Loading...
2015-11-04 DRC Final MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES - FINAL Committee Members Present: Tim McCormack - Chair Carol Fox — Vice Chair Anne McDermott Craig Wheeler Committee Member Absent: Robert Imboden November 4, 2015 Staff in Attendance: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner Jennifer Le, Acting Principal Planner Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner — Historic Preservation Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner Sharon Penttila, Recording Secretary Administrative Session — 5:00 Chair McCormack opened the Administrative Session at 5:04 p.m. Chair McCormack inquired if there was any Policy or Procedural information. Robert Garcia, Senior Planner, asked the Committee to think about rearranging tonight's agenda keeping in mind that Committee Member Wheeler would not be able to participate on the Urth Caffe and Metrolink Parking Structure projects due to the proximity to his office. Mr. Garcia stated that there were two planners who had information for the Design Review Committee. Jennifer Le, Acting Principal Planner, provided the Committee with a copy of a letter from the State Historical Preservation Office regarding the parking structure project. Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner- Historic Preservation, discussed the topics and schedules for upcoming study sessions, and she distributed a list of these to the Committee. She suggested having a session concerning alternate materials on December 4 a Grand Street study at the first meeting in February, and a session addressing the treatment of accessory structures at the first meeting in March. These were staff suggestions and she was asking the Committee their input. Committee Member Fox suggested having a separate public workshop for local contractors, architects, homeowners, design professionals and realtors on how to apply the Secretary oflnterior's Standards. Ms. Moshier thought this would be helpful, and staff was looking at these things as part of the roll out of the revised Design Standards. Committee Members reviewed the Design Review Committee minutes for October 21, 2015. Committee Member McDermott distributed an Urth Caffe newsletter to the Committee. She also questioned the light fixture on Blaze Pizza which had not been replaced. Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner, said she had been in contact with the owner and he had provided a couple of good options. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 2 of 12 Committee Member Wheeler made a motion to close the Administrative Session of the Design Review Committee meeting. SECOND: Carol Fox AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: Robert Imboden MOTION CARRIED. Administrative Session adjourned at 5:26 p.m. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 3 of 12 Regular Session — 5:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Committee Member Imboden was absent. All other Committee Members were present. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Opportunity for members of the public to address the Design Review Committee on matters not listed on the Agenda. There were no speakers. CONSENT ITEMS (2) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 21, 2015 Special Chapman Meeting October 21, 2015 Regular Meeting Committee Member Fox made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review Committee meeting of October 21, 2015 Special Chapman Meeting and October 21, 2015 Regular Meeting as emended during the discussion at the Administrative Session. SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: Robert Imboden MOTION CARRIED. Committee Member Fox made a motion to reorder the agenda items as follows: Oakmont Senior Living, Urth Caffe, and Metrolink Parking Structure. SECOND: Anne McDermott AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, and Anne McDermott NOES: None ABSENT: Robert Imboden ABSTAIN: Craig Wheeler MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 4 of 12 AGENDA ITEMS New Hearings: (4) DRC No. 4805 -15 - Oakmont Senior Living • A proposal for a three story assisted living facility within the Urban Mixed Use (UMU) zoning district. This is a preliminary review of the exterior design of the building and the landscape plans. • 630 The City Drive South • Staff Contact: Kelly Ribuffo, 714 - 744 -7223, kribuffo @cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Preliminary Review Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. The applicants who were present for this project were James Lawson, Gregg Wanke, Peter Wurtz, Rachel Zbovowska, and Briana Rempel. The applicant stated they have 18 facilities in California; explained the fire lane in the back of the property; described the site design showing the large scale renderings of the building, the courtyard, the memory care garden, pet park, and the resident gardens; stated the focus for this design was to create a contemporary building that would fit into the urban context of the City of Orange and they wanted to break up the facades; and described the trellis area as providing a pedestrian link to the community and created a nice view from the freeway. Public Comments Chair McCormack opened the item to the Public for comments. There were none. Chair McCormack opened the item to the Committee for discussion. The DRC commented on the following: • Noted that on Sheet A0.2 the Southeast Perspective Rendering should be labeled Northeast. • Noted a difference in exterior colors