in use indefinitely, the Board might consider if the framework should be treated in terms of color. Board Member Allen asked that if the framework were to be a permanent structural addition, would it need a permit for its erection and would it be subject to the Code building criteria. Mr. Noland confirmed that it would. Considering that the awnings would likely be more permanent than occasional, Board Member Ross suggested that the concept of awnings in lieu of a structure may not be appropriate to the western theme of Old Town. Mr. Noland confirmed that awnings with signage thereon are the only awning-approved item in the Old Town Specific Plan. Board Member Ross queried whether the approval of these awnings, without being specifically included in the Specific Plan, would set a precedent. He also noted that another restaurant business in Old Town built a permanent covered patio structure to accommodate its outdoor guests. Chairman Harker stated that if the existing roof were extended, in place of the temporary awnings, the extension could enhance the western appearance of the Applicant's existing structure. For Chairman Harker, and per a proposal provided earlier by the Applicant, Mr. Noland reported that the temporary awning system is estimated to cost $6,000. Mr. Meyer considered that the Old Town Facade Improvement Program could be utilized to extend the roof to provide a protective cover, as well as providing paint and new signage. Mr. Noland R:/OIdTown/LRB/Min utes/05-13-02 4 surmised that with the City's matching funds for fa(;ade improvement, the Applicant could likely complete an aesthetically pleasing permanent roof extension to develop comfortable outdoor seating. Board Member Allen suggested that the pitch of the existing roof needs to be considered with either a temporary or a permanent structure. Mr. Elmo clarified that any extension, whether fabric or permanent, must allow seven feet height in areas where people will be walking or sitting, and that the pitch of an extension, although minimal, could be expected to meet Code. After additional discussion, it was determined that Mr. Noland and Mr. Elmo could discuss costs, Code elements, and the facade program with the Applicant, due to the Board's current concerns regarding a removable awning extension. Chairman Harker suggested that Staff physically visit the Applicant's business to insure Code is met. Board Members Ross and Allen noted that additional feedback, details, and other possibilities should be obtained and presented before approving the application. MOTION: Board Member Ross moved to continue this matter to the next Board meeting in order that Staff could determine some potential solutions or alternatives with the Applicant. The motion was seconded by Board Member Allen and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 5. Planninq Application No. 01-0493 - Application for two wall signs to be erected by Land and Sea Marine Service on the south and east elevations of a buildinq at 41923 Second Street (Continued from the November 5, 2001, meeting) RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Staff is requesting that the Old Town Local Review Board evaluate the use of multiple colors in the mural portion of the sign design and provide direction for staff. Development Processing Coordinator Notand reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material), highlighting the following: Land and Sea Marine Service (the Applicant) currently proposes a smaller sign than formerly presented for the street sign, with variations on the theme sign for the front parapet of the business. Carved into the theme sign are nautical rope with an anchor post, mountains and a body of water, a schooner-type boat, hot air balloons, and the business' name. · The current font is one, which reflects Specific Plan guidelines. The schooner's name, as shown on the boat, is Temecula Marine. · The sizes of the signs are now well within the sizes recommended in the Specific Plan, and the theme sign is the only one with a picture/theme. · Mr. Noland's concern is with the multiple colors in the picture, some of which do not concur with Specific Plan guidelines. R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 5 The Board Members commented that the theme sign, with its multiple-color scheme, is aesthetically pleasing, reflecting many aspects of the community and the Applicant's business, regardless of its few non-conforming colors. They agreed that the non- conforming colors selected were neither loud nor in poor taste. Board Member Ross recommended that the smaller sign would be more distinctive if it shared the rope and anchor concept that borders the theme sign. Chairman Harker concurred. I~IOTION: Board Member Ross moved that the Board accept the application as presented with the exception that the smaller sign be bordered with the rope and anchor as shown on the theme sign. The motion was seconded by Board Member Blair and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 6. Southern Gateway Landscapin,q RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Staff is recommending approval of this plan. Director of Housing and Redevelopment Meyer reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material), highlighting the following: With the realignment of First Street and construction of the First Street Bridge, two undeveloped parcels located on each side of Old Town Front Street in front of The Stampede and Dan's Feed and Seed have been identified for landscaping improvements per the City's Capital Improvement Program. The parcels will be known as the Old Town Southern