Loading...
2016-04-14 DRC Final Minutes CITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES - FINAL April 14, 2016 Committee Members Present: Carol Fox - Chair Craig Wheeler — Vice Chair Robert Imboden Tim McCormack Anne McDermott Staff in Attendance: Jennifer Le, Principal Planner Sharon Penttila, Recording Secretary Administrative Session — 7:00 Chair Fox opened the Administrative Session at 7:04 p.m. Chair Fox inquired if there was any Policy or Procedural information. Jennifer Le, Principal Planner, indicated there was no Policy or Procedural information. Regular Session — 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL: Committee Member McCormack had not arrived at this time. 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: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Special Meeting Minutes for April 14, 2016 Page 2 of 6 AGENDA ITEMS New Agenda Item: (1) DRC No. 4847 -16 — Santiago Hills II Design Guidelines • A proposal to modify previous project approvals in order to construct 1,180 residential units in the Santiago Hills II Planned Community area. DRC review will focus on the proposed amendment to the previously- approved Santiago Hills II Design Guidelines. • Santiago Hills II, east of Jamboree Road, west of SR- 241/261, south of Irvine Regional Park and north of the City limit. • Staff Contact: Jennifer Le, 714 - 744 -7238, jle @cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Preliminary Review Jennifer Le, Principal Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. She explained that the DRC would be providing feedback on the Design Guidelines related to the product types as well as architectural styles and landscape concepts. Committee Member McCormack arrived for the meeting prior to the applicant's presentation. The applicants who were present for this project were Brad Engelland, Bob Clark, Jamie Yoshida, and David Kosco. Mr. Clark explained, using a PowerPoint presentation, the changes to the exhibits to address the comments from the last DRC meeting. He explained that example photographs of the landscape area were now included in the Design Guidelines and the number of landscape zones had been reduced. He described the proposed landscape treatment. He explained how the community trail along Jamboree was restudied and widened to the 10' City standard; described the character images of some of the landscape framework areas; described the common thread of trees including the native oaks, sycamores, and pines along the streets; and provided images of typical street trees. He described the wall and fence plan including the location of block and entry walls. He provided a sample of the proposed PVC equestrian fence. Mr. Engelland noted the concern the DRC had with the Traditional Monterey style from the last meeting and that design had been eliminated. Mr. Kosco explained how they had changed the images of the 3 remaining styles by reducing the number of built images and spelling out the connection between the pictures and the characteristics. He described the changes to the Santa Barbara style; addressed the comments regarding the window details and grammatical errors; and the comments specific to the various product types, lot sizes and the plotting of garages. Public Comments: Chair Fox opened the item to the Public for comments. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Special Meeting Minutes for April 14, 2016 Page 3 of 6 Alan Burns, address on file, was concerned with preserving the berm on the east side of Jamboree. He wanted to see the line of sight and what it would look like from the college, and how the landscaping would line up with the topography. He was interested in seeing how the landscaping would match with the grading plan. Bonnie Robinson, address on file, stated the berm is the gateway to the canyon and it would be a shame to destroy it because it changes the character of the whole of the community in that area. She wanted to see the character of that area preserved. Also concerned about traffic. Chair Fox explained how the original proposal was for almost 4,000 houses and now the proposal was for only 1,180 houses and that the Irvine Company has dedicated the land from the 241 to the Irvine Lake to open space. Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion. The DRC had the following comments: Architectural Design and Home Types • Thought the sketches of the architectural styles should be clearer but was much better than it had been before. • Noted a typo on pages which states "Eaves, cornices, chimneys, balconies and other similar architectural features shall not project more than 4 feet..." • Questioned on Pages 39 and 41 that it appeared the site plan graphic was the same for both of the product types and Mr. Kosco said they were the same basic lot size. • Liked the increased setbacks on the street side on Page 43. • Commended the applicant for listening to the comments of the Committee and glad the Monterey style was removed. • Noted there were no roof pitch guidelines for the styles. Mr. Engelland confirmed it was so designers would have more flexibility. Mr. Kosco said the guidelines state roof pitch would be appropriate to the style. • Wanted enhancements of side elevations of units on corner lots and roof plans. • On Page 23, Bullet 4 is the same as the bullet at the bottom of the page and suggested deleting Bullet 4. • On Page 24, under Windows and Doors, on Bullet 1 add "and they are not acceptable" to the last sentence. • Questioned the adjacent driveways shown on Page 41 with the property line down the center of the planter between the two driveways which would mean the tree between the two neighbors could be maintained differently by each property owner. Suggested placing the trees in landscape parkway adjacent to street. Landscape Design • Liked the streetscape and landscape at the Great Park and that the appeal was the looseness and natural look of the landscape there. • Concerned with the local street tree species — the African Sumac, New Zealand Christmas Tree, Fern Pine and Holly Oak because of their size. Preferred the Platanus. