Loading...
2016-03-02 DRC Final MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES - FINAL Committee Members Present: Carol Fox - Chair Craig Wheeler — Vice Chair Robert Imboden Tim McCormack Anne McDermott March 2, 2016 Staff in Attendance: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner- Historic Preservation Sharon Penttila, Recording Secretary Administrative Session — 5:00 Chair Fox opened the Administrative Session at 5:10 p.m. Chair Fox inquired if there was any Policy or Procedural information. Robert Garcia, Senior Planner,'indicated there was no Policy or Procedural information. Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner- Historic Preservation, reminded DRC about the upcoming study session discussing accessory structures in the Historic District which would be held on March 16, 2016. She also stated she has had a couple of other requests on the setting of historic buildings and streetscape in the Historic District including fences, satellite dishes, light fixtures, and paint. The DRC indicated they would be interested in a study session regarding those subjects. Committee Member Imboden thought they had talked about unpermitted demolition. Ms. Moshier stated they did have a study session on that subject and now the staff is working out how to incorporate that into the Ordinance. Committee Members reviewed the Design Review Committee minutes for February 17, 2016. Committee Member McCormack made a motion to close the Administrative Session of the Design Review Committee meeting. SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. Administrative Session adjourned at 5:31 p.m. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 2 of 11 Regular Session — 5:31 p.m. ROLL CALL: All 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 (1) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 17, 2016 Committee Member McDermott made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review Committee meeting of February 17, 2016 as emended during the discussion at the Administrative Session. SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: None ►ITCI� � [I� �1:�:�:� I �I la City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 3 of 11 AGENDA ITEMS New Agenda Items: (2) DRC No. 4828 -15 — The Pie Hole Signage • A proposal to install a new sign, recover existing awnings, and paint the exterior of a restaurant in the Plaza Historic District. • 177 N. Glassell Street, Plaza Historic District • Staff Contact: Marissa Moshier, 714 - 744 -7243, mmoshier @cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Final Determination Committee Member Wheeler recused himself due to his proximity to the project and left the room. Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner- Historic Preservation, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. The applicants who were present for this project were Rick Anaya, Madeleine Anaya, Sunny Pinhero, and Tiffany DelGatto. Ms. DelGatto wanted to change the vinyl lettering on the sign to a white paint. Public Comments Chair Fox opened the item to the Public for comments. Jeff Frankel, Old Towne Preservation Association, stated he had met with the applicant and was in support of the project. Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion. The DRC had the following comments: • Questioned the sign colors and what the final purple /gray color would look like. • Concerned with the color of the sign paint matching the color of the awning fabric. • Questioned if there would be lettering or signage on the awnings. • Questioned what restoration had been done on the building in 2008 and Ms. Moshier explained the changes which had been done by the previous owner on the store front. • Questioned what the building had been originally. • Wanted to see the color of the window frames, which at one time could have been garage doors, a darker color, possibly a bronze to be compatible with the brick. • Concerned that the Reticence color on the bulkhead below the windows was too white, preferred a darker color. • Wanted to see the paint color samples next to a rendering of the existing bricks. • Questioned if the sign would be placed in the same location and if the existing brackets would be used. • Questioned if the 24" return on the awning would be the same. • Questioned the awning coming to a sharp edge rather than a valance and whether it would read more contemporary. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 4 of 11 • Noted a number of inaccuracies on the elevations. The drawing did not reflect the field conditions. Requested revisions to better understand the paint proposal. • Suggested saying none of the architectural elements of the building are changing and only the changes would be the paint color, the blade sign, and the awnings. • Questioned if the panels on the north elevation would be the Virtual Taupe color and if the vertical element on the store front would also be Virtual Taupe as well as the trim. • Concerned with the Virtual Taupe color looking green. • Noted the same color on different textures would not match. • Suggested changing the Virtual Taupe color and using a darker color under the windows to be more compatible with the brick. • Noted the attachment drawing for the sign showed a stucco panel which did not appear to be the case in the field. • Preferred different language be used in Condition 41 of the staff report which addressed the issue of the painted sign being damaged during installation. Thought it would be more appropriate for the applicant to come to the Historic Preservation Planner to work out a plan for restoration prior to repairs. • Wanted to see the awning frame shape, color and material, and how it would be mounted. • Wanted the square tubing on the blade sign to be compatible with the awning frames. Committee Member Imboden made a motion to continue DRC No. 4828 -15, The Pie Hole Signage, to a date uncertain asking the applicant to address the following revisions and updates to the drawings: 1. The drawings shall be reviewed for accuracy and more closely resemble the field conditions. 2. Revise the bulkhead color. The Committee recommended a darker color in that location. Study the paint colors, Reticence and Virtual Taupe, for alternative that would look better with the brick color on site. 3. Provide details or photographs of the existing awning frames particularly the ends, anchors, and the finish. 