Gateway Landscaped areas. The Agency contracted a landscaping plan by lan Davidson, Landscape Architect. Mr. Davidson's proposed plan was displayed for the Board's review. The Agency instructed Mr. Davidson to plan the areas as complimentary to the Gateway to Old Town, to provide twelve parking spaces in the area, and to leave a ten-foot wide area adjacent to the The Stampede building for a future facade improvement and in accordance with an underlying easement. An antique wagon is included in the landscaping plan, possibly with a message painted on or attached to it. An antique ranch water wagon was pictured as an example of the type of wagon under consideration. The Board commended the City's plan to landscape the area. However, Board Member Ross questioned why a wagon was considered in the plan in place of a horse sculpture, commenting that both the Gateway Arch and the western theme of Old Town reflects the horse topic. Mr. Meyer noted that a sculpture would be more expensive than the proposed wagon; and that funds for improvements, including a wagon, were coming from the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, and funds for maintenance will be from the Community Services budget. MOTION: Board Member Montgomery moved that the Board accept Staff's recommendation as presented. The motion was seconded by Board Member Blair, and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Board Member Allen who abstained. R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 6 The Board recessed at 10:10 A.M. and reconvened at 10:33 A.M. 7. Amend the Old Town Specific Plan (Continued from the April 8, 2002, meetin,q). RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Staff is recommending approval for this project. Director of Planning Ubnoske asked the Board to offer its best efforts to come to a consensus regarding the summarized items to be presented, noting that it may take more than one meeting to cover the entire list. She added that once the summarized comments are addressed and agreed upon the Specific Plan will be revised, likely internally. NOTE: The following italicized headings are the summarized items for which Ms. Ubnoske requested comments and recommendations from the Board. These items were comments made by the Board concerning the proposed revision and update of the City of Temecula Old Town Specific Plan as amended January 9, 1996 (the Specific Plan) The non-italicized text following the comments are the Board's discussion and recommendations of each preceding item(s). References to a revised Specific Plan are referred from hereon as the New Plan. General Comments Change the role of the Old Town Local Review Board to aflow them to have approval and denial authority. The Board's decisions would be final unless appealed to the Planning Commission or City Council. Discussion regarding the present final approval process ensued, to which Director of Plannin9 Ubnoske explained that the City Council, the Planning Director, and Planning Commission have, per City ordinance, approval and denial authority; other City Boards, such as the Old Town Temecula Local Review Board, have the authority to make recommendations for approval or denial. Ms. Ubnoske emphasized that the City has consistently adhered to the recommendations of the Boards. Director of Housing and Redevelopment Meyer added that there is a three-tier approval process, first to the administrative level; second, the Director's Hearing; and then to the Planning Commission. The Board's role is to provide recommendations to the Planning Department and its director at the administrative level. Board recommendations are made whenever applicants' requests do not adhere to the Specific Plan with specificity or when staff requests clarification concerning a possible variance. Of course, plans for new construction or redevelopment are presented to the Board as well for their information and recommendations. The Planning Department then incorporates the Board's recommendations to the Director's Hearings or the Planning Commission. Thus, any appeals would go before the Director's Hearing or the Planning Commission. Board Member Blair suggested that a representative from the Board attend Director of Hearing and/or Planning Commission meetings when there is a project upon which the Board has made a recommendation, in order to clarify the Board's intent should there be any question regarding same. Ms. Ubnoske encouraged the Board to approve this suggestion. Board Member Ross questioned whether the approval process might be streamlined and service provided in a timelier manner if the Board had full authority to approve some of the less detailed requests such as color chart approval, use of banners, flags and signs, etc. Ms. R:/OIdTown/LRB/Min utes/05-13-02 7 Ubnoske noted that that would not change the process since Staff would still be responsible for receiving the applications and bringing the applications before the Board. Mr. Ross noted that the Board, compared to other City Boards, plays a unique role in its specificity to Old Town issues. Chairman Harker agreed that the Board is unique in that it is involved only in a historically-designated segment of the Temecula City's community. Supposing the Board would have approval or denial authority, applicants could appear directly before the Board, and the Board could gain the advantage of having more interaction with the residents, business owners, lessees, and vendors in Old Town. Board Member Montgomery noted that should applicants be required to come before the Board, many times that would make the applicants' processes more cumbersome