between Sheet A0.3 and Sheet A2. • Questioned the materials called out on Sheet Al which was only listing the colors and not the stone. Requested that the materials be shown and called out on all the elevations. • Asked that the color elevations on Sheet A2 on the background roof elements be ghosted in to make it more clear as to what was in the foreground and the rear. • Concerned with the "Juliet" balconies because it didn't look like any flooring was projecting out and it looked like the railing was attached directly to the wall. Questioned if a balcony railing was appropriate where there was no door to the balcony and it appeared fake. • Noted the roof plan on Sheet A7 did not show overhangs to match some of the exterior elevations and renderings. • Noted on the roof plan that it appeared the parapets were being carried around to the back side and questioned if that was what was intended. If it was carried back a short distance to make sure it was a significant distance from the tower. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 5 of 12 • Questioned the light diagonal lines on each of the towers on the roof plan. • Regarding the landscape plan, asked if using decomposed granite on the path would be appropriate. • Asked who would be using the pedestrian park on the east side. • Wanted more information on the arbor structure near the ramp going down to the parking entrance. • Noted the plans in the packet were not plotted to the scale as shown on the drawing. Asked for a graphic scale. • Questioned if this was architecturally compatible with the neighborhood, the design seemed too animated. • Suggested the applicants look at some other buildings like the project recently approved at 1110 Town & Country which would be more appropriate. • Concerned with the freeway being elevated and being able to see more of the roof parapet and bracing. Wanted to ensure the parapet bracing was concealed from pedestrians. • Concerned with the massing and wanted to see in the next submittal the outline of the existing office building because of the impact to the residents to the west. • Noted the massing and location on the site was well thought out. • Thought there was a lot going on on the elevations. The design could be well received in other parts of the City but not this area. • Questioned the level of independence for the people who would be living there would be. • Did not want it to look like an office building or a giant hotel. It needed to look residential and blend in. • Wanted to see the elevations simplified. • Wanted street names put on the drawings. • Questioned why they were using the Eastern Red Bud as opposed to the Western Red Bud, and the use of the azaleas. • Needed more articulation on the first floor and asked how it could be made to look more welcoming. • Requested on the landscaping plans that there be one palette for the sun and one for the shade. • City Drive street scene needs more landscaping. Ms. Ribuffo would talk to the Public Works Department to see if there could be an opportunity for more street trees placed on the sidewalk. Mr. Wurtz stated a possible solution would be to have more planting and less sidewalk. • Addressed the sun/shade issue on the west side of the building. Suggested replacing the Crape Myrtle with an Italian cypress. • Questioned if diamond shaped planters could be placed aligned with the parking space lines where trees could be placed. • Suggested replacing the palm trees with Tristanias. • Questioned the fire lane design and questioned if it was devoted strictly for fire access. Suggested an alternate type of pavement for that area. • Suggested adding vines to the stucco wall in the garden. • Concerned that the resident garden would be in the shade. • Requested that the pedestrian trails be striped or change the texture, suggested using a paver next to the asphalt. • Questioned the transition of the asphalt and the concrete leading into the parking structure. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 6 of 12 • Questioned the exterior lighting on the project and asked the applicant to bring back a lighting plan. • Didn't want this to look like the other building on the other side of the street but it should read as a residential building. • Wanted more consideration given to using materials which were more compatible with the area. • Suggested using more shading elements on the top floor on the sun side instead of the railings. • Wanted strong simplicity on the corners so it did not look too chaotic. • Wanted clarification as to what could be seen from the freeway. Ms. Ribuffo, for clarification, asked if the Committee was satisfied with how the elevations were articulated noting the DRC just wanted to see a simpler palette of materials and window openings. The Committee asked for a little more honesty concerning the "Juliets" and the use of some of the forms that everyone else was using. Ms. Ribuffo stated staff had instructed the applicants to do something more urban than their other senior living facilities. For preliminary review only — no action was required. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 7 of 12 (3) DRC No. 4803 -15 — Urth Caffe • A proposal to rehabilitate a historic building for use as a restaurant in the Plaza Historic District. • 100 W. Chapman Avenue • Staff Contact: Marissa Moshier, 714 - 744 -7243, mmoshier @cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Final Determination Committee Member Wheeler recused himself due to the proximity to his office and left the room. Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner- Historic Preservation, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. She said the signage package would return for final DRC approval prior to the issue of a certificate of occupancy. The applicants who were present for this project were Walter Jones and Stephen Jones. Public Comments: Chair McCormack opened the item to the Public for comments. Jeff Frankel, representing Old Towne Preservation Association (OTPA), stated it was the best project he has seen in the past 17 years. It was the most comprehensive restoration and rehabilitation of a building in the Plaza. OTPA supported this project and it will enhance the whole Plaza Square. Chair McCormack opened the item to the Committee for discussion. The DRC commented on the following: • Questioned the condition of the brick and mortar. Ms. Moshier clarified that the second floor was in above average condition and areas on the ground floor were in average condition. • Questioned, in the area where the old windows were covered up, how were the new punched in openings going to be filled in. Mr. Stephen Jones indicated they would be adding brick and he stated that Spectra has a source that can match the brick exactly and there might be some original brick that can be salvaged. Ms. Moshier explained that the sections between the windows would need to be reconstructed as well as the bulkhead to match the existing. • Noted the difference between restoration and preservation. • Asked if there was room for umbrellas on the sidewalk, and if the tables and chairs would be picked up at night. • Questioned the wall material on the alley elevation and asked if there could be something historical under it. Mr. Stephen Jones stated the wall would remain plaster and they would be constructing a ceiling with lights to hide the utilities. • Wanted the alley wall to be a darker color and wanted to see the color before the building permit final. Suggested that the applicant paint as many swatches as he would like to be considered on the building so the DRC could see them before they approved the color. • Wanted the LED strings lights in the alley to be the warmer ones opposed to the cold ones. • Questioned the exterior lighting on the building. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 8 of 12 • Questioned the asphalt currently in the alley. Mr. Stephen Jones said they were proposing to make it concrete. The DRC suggested doing an Old Towne standard top cast and wanted all the expansion joints to look the same as the scoring. Wanted metal drains and not plastic. Questioned what the interior flooring would be. Committee Member Fox made a motion to approve of DRC No. 4803 -15, Urth Caffe, based on the findings and conditions listed in the Staff Report, and with the additional conditions: 1. Warm LEDs shall be used on festival and building lights. 2. The concrete paving at the alley to have score joints instead of saw cuts, and the patterns are to look functional and coordinated. Drains in the alley are to be metal. 3. The paint color on the plaster alley wall shall come back to the Design Review Committee prior to building permit final. Large paint samples shall be applied on -site for DRC members to review 5 days prior to that hearing. SECOND: Anne McDermott AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, and Anne McDermott NOES: None ABSENT: Robert Imboden RECUSED: Craig Wheeler MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 9 of 12 (5) DRC No. 4675 -13- Metrolink Parking Structure Project • A proposal to construct a new parking structure at the northwest corner of Chapman Avenue and Lemon Street. The structure would provide 611 parking spaces on five levels (two below grade, one at grade and two above grade). • 130 N. Lemon Street, Old Towne Historic District • Staff Contact: Jennifer Le, 714 - 744 -7238, jlencit oforange.org • DRC Action: Recommendation to the Planning Commission Committee Member Wheeler had recused himself, due to the proximity to his office. Jennifer Le, Acting Principal Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Damon Dusterhoft and Gus Puertas, from LPA, were present to respond to the issues the Design Review Committee (DRC) had raised at the most recent DRC meeting held on September 16, 2015. Ms. Le reviewed the issues listed in the staff report which included the Maple Avenue elevation; examples of the precast brick; contrast and variation on the brick fagade; the clear glass material; the condition of the root zone; the tree grates; exposure of the base of the pilasters; the lighting plan; and photographic examples of the landscape species. Public Comments Chair McCormack opened the item to the Public for comments. Jeff Frankel, representing OTPA, stated that they support this project and they appreciate staff working with them to make some concessions on some issues. They wanted it to fit with the surrounding historic buildings and do have concerns with the brick and how the brick panels will look. They don't want it to appear too contemporary and want it to fit within the context of the Plaza. Chair McCormack opened the item to the Committee for discussion. The DRC has the following comments: Brick Panels • Viewed the building at Peterson Hall at Cal State Long Beach with brick panels and questioned the control joint on that building and wanted to know if that was because of the panel. Also viewed the Nordstrom with the precast brick. • Questioned where the panels were located and where were the joints on the Metrolink structure. Concerned with the joints and the limits of the material. Wanted relief, projections, different colors of brick or some kind of texture within the panels. Mr. Dusterhoft explained how the precast was the backer for the bricks. • Questioned how the joints were tooled. Mr. Dusterhoft said the joint would be pulled back and raked. • Asked what could be done with the panel in terms of projections or recesses. Mr. Dusterhoft answered the question by showing the Committee an image of the panels. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 10 of 12 • Asked where the base meets the ground. Concerned with Detail 5 on Sheet 3.4 and didn't want the bottom to look like it was levitating. Mr. Dusterhoft said it would be covered by plants. • Concerned with the entry way with the elevator towers and it was not called out as precast brick. Mr. Dusterhoft said that part would be built on -site. • Concerned there was not enough texture, color, and relief to relate to the historic brick buildings in the area. Other historic buildings have relief with a rhythm of recess panels, different color brick, and a different pattern. Mr. Dusterhoft explained how they have created interest on a flat building. Ms. Le addressed the limitations of the precast brick but said there was some latitude to do some variation. • Did not have a problem with the panel joint since it was where the pilaster was. The scale of the building would dictate that the detailing would not be too little and this had a well - proportioned and articulated amount of detail for this scale of the building. • Concerned with what the grout was going to feel like, wanted it to be a concrete color, and liked a concave grout. • Mr. Dusterhoft felt they have enough detail and he showed examples of other variations. • Concerned with the area around the entry way and wanted some interest within the brick work. Would like a different brick color and stack bond around the entryway and signage. • Liked how the expansion joints have been hidden. Materials • Mr. Dusterhoft discussed the security screen suggesting the use of metal grating in place of the glass with an 1/8" bar and painted to match the mullion. Street Trees • Mr. Dusterholf explained the tree wells were now triple wide. • Concerned that no structural soils would be used. • Wanted to expand the root zone by only providing the root barriers along the curb and sidewalk and adding 1 /2 grates to each end of the tree well. • Discussed how the trees would be watered and preferred them to be automatically irrigated with bubblers. Ms. Le will confer with the City street crew and ultimately it would be a decision made by the City Council. Landscape Plan • Confused about the landscaping shrub type and the height it would be maintained. Suggested staking the Prunus caroliniana at 6' or 8', or use a galvanized stake and have the stakes placed every 42 ". • Clarified that the Nandina (S3) would be at the openings and spaced 42" apart, and the Prunus caroliniana (S4) would be in front of all the brick facades at a height of 6'. Lighting Plan • Ms. Le handed out the lighting plan to the DRC. She explained the two types of light fixtures which were the tear drop light standard and the acorn light standard. Mr. Dusterhoft described the different light fixtures being proposed for the streets, the pedestrian areas, the bike canopies, the roof top and the service yard. • Questioned the height of the service yard lights. Mr. Dusterhoft said 6'. • Questioned what the lights would be at the entries. Mr. Dusterhoft said they would be lit internally. • Ms. Le stated the proposed lights would be reviewed by the Public Works staff. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 11 of 12 Committee Member Fox made a motion to recommend approval of DRC No. 4675 -13, Metrolink Parking Structure Project, to the Planning Commission based on the findings and conditions listed in the Staff Report, and with the additional conditions: 1. Tree grate shall be as specified in the Depot Specific Plan for style and an additional '/z grate be added to each end of each tree well. 2. On Landscape Plan L7.01 that the Nandina (S3) and Prunus caroliniana (S4) along the perimeter of the building shall have the following placement: the S3 to be in front of the panels that have openings and the S4 to be in front of panels that are solid and shall be maintained at a 6' height using 6' stakes. 3. With regard to lighting, the LW 1 s in the service yard shall be mounted below the 6' fence height. 4. The detailing of the brick at the two elevator towers shall come back to the DRC with a subtle pattern at the blade sign portion of the fagade prior to the start of construction. With the following recommendation: 1. That the street trees be automatically irrigated to support as large a canopy as possible against the long and tall building elevation. SECOND: Anne McDermott AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, and Anne McDermott NOES: None ABSENT: Robert Imboden RECUSED: Craig Wheeler MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for November 4, 2015 Page 12 of 12 ADJOURNMENT: Committee Member McDermott made a motion to adjourn to the next regularly scheduled Design Review Committee meeting on November 18, 2015. SECOND: Carol Fox AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, and Anne McDermott NOES: None ABSENT: Robert Imboden and Craig Wheeler MOTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 8:59 p.m.