4. Provide details of the sign that accurately shows how it attaches to the existing surface. 5. Have Ms. Moshier change the language in Condition 41 on page 5 of the staff report to refer to the Historic Preservation Planner and the Community Development Director. 6. Should damage occur to the sign, the City shall be involved prior to the restoration and the plan shall be in place prior to repairs. 7. Change the white vinyl on the sign shown on the drawing to white paint. SECOND: Anne McDermott AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, and Anne McDermott NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSED: Craig Wheeler MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 5 of 11 THE ORANGE COLLECTION • DRC Nos. 4843 -16, 4844 -16, 4845 -16, and 4846 -16 • 3800 Chapman Apartments, City Parkway West Apartments, City Plaza Apartments, and City Plaza Hotel • 3800 W. Chapman Avenue, 500 & 600 City Parkway, and 1 City Boulevard West The applicants who were present for this project were Donald Lamm, Randy Jackson, Peter Quintanilla, Douglas Jones, Tarek Shaer, and Bryan Sevy. Mr. Lamm, representing Greenlaw Partners, explained that he was pleased to show the Committee something new and exciting. He discussed Greenlaw Partners' purchase of the various buildings in the area. With the purchase of these four new properties, they were looking at the whole urban setting of the Outlets at Orange. The applicants provided a Powerpoint presentation. Mr. Jackson and Mr. Quintanilla discussed the urban design of the proposed apartments and hotel showing how they are making connections between the projects and taking advantage of open space. Each of the three buildings would have a different character and personality. The hotel design was based on the Marriott Hotel and was proposed to have 165 rooms. Mr. Shaer and Bryan Sevy discussed the architectural styles of the four projects. They explained who they envisioned occupying the three apartment buildings and the design of each building including the courtyards and parking structures. Robert Garcia, Senior Planner, indicated staff had met with the applicants and staff had encouraged them to make something with the architecture to make this project different from what was existing in the area. Public Comments Chair Fox opened the item to the Public for comments. There were none. Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion on the Urban Design of the 4 project sites: • Appreciated the big urban design and the interconnections between the project sites. • Asked about the missed opportunities indicated in the overall concept. • Asked if the applicant would be able to have an overall master plan of suggestions for other landowners. • Noted the applicant was going after a demographic to abandon their cars and mentioned the bridge at South Coast Plaza connecting the shopping areas. • Suggested using landscaping with the common linkage of trees to connect the urban spaces. • Suggested energizing the sites with traffic circles. • Suggested giving up more square footage and giving it back to the landscape and making the setbacks better. • Suggested putting a tennis court or garden on the top floor of the parking structures. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 6 of 11 • Noted the existing office buildings that are glass boxes and concerned how this proposal would fit into that context. • Questioned the proposed encapsulated parking structures. • Concerned with the number of cars and the movement of those cars and the need for a good traffic management plan. • Concerned with how the interface was treated between the sidewalk and the first floor apartments along Chapman Avenue and Lewis Street. Asked if that could be professional or commercial space rather than residential. • On the northern apartment buildings liked the treatment of the base and would like to see it emphasized more. • Uneasy about the artificial forms for the buildings in the southern project and it might be going a little too far. • Unsure about the palm tree edge of the parking structure unless it was treated well. • Discussed the fire lane /alley avenue and thought the approach of connecting the disconnected opportunities was very important but wanted to be realistic because it crossed through a sufficient area and they were asking a lot to happen across the street to make it successful. Wanted to be sure they were real linkages but thought the concept was great. • Questioned the plazas and thought they were successful when they were a relief from something or it could become a no man's land. • Would like to see retail businesses such as FedEx on the ground floor so residents don't have to drive somewhere else. • Concerned with the way into the parking structure for the Chapman building. • Wanted to know about the vehicular entrances into the structures and was there a reason that they didn't put the entrances into the parking structures closer to the perimeter. • Thought the plaza would be ruined if it would be used by vehicles and would impact the aesthetics of the plaza. • Suggested having all the access for the enclosed parking structure coming off the fire lane from Lewis Street for the 3800 Apartment project. • Liked the plaza on the City Parkway Apartments and thrilled by the bottom southern one. • Questioned the shaded drop off area on the drawing for the 1 City Plaza Apartments. • Questioned the gated area that already exists on the site. • Questioned the image of the reflective pool and requested imagery that really reflects what was being designed. • Needed more realistic photos of what was being proposed. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 7 of 11 (3) DRC No. 4843 -16 — 3800 Chapman Apartments (Orange Collection) • The applicant proposes to construct 277 multiple family residential apartment units with an internal parking structure and a commercial office parking structure to replace existing surface parking. • 3800 W. Chapman Avenue • Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714- 744 -7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Preliminary Review Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion. Apartment • Wanted the architecture to be taken further. • Liked the streetscape form and the heavy base. • Concerned with some of the larger overhangs because it might be going a little too far. • Thought the 5 -story nature of it was not broken enough. • Suggested enhancing the pedestrian level. • Noted the building was conservative but the balconies had some interesting features. • Wanted the roof areas treated differently and wanted them to create some playfulness. • Wanted something more interesting and original as far as the colors and materials. Parking Structure • Parking garage seemed to be on the right path. • Liked the effect of the circular forms on the screen wall. • Liked the balance of the green screen and fin elements. • Thought the green screen was regimented and wanted something more natural. • Did not like the circles on the other side because of its randomness and they could be more subtle. For Preliminary Review only — no action required City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 8 of 11 4) DRC No. 4844 -16 — City Parkway West Apartments (Orange Collection) • The applicant proposes to construct 213 multiple family residential apartment units with an internal parking structure and a commercial office parking structure to replace existing surface parking. • 500 & 600 City Parkway • Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714- 744 -7231, rgarcia @cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Preliminary Review Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion. Apartment • Noted it was very restrained and liked the brown better than the blue from the 3800 Apartment project but wanted something better than brown or blue. The color scheme was boring. Liked the colors on the AMLI project. • Wanted to see the colors picked up from the Outlets at Orange. • Liked the 4 and 5 story variation which made the roof line more interesting. • Liked how it responded to the residents across the street but still concerned about the single story homes directly across the street. • Might be an opportunity for a color pop on the corners. • Wanted the colors to contrast more than pop. • Should relate to the houses across the street. • Noted the strong articulation of the canopies, balconies, and railings. Wanted an edge brought to it by taking one point and making it very strong. • Suggested making it a simple building but create shadow patterns. • Suggested spots of colors on the awnings or trim. • Wanted the volume turned down along Lewis Street because of the residents across the street. • Wanted the courtyard celebrated more. Parking Structure • Parking structure was more interesting than the apartment building. • Thought it was too forced and suggested something more free form. • Liked the automated treatment of the green screen on the south side and the fin treatment was a nice balance. • The up and down was a good first try but didn't want something you would get tired of. • Liked the character of the space. • Noted this was more creatively handled than the apartment building. • Wanted to make sure that the soil area at the base was big enough to sustain the landscape element indicated on the plans. • Wanted something done on the roof. For Preliminary Review only — no action required City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 9 of 11 (5) DRC No. 4845 -16 — City Plaza Apartments (Orange Collection) • The applicant proposes to construct 331 multiple family residential apartment units with an internal parking structure and a commercial office parking structure to replace existing surface parking. • 1 City Boulevard West • Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714 - 744 -7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Preliminary Review Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion. Apartment • Thought this was an extension of the mall and needed more animation and needed to be more pedestrian ordinated with an orchestration of contrast. • Liked the colors and the vertical elements. • Thought the building was too contrived and it would get old fast. • Thought the orange poles were interesting. • Thought something special should be done with the darker parts and suggested calming down the wider parts. • Wanted a hierarchy established. • Liked the orange infill panels on the fenestration and how that feeds back to the crooked columns. Parking Structure • Noted it was similar to one of the Cal State Fullerton parking structures. • Thought this one could go more modern and with more horizontality. • Questioned the curve fagade and liked the look of it. • Liked the angle feature on the first concept. • Liked the curved screen wall. • Excited to see green vegetation on the roof. • Liked the curve form and the idea of a freestanding curve screen with something interesting behind it would be wonderful. For Preliminary Review only — no action required City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 10 of 11 (6) DRC No. 4846 -16 — City Plaza Hotel (Orange Collection) • The applicant proposes to construct a 6 -story 165 -room hotel with surface parking. • 1 City Boulevard West • Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714 - 744 -7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Preliminary Review Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion. Hotel • Thought it was a little too beige. • Wanted only 2 or 3 ideas carried through and let the other ones go, pointing out the multiple canopy styles. • Liked the bay window features. • Thought there were too many things going on. • Liked the corner treatment and the exaggerated horizontal elements that wrap around the corners. • Noted it did not need that many different changes in the material. • Liked pulling the horizontals through the whole building. • Thought it should look more monolithic and more all one building. • Could be elegant with more simple treatment of the facades. • Thought this was a grand, beautiful symphony and liked it. • Liked the roof forms. • Suggested the landscaping be simple and very strong. For Preliminary Review only — no action required City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for March 2, 2016 Page 11 of I I ADJOURNMENT: Committee Member McCormack made a motion to adjourn to the Design Review Committee meeting on March 16, 2016. SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 9:23 p.m.