since the applicants already have to go first to the Planning Commission. Ms. Ubnoske assured the Board that the City encourages all applicants to appear before the Board since it is to an applicant's advantage to explain its proposal. Unfortunately, however, applicants often do not choose to do so. Board Member Allen noted that the City Council is the ultimate decision-maker for disputes; everything funnels to it. He opined that the Board is perfectly suited to continue in an advisory capacity in order to provide unique advice, believing that changing the process would cloud the issue of approval or denial. However, he wholly agreed that the Board should be as interactive with applicants as is possible. Board Member Blair noted that he has 22 years previous experience as a as a staff member in another city which has historical districts which he served during his employ. He feels that city's districts were strengthened by the approval and denial authority held by those boards. He added that the physical result is that those boards have strengthened the historical authenticity of the districts through their actions. In response to Development Processing Coordinator No[and, he noted that those districts are primarily residential, considerably larger than Old Town's historical district, and receive Federal and State monies for urban renewal. Mr. Blair offered this information simply for comparison and consideration. Mr. Noland quoted from the Specific Plan that the Board is "to make findings of historical significance" by reviewing ail physical improvements proposed within the district to determine whether design conforms with the Specific Plan's historical guidelines. The purpose of the Board is to make design decisions as a panel versus an individual. Since design is a nebulous area, it is best for a panel, such as the Board, to make design decisions. Also, it assists staff when design items are not in accordance with the Specific Plan, to refer them for discussion at the Board level. Board Member Montgomery noted that whether the Board or the City has final authority for Old Town design decisions is somewhat moot due to the fact that the tool which designates design in Old Town is the Specific Plan - adding that, at this time, strengthening the context of the Specific Plan should be the primary focus of the Board. Ms. Ubnoske assured the Board that she will take any recommendation forward. However, Chairman Harker, in the interest of time, asked that discussion be tabled until a future date. Board Member Ross reiterated the consensus of the concept of having a Board representative at future Director's Hearings or Planning Commission meetings, where projects, which the Board has previously discussed, were presented. R:lOIdTownlLRS/Minutes105-13-02 8 Specific Plan Text Comments Include a brief history section. For Chairman Harker, Ms. Ubnoske noted that the history requested is about the Old Town Historic District (OTHD) itself. Currently in the Specific Plan are histories concerning the origination and organization of the Specific Plan and also about the Temecula Valley and its general area, including only a small section about the OTHD. Chairman Harker volunteered to add to the early-day OTHD history with more specificity. The staff and the Board concurred that an updated and more specific OTHD history should be incorporated in the New Plan. Other supported suggestions included adding a historical timeline with significant dates such as when existing historical buildings were constructed and to include graphics. Make the document more of an "operations" manual. Wherever permits are required, make these sections stand out more. Encourage Old Town Business owners to work in conjunction with City Code Enforcement staff. "Operations"manual: Board Member Blair explained that he had made this recommendation based on the Specific Plan which includes start-up goals that are now outdated. Mr. Meyer agreed that approximately ninety percent (90%) of the items included in the Specific Plan have been completed. Only a few plans, such as forming an Old Town business owners association are yet to be accomplished. It was noted also that the Specific Plan has a series of standards regarding architecture, signage, etc. and then the same subjects are reviewed in the guidelines, which are often referenced in different chapters or sections of the Specific Plan. The Board and staff agreed that an item should be contained and stated in one section, wherever possible, to simplify finding and complying with all requirements. Chairman Harker suggested that icons be placed beside items that have similar functions to catch the attention of users. Ms. Ubnoske envisioned a more organized document with tabs for ease in accessing different topics. Board Member Ross reiterated that Old Town business and property owners need an Old Town planning, building and safety manual that is simple, clear and concise - easily understood by laymen. Mr. Noland stated that the City developed and distributes a Tenant Improvement Handbook for that use, but agreed that the New Plan should be constructed in such a way to address all subjects more clearly and in a similar manner to that of the Handbook. Mr. Noland noted that staff's goal is to have a user-friendly New Plan. With an easily understood New Plan, staff could use it as a primary tool to implement Old Town improvements, such as referring to it while discussing items with future Old Town residents. Ms. Ubnoske, Mr. Noland, and Mr. Meyer surmised that a good New Plan would have particular pages, regarding single items such as signage, which