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Special Meeting Minutes for April 14, 2016 Page 4 of 6 • Wanted the right street tree to be planted that would tolerate the drought and placed where it would be protected and where it would have a larger growing area. Suggested jogging the sidewalks to get a bigger planting area. • Questioned what "front on conditions" meant. Mr. Clark explained it referred to the locations where the narrower parkways were proposed that concerned the Committee previously. He also stated they would be using rectangular tree pits. • Questioned on Page 58 if the graphic of the modified coastal sage would look like that when there was a fuel mod situation. Mr. Clark indicated that the foreground image would be the modified palette and beyond would be the true sage and scrub palette. • Liked the new trail legend and questioned if the dashed yellow line was what existed now and Mr. Clark confirmed it was and the bluish -green was where the trail was proposed to be relocated. Discussed need to update the Page 66 exhibit. • Questioned if they were dropping the grade at the trails so the ridge was moving. Mr. Clark said the manufactured slope would slope up from the development to the trail and the view from the existing Puma Trail looking back at the park would look much the same with the homes much lower. Mr. Yoshida indicated when the trail is regraded it would be in a different horizontal location and vertically about the same. The houses would be 60' below Puma Trail. • Noted that cattle were formerly seen along Santiago Canyon Road and wanted something to memorialize what the property had been used for in the past. Suggested memorializing it by creating a wooden corner brace like used on a barbed wire fence. • Suggested planting yucca on the other side of the existing yucca line. • Happy with what had been brought back to the Committee, it was more user friendly, and especially liked the illustrations of the landscapes. • Recommended on the trail as it moves along the process that they might find a way to convey what is going to happen especially with the Puma Trail with 3 dimensional representations. • Wanted the fencing colors to be called out such as brown or charcoal grey. • Surprised to see the split face block wall along Santiago Canyon Road and asked if the bluff would still be high above the street. Mr. Yoshida said yes. • Concern with the homes on the north side of Santiago Canyon Road having block walls restricting the view. Noted the use of tubular steel fences in other areas and wanted that used on pie shaped lots. • Noted the use of glass fences in other developments. Mr. Clark discussed the use of glass fence versus open fences. • Wanted a more finalized wall /fencing plan with heights submitted. Mr. Clark said they would have a more detailed wall and fence plan during the design stage. • Asked when the view sections from Irvine Park would be included and Ms. Le said that would be provided at the next meeting. • Questioned if ribbon driveway guidelines mentioned on Page 7 of the Staff Report were needed or could be addressed later during the design stage. Suggested that ribbon driveways if used have hard surface material such as gravel or pavers down the middle. • Suggested placing the water meter on the more generous side of the property and providing a sustainable planting zone. • Mr. Engelland asked if there would be an objection to artificial turf. The Committee stated the issue was the turf getting too hot and the potential of burning someone or catching fire. There was the alternative of using drought tolerant plants or grasses. City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Special Meeting Minutes for April 14, 2016 Page 5 of 6 • Concerned with the plants that spread out and how those plants would be maintained and what would be done with them on the edges. Suggested the use of non mowable grasses on the edges. Other Comments • Verified the utilities along Santiago Canyon Road would be underground. • Suggested on the Table of Contents switching items 6 and 7 because 6 has a totally different numbering system. • Suggested on Page 4 of adding the "Submittal Section" to the "Overview" section. • Suggested on #7 on the last page called "Submittals" adding "samples" for colors and materials to make it clear. • Suggested on #1 in Section 7 to include the floor plan options and the same in #2 with elevations, roof plans, and enhanced corner lot treatments. For Preliminary Review only — no action required City of Orange — Design Review Committee Final Special Meeting Minutes for April 14, 2016 Page 6 of 6 ADJOURNMENT: Vice Chair Wheeler made a motion to adjourn to the next regular Design Review Committee meeting on April 20, 2016. SECOND: Anne McDermott AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 8:22 p.m.