could be copied and used separately in order for a user to take a one-page copy with him or her to easily understand what is needed to comply with a particular' standard. Ms. Ubnoske added that the City has implemented a relatively new procedure of meeting with proposed users at their places of business or residence to discuss what is needed to proceed R:/OIdTown/LRB/Min utes/05-13-02 9 when building or renovating. The New Plan should reflect this already-in-use practice and emphasize the City's cooperation in sharing its expertise from planning through completion. Permits: Board Members Ross, Blair, and Montgomery agreed that planning and building permits should be defined first, then further distinguished as separate items with lists or text concerning specific detail for each type of permit. In response to Board Members Blair, Ross, and Allen, Mr. Meyer noted that due to Old Town's historic designation, there are many unique improvements that need to be approved by the Board without a building permit, i.e., paint colors (he refers to these as entitlements). He agreed that items that need a permit and those that simply need City and/or Board review should be specified. Fagade improvements, financing programs, entitlements, and physical installation which require permits, all should be described, as well as the process needed for a business owner to proceed, and stated clearly in a beginning "layman's" statement, followed by specifics. Encourage Enforcement: Discussion on this topic focused on business owners who are often not aware of what they are obligated to do under the Specific Plan. Board Member Ross asked if most people who are planning to buy, build, or lease in Old Town are aware of the Specific Plan. Ms. Ubnoske and Mr. Meyer concurred that most do not; often the City first sees people after they are first cited for Code non-compliance. Mr. Noland opined that in the past conformance was more readily achieved when Code Enforcement was consistent. Ms. Ubnoske added that a Code Enforcement Inspector has been assigned to the Old Town area. However, due to many Old Town property owners being unaware of the Specific Plan, staff recommended that a presentation be made to local Boards of Realtors when the New Plan is completed. The staff has found that most Old Town property buyers go directly to a real estate broker who frequently do not point out that Old Town properties have unique requirements as part of a historical district. For Board Member Blair, Ms. Ubnoske noted that oftentimes business owners do not purchase business licenses or know they are required. When Old Town business operators do purchase business licenses, staff has the opportunity to explain the Specific Plan and the business operator's required adherence to its guidelines. Mr. Noland added, when the City incorporated, it chose to have business licenses used as a business registry in comparison to cities that use licenses as a revenue source. Thus, City business licenses are often viewed as a voluntary license. Ms. Ubnoske commended the Board on the aesthetic changes made, such as uniform signage and colors, and stated that she believes that changes such as these have made more businesses aware of the Specific Plan. Ms. Ubnoske noted that the Assistant City Attorney Curley will be at future Board meetings to assist with the New Plan, including suggesting enforcement guidelines. At 11:45 A.M. the meeting broke for a brief lunch, resuming business at 12:05 P.M. Include a section or a chapter on the role of the Local Review Board. R:/OldTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 10 Board Member Blair noted that the Local Review Board is only briefly mentioned in the Specific Plan. In the New Plan he proposes that the goals, responsibilities and function of the Board be clearly emphasized and be positioned in a separate, prominently-placed, introductory section, and that references to it be included in "definitions" and the Table of Contents. Board Members Allen and Ross concurred that it should be noted in the New Plan that the Old Town Local Review Board is a primary agency that a property or business owner or lessee will be required to consider during their operating or residency periods in the historic district. Chairman Harker noted that the Specific PLan currently refers to the organization of the Board but not its functions, as they have evolved over time. The staff and the Board agreed that this topic should be improved and expanded in the New Plan. Include a more extensive sample of acceptable graphics and fonts. Need to sene on a font guideline for signs. Provide a palette of several approved types. Chairman Harker noted that the New Plan would be strengthened by providing font samples. Discussion as to whether such samples would be requirements or guidelines followed. Mr. Meyer noted that guidelines would most likely be preferred because there are occasionally instances where an applicant would prefer to use a font that is not in the samples. Board Member Ross noted that when such a scenario would occur, the applicant could come before the Board and provide historical documentation of use of the non-guideline font. At that point, the Board's judgment would come into play. He agreed, however, that there must be some structure regarding fonts, and the Board and staff concurred that sample fonts should be included in the New Plan. Ms. Ubnoske suggested that the owner of Rancho Graphics may have suggestions for font guidelines, as well as consulting with museum and/or library historians, noting that there is time for consultation and recommendation as the New Plan is being developed through at least the next two meetings. Board Member Ross excused himself from the meeting at this time, 12:15 P.M. Include more flexible guidelines for building, painting, signage and land uses in order to encourage property and business owners to develop or improve their properties. Restrict the number of colors to four except the logo. Mr. Noland pointed out that the Board should consider guidelines versus standards. Board Members and staff cited several examples, such as the one discussed earlier today regarding signage, where the Board used its judgment to approve or disapprove based on flexible guidelines, always taking into account the business, its applications, and the appropriateness to the area's historical background. All concurred that flexibility should be part of the Board's responsibilities but flexibility need not be specifically discussed in the New Plan. Using guidelines instead of specific standards will be sufficient to allow flexibility where it is appropriate. Signs regulations should apply to gas stations also. In response to Chairman Harker's question, Mr. Meyer answered that currently there are no gas stations in Old Town's historic district; the 76 station at the corner of the district's entry is not in its boundaries. He added, however, that gas stations are conditionally permitted in the Community Commercial/Tourist Support (CCTS) District; and they are permitted in the Highway R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 11 Tourist Commercial (HTC) District, as described in the Specific Plan. The Board agreed if the building of a future gas station(s) was approved, the New Plan's signage guidelines would apply. Temporary signs should have a time limit for their use. Chairman Harker noted that a temporary sign time limit is already included in the Specific Plan. As such, this item is an enforcement issue, and staff noted that the Board's concerns would be relayed to the Old Town Enforcement Officer. With respect to colors, remove language that allows "other similar colors." Board Member Montgomery and Mr. Meyer noted that the term "other similar colors" was originally added so that a color similar to the Sherwin Williams' recommended palette, such as a Dunn Edwards brand, could be used. Based upon this explanation, it was the consensus that the words "other similar colors" should remain. Do not aflow lights to decorate the outside ora building. Mr. Meyer explained that this item was presented based on whether or not a style of lighting fixture used was appropriate in a historical district, understanding that the writer was particularly questioning the small white strings of lights commonly used in Old Town. Board Member Montgomery strongly disagreed that such lights should be prohibited due to their "lighting the way" and attracting customers to businesses where street lights are at a minimum. Board Member Blair noted that when the planned community theatre is constructed in the historical district similar lights may be incorporated in that plan. Chairman Harker noted, in his opinion, the lights were attractive as they outlined the buildings after dark. Ms. Ubnoske suggested that types of lights, lighting maintenance, and safety issues should likely be addressed in the New Plan and the Board concurred. Street/Circulation Comments Consider the use of one-way streets. Make Mercedes and Old Town Front Streets one way between Moreno Road and the south entrance to Old Town. (Three Board Members commented on this.) Three Board Members supported this item in their written comments. During discussion, Board Member Allen added, although he had not provided written comment, he should be counted as the fourth Board Member in support of it. Board Member Montgomery noted that creating one- way traffic would increase circulation on the side streets and could create incentive for property owners to improve their properties' appearance. He added that diagonal parking could be added to increase spaces if one-way traffic were approved Chairman Harker stated that visitors are already familiar with using Mercedes Street when Old Town Front Street was closed for special events. Board Member Montgomery added that the current streets' set-up "naturally" accommodates one-way traffic flow going south on Old Town Front Street and one-way going north on Mercedes Street. Board Member Blair noted that he has not made a decision one way or the other but concurs that such a change would definitely impact Mercedes Street, and may enhance the whole of the Old Town tourist district. R:/O~dTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 12 Ms. Ubnoske suggested that should the staff agree to move forward on this item, the Board should emphasize the fiscal ramifications of changing the flow of traffic to the Planning and Public Works depar[ments. In response to Ms. Ubnoske, Mr. Meyer confirmed that there presently are no one-way streets in the City. He added that when the Specific Plan was originally adopted, this item was discussed but the disadvantages outweighed the advantages at that time. Mr. Meyer and Ms. Ubnoske suggested that the Board hear comments from Planning and Public Works staff regarding the safety, maintenance, and engineering before making a recommendation. Ms. Ubnoske noted that she would arrange for a review of pros and cons concerning one-way traffic flow. This item was tabled for further information. Perfect the streetscapes (i.e., roiled curbs, light stanchions and boardwalks/sidewalks) on side streets, as well as Mercedes, to help promote more pedestrian traffic on these streets. Chairman Harker voiced his support of perfecting streetscapes on side streets, and possibly on Mercedes Street. Mr. Meyer noted that The City puts aside funds to provide streetscape design in the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP), noting that during the first two years the Specific Plan was in place this was not done. Additionally, when new construction is approved, the City requires the builder/owner and/or contractors to insure that they are responsible for implementing correct grades and adherence to other aspects of the streetscape design plan. However, since there are more vacant lots in Old Town than the City overall, the City has used Old Town's capital improvement funds solely for streetscape designing and not for any building purposes (such as along vacant lots). Therefore, although the City does not have the funds to go forward on construction improvements, the plans were in place for new construction to conform as Old Town develops. Board Member Montgomery noted that he sat in on a meeting, which included two City Councilmembers where participants suggested that funds for streetscape construction of one Old Town side street per year might be included in the ClP. Mr. Meyer recalled that conversation but questioned whether sufficient funds would be available. The streetscape has lanterns but there are many telephone and electric lines afl over Old Town Front Street. Underground these lines as soon as possible. Mr. Meyer reported that The City is working on this element, that City representatives have contacted Edison and walked the Old Town district with Edison representatives, and that a large amount of conduit has already been laid. Edison has a program called Rule 28 funds, a percentage of money put aside by Edison for projects such as underground lines in specific areas, which may be approved for use in Old Town. He noted however that Edison's lines run perpendicular to Old Town Front Street, but it was his understanding that once Edison goes forward, then cable and telephone companies would follow, all using Rule 28 monies. Use the RDA property at the east end of Third Street fora southbound off and on ramp to 1-15. Chairman Harker noted that this project would include Caltrans planning, and the ensuing discussion covered the following points: · The City has a public right-of-way between the deli and Mrs. Santiago's at Third Street. · A newspaper article of two and a half years ago stated that Caltrans is in the process of designating the section of the i-15 Freeway between Highway 79-S and Murrieta Hot Springs Road to high density. By so doing, the speed limit would be reduced to 65mph, giving Caltrans an opportunity to install additional on- and off-ramps. The R:/OIdTown/LRB/Min utes/05-13-02 13 Board should, therefore, consider recommending that a ramp be placed in or near the Old Town district. The City has been exploring this project for years, considering using the Santiago Road area as a limited -on and off-ramp. Chairman Harker questioned if an off-ramp near Old Town would route traffic that is avoiding the Rancho California and Winchester Roads off-ramps through the historical district, creating unwanted congestion. No decision to recommend or not to recommend was reached. Use Comments Put a timeline on all "grandfathered" uses in Old Town. (Two Board Members commented on this.) Board Members questioned whether this item could be legally adopted and Ms. Ubnoske noted that legality would be addressed at the next meeting with the City Attorney. For Chairman Harker, Mr. Meyer explained the difference between a "grandfathered" property and a conditional use permit by using automotive repair shops as an example. When auto repair shops were established, the County, prior to the City's incorporation and the Specific Plan's adoption in 1994, regulated the Old Town area. Thus, the auto repair shops were legal for that area at that time. Since they are not now a Specific Plan permitted use, they are considered a legal non-conforming business, which is "grandfathered." Mr. Meyer also noted that the grandfathering issue was discussed but not addressed when the Specific Plan was put in place -- the philosophy being that when those businesses' property values were worth more than the business itself, likely the problem would take care of itself. Chairman Harker asked that staff prepare an inventory of all OTHD grandfathered properties for future discussion. Diversify the uses in Old Town. Too many antiques shops are hurting Old Town's reputation. More diverse types of retail and service businesses will help to attract local dollars. Board Member Montgornery noted that a large number of businesses, including many antique shops, close by 5:00 or 5:30 P.M. This practice is not conducive to drawing local residents to Old Town in the evenings and after dark; perhaps business diversification would assist in invigorating the district's evening usage. Ms. Ubnoske noted that when the community theatre is built in Old Town, as presently planned, this problem might heal itself as cafes and support businesses are opened. Also, Mr. Meyer commented that most OTHD "antique shops" are not solely antique stores; most are boutiques, which sell a variety of products. Additionally, the business owner determines hours of operation, and they have the right to have reduced hours. He has also noticed that many property owners are holding onto property waiting for it to increase in value, and, certainly, vacant properties do not enhance diversity. On the other hand, he praised those businesses with well-marketed, diverse products, which change window displays and merchandise on regular and seasonal schedules. R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 14 Remove all blighted property in Old Town. Clean them up or demolish them. Ms. Ubnoske noted that the City is obligated to go through legal channels in relation to property maintenance and demolition. Enforcement of City Code issues and adherence to Specific Plan recommendations are the tools by which staff can step in to require maintenance or demolition work. The City continues to actively enforce violations in an attempt to enhance Old Town by applying its legal rights and obligations. Limit the number of businesses, by type, allowed in Old Town through the Land Use Matrix. Ms. Ubnoske's and Chairman Harker's understanding is that this cannot legally be done. The City Attorney will consult with the Board concerning this item at the next meeting. Put the new City Hall/Civic Center in Old Town. (Three Board Members commented on this.) Ms. Ubnoske noted that public buildings need to be added/allowed in the land use matrix of the New Plan. Generally, staff hopes that Temecula's "downtown" will develop in Old Town as Temecula continues to develop. Address the nature of accessory buildings. Ms. Ubnoske agreed that this is an issue staff and the Board need to particularly address in relation to both accessory buildings and restrooms - where they will be allowed, their size, setbacks, style, materials used for construction, etc. Mr. Meyer noted that determination of whether or not accessory buildings and/or restrooms should be on permanent foundations should also be addressed. Mr. Meyer asked for a definition of an "accessory building," and Ms. Ubnoske noted that is a term that needs to be defined in the New Plan. Add more public restrooms. Mr. Meyer stated that plans for the theatre included restrooms in the courtyard, which would be available, even when the theatre was not in use. Also, the Poole property (the dirt lot in front of The Stampede) plan will likely include public facilities in its finalization stages. Chairman Harker noted that more public restrooms are needed, particularly in the South end of Old Town. Discussion by the Board indicated that all were in agreement that more public restrooms were desirable. Board Member Montgomery excused himself from the remainder of the meeting at 1:08 P.M. A quorum of three members, Chairman Harker and Board Members Blair and Allen remained at the meeting. Open Space Comments Try to establish pocket parks and paseos within the TRC and a public square near the future Civic Center site (CCS). Chairman Harker noted that a CCS, although discussed in relation to Old Town previously, has not yet been formally addressed. Ms. Ubnoske noted that current parks and paseos are shown R:/OIdTown/LRB/Min utes/05-13-02 15 as green areas on the Old Town map in the Specific Plan. Mr. Meyer recommended that a New Plan include a policy statement that it is staff's and the Board's intent to develop small public parks in the Tourist Retail Core (TRC) District (if this is not specified in an overall goals and objectives statement). Board Member Blair suggested that construction of parks be tied to business improvements and/or construction as an incentive program. Build a spillway at the south end of Murrieta Creek, perfect the east and west shorelines along the creek including boardwalks and even small boat marinas and slips. Make a small lake out of the creek, which will eliminate flooding problems due to collection of debris from storm run of£ Mr. Meyer and Ms. Ubnoske noted that this extensive type of project is considered a City General Plan issue, and, in fact, has been discussed at Council; however, due to wetlands and flood control involvement, the Army Corps of Engineers would be involved, as well as agencies, which oversee environmental concerns, water rights, and fish and game regulations. Financial Incentive Comments Create more attractive incentives for developing property/businesses in Old Town. Mr. Meyer responded that the fa;ade improvement program and the affordable housing programs were well received in Old Town. Mr. Meyer noted that The Keyser Marston study reports the area should be targeting restaurants. He explained that for several years, the City has had development incentives in its books, and usually one or two persons discuss this program with staff each month. However, he has seen little interest in the program displayed by Old Town residents or builders; perhaps due to lower rents, property owners who cannot afford major investments, or owners who do not want to sell their property. The City intends to provide continued public notices of plans in the hope of continuing to upgrade existing businesses and encouraging diversified new business usage in Old Town. Notification of the existing plan can be included in the New Plan. Land Use Matrix Comments NOTE: The following districts are those currently included and described in the Specific Plan: Highway Tourist Commercial (HTC) Old Town Civic (OTC) Tourist Retail Core (TRC) The Shoot Out (TSO) Community Commercial/Tourist Support (CCTS) Community Commercial (CC) Medium Density Residential (MDR) High Density Residential (HDR) Open Space (OS) Allow bed and breakfasts in the HTC zone. Ms. Ubnoske pointed out that bed and breakfasts are currently allowed in the HDR district, and Mr. Noland added that he has observed that bed and breakfast establishments are often integrated into retail areas and old hotels. Mr. Meyer additionally noted that the consultant R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 16 recommended and, it seemed appropriate, that within the proposed TSR/Tourist Serving Residential District, if someone wanted to buy two or three lots to put in a bed and breakfast as a pseudo residential use, they could do so. Board Member Blair stated that he would like to see this type of business allowed in all Old Town districts, leaving it to a business owner's discretion whether or not his or her bed and breakfast business would be successful at a particular location. The consensus of the Board was to allow bed and breakfast establishments in the HDR district but to also consider them in other districts. Aflow government offices in the CC zone. The Board agreed with this item. Mr. Meyer suggested that the CC district be split, becoming HTC, TRC, and for civic use. Board Member Blair noted that prior discussions have led him to believe that this CC district will probably be done away with. Mr. Meyer responded that the Old Town Plaza is included in the CC, as well as the U. S. Post Office and the GTE switching station; again suggesting that the matrix would be simplified by combining these business usages into the HTC. He added that consideration would be given also to all of the CTS being combined into TRC. Aflow ice cream and yogurt shops/soda fountains in the HTC zone. The Board agreed with this item. Before discussing the following classifications1 Chairman Harker questioned staff as to whether there were any types of businesses, which would be inappropriate in a historical district. Mr. Meyer stated that this process would be simplified if staff would prepare an Old Town land use district draft for the Board's review at its next meeting. Thus, the following uses were not discussed at this meeting: Prohibit billiards/pool center in the TRC and TSO zones. Aflow fithographic services in the HTC zone. Al/ow luggage and leather goods in the HTC zone. Prohibit pawnshops in the TRC zone. Land Use Districts The CCTS designated area at the south end of Old Town should be changed to TRC. This area should be theme oriented and as restrictive as the main part of Old Town. It's at the south main entrance, which is an area we have been trying to upgrade for some time. To allow development that would not follow the rules of the TRC would give an undesirable first image for tourists entering Old Town from the south. Additional comments were made concerning the Specific Plan and Land Use Districts, which do not fall under the preceding italicized headings. These items were as follows: · In response to Chairman Harker, Mr. Meyer noted that ownership of the first half acre of the two-acre parcel in the undeveloped property on the corner near The Stampede and Dan's Feed and Seed (that forms an L-shaped area around the hotel and which was subject to standing water in past years), is owned by multiple- R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 17 member family trusts. No one from the trusts has approached the Agency regarding plans for the property. Board Member Ross noted that this parcel is not in the Tourist Retail Core (TRC) District, but should be considered as an addition to the TRC. In relation to the Community Commercial/Tourist Support District (CCTS), during discussion of service stations in the historical district, Mr. Meyer pointed out that a question which should be addressed is: Should service stations which are provisionally allowed in the CCTS district continue to be provisionally allowed since they are already allowed/included in the HTC district? He suggested that the need for this CCTS classification may need to be revisited. Mr. Meyer noted that 19+/- of Old Town's single-family homes are in the TRC, making them legal nonconforming use properties. He questioned whether the Board was comfortable with this or should the districts in which the homes are located be revised to allow single family homes. In relation to these residences, he also noted that the City has done a lot of work in that area, and has found that most houses are owner-occupied (very few rentals), that many homeowners do not qualify under financial guidelines for home improvement incentive plans, that there is little turnover, and that residents are simply happy with their hemes and the area. Mr. Meyer opined that the City does not intend to direct what goes where, but intends to allow opportunities based on appropriateness to the varied districts of Old Town. He noted that differences between a traveler and a tourist are considered when determining businesses in a particular district. For instance, around freeway interchanges uses should be those, which are used by travelers. Board Member Allen suggested that considering medium to high density designations could assist in determining businesses appropriate to particular districts. MOTION: Board Member Blair moved to continue this matter to the next Board meeting in order to obtain additional information, comments and advice. The motion was seconded by Board Member Allen and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Board Members Montgomery and Ross who were absent. DIRECTOR OF PLANNING REPORT Ms. Ubnoske will followup on the Barron's property status as it relates to a prior Code infringement citation and report at the next meeting. DIRECTOR OF REDEVELOPMENT REPORT No comments. R :/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 18 ADJOURNMENT At 1:30 P.M. Chairman Harker formally adjourned this meeting to Monday, June 10, 2002 at 9:00 A.M. in the Community Development Conference Room, City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590. Chairman William Harker I~irector of Planning Debbie Ubnoske R:/OIdTown/LRB/Minutes/05-13-02 19