Loading...
2016-06-15 DRC Final Minutes CITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES -FINAL June 15, 2016 Committee Members Present: Carol Fox - Chair Craig Wheeler—Vice Chair Tim McCormack Anne McDermott Committee Member Absent: Robert Imboden Staff in Attendance: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner Sharon Penttila, Recording Secretary Administrative Session —5:00 Chair Fox opened the Administrative Session at 5:06 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. Committee Member McDermott wanted to know how to address a concern when they see a project which has been finished but it was not completed as approved or just want to discuss an aesthetic concern that had not been discussed previously. She wanted to know who to discuss any issues with, Mr. Garcia indicated it would be best to bring it to the attention of the Planning Manager, Leslie Roseberry. Chair Fox added it would be good to have it discussed at the DRC Administrative session as well. Committee Member McDermott had a couple of issues with the Pie Hole project. She was concerned with the stainless steel fasteners which were not very well placed and not aesthetically pleasing; and rope lights under the awning which were not part of the submittal. Mr. Garcia said he would pass along the concerns to with Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner-Historic Preservation, about the issues. Chair Fox said it should be brought up and ask that staff look at the drawings to see if in fact it was built according to the plan. She said that sometimes the Committee micromanages too much and they have to give some latitude to the applicant to find an available product. She said that sometimes they give the same treatment to contractor applicants and owners who do not have architects or draftsman and the recommendations are not interpreted the same. Committee Members reviewed the Design Review Committee minutes for June 1, 2016. Vice Chair Wheeler made a motion to close the Administrative Session of the Design Review Committee meeting. SECOND: Tim McCormack AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for June 15,2016 Page 2 of 8 ABSENT: Robert Imboden MOTION CARRIED. Administrative Session adjourned at 5:29 p.m. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for June 15,2016 Page 3 of 8 Regular Session—5:34 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: (1) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 1,2016 Vice Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review Committee meetings of June 1, 2016 as emended during the discussion at the Administrative Session. SECOND: Anne McDermott AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: Robert Imboden MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for June 15,2016 Page 4 of 8 AGENDA ITEMS Continued Item: 2) DRC No. 4761-14 Koll Center Parking Structure#2 • A proposal to construct a new three level parking structure on an existing surface parking lot. This is the second review of this project by the Design Review Committee, for final review of landscape, structure lighting, color and materials. • 420 N. State College Boulevard • Staff Contact: Kelly Ribuffo, 714-744-7223, kribuffo@cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Final Determination Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. She explained the 3 items that were coming back to the DRC for final determination. They included the revised landscape plan and photographs of plant choices; the proposed lighting plan; and the paint colors on the new structure and the proposed security mesh. The applicants who were present for this project were Craig Morrison and Chris Peterson. Public Comments: Chair Fox opened the item to the Public for comments. There were no speakers. Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion. The DRC commented on the following: • Noted the Myoporum `Pacificum' was being replaced with the star jasmine as recommended by the Committee. • Wanted to know if the lighting would be coordinated with the tree placements. • Questioned the interior lighting of the structure. Mr. Morrison explained the fixtures inside the structure would be ceiling mounted, and the light would not spill outside and would not be overly excessive. • Suggested the applicant play around with the colors to differentiate the 2 parking structures. Mr. Morrison stated they had mixed up some of the accent colors so it would look similar but they would have their own unique features. Mr. Peterson said they would be using the opposite colors found on the existing structure. • Questioned the finish on the security mesh and was told it would be galvanized. Asked if landscaping would grow on them and Mr. Peterson said no. Committee Member McCormack made a motion to approve DRC No. 4761-14, Koll Center Parking Structure #2, based on the findings and conditions listed in the Staff Report: SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: Robert Imboden MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for June 15,2016 Page 5 of 8 New Agenda Item: (3) DRC No. 4821-15 Glassell Townhomes (PRELIMINARY REVIEW) • A proposal to construct a new 40 unit townhouse development on an existing developed lot in north Orange. • 2830 N. Glassell Street • 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 Daryl Sequeira, Bryan Sevy, and Mark Schattinger. Mr. Sequeira, from LaTerra Development, explained who they are and that they specialize in infill developments. Mr. Sevy explained the architectural features of the project. He provided color and plaster sample boards. Public Comments: Chair Fox opened the item to the Public for comments. There were no speakers. Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion. The DRC commented on the following: • Thought it was nice and well done. • Privacy concern with the Riverbend development so close to the north. • Wanted a privacy study to see how the windows relate to the Riverbend development and suggested the use of translucent glass in some locations to preserve privacy. • Wanted to see next time some of the details of the trim items like the cornices and window trims; and wanted a roof plan. • Asked if there would be any mechanical equipment on the roofs. Mr. Sevy said no and the AC condensers would be at ground level. • Noted on Building A there was a discrepancy between the elevations (Sheet A2.0) and the floor plans (Sheet A3.0) regarding window locations. • Questioned the material on the doors on the mechanical spaces. Mr. Sevy said they would be hollow core doors. • Liked the color combination but it appeared very equal. Mr. Sevy said the white and khaki would be the dominant colors. Asked the applicant to have one of the two colors be more dominant. • Questioned the use of really thin roofs. Mr. Sevy said the intent was to be fairly delicate and not bulky. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for June 15,2016 Page 6 of 8 • Asked if there would be any sun shade on the south side. Mr. Sevy said they are trying to not use any projections or awnings to keep the space open. • Noted the park directly across the street from the project and asked if the circulation to the park should be addressed. • Liked the contemporary feel of the design. • Questioned the stucco reveal alignment at some of the windows. • Suggested using a stack bond wall on the north side. • Suggested the plant palette in the center of the project be monoculture and bring the palo verde trees all the way through. • Suggested the synthetic grass that would be exposed on the south and west of the dog park be irrigated because it would become very hot and add more trees for more shade. • Wanted to see a foliage tree on the street instead of the palm tree. Mr. Schattinger stated they are using the palm trees because of the small planting area and they cannot touch the building. • Wanted the planting palette simplified and suggested the acacia removed. � Wanted the use of the large Cape Rush be reconsidered. • Noted the site was a great place to get the density. • Questioned the setback on the north side of the property. Mr. Sevy said the required setback was 5' and they have asked for a 10% reduction which was for the utility cabinet bump out. Ms. Ribuffo stated the front setback requirement was 15' and the applicant was asking for 12.5', and the rear setback requirement was 10' and they are asking for 8'. • Questioned what was adjacent to the lot in the back. Mr. Sequeira said it was an existing apartment complex with a large parking lot along the property line. • Suggested bringing next time the landscape and block materials, and paving. Did not want to exclude the exterior site materials from the material palette so wanted a hardscape palette. • Questioned the type of paving material. Mr. Sevy said it would be asphalt. Wanted the applicant to think about using pavers or score lines on the pedestrian access zones. • Thought the California fan palms at the entrance were ideal. • Liked the thin overhang form on the roofs. • Thought the elevation on Glassell Street was elegant but did note the flatness internally on the site. • Thought there might be an opportunity for shading on the south side along the drive aisle. • Wanted to be sure they used true California fan palms. Ms. Ribuffo summarized the Committee's comments: • Concerns with privacy between Riverbend to the north and that could be accomplished with additional details about distance between the buildings and window placements. • Wanted specific trim details on the buildings and the windows. • Correct the discrepancy between the floor plan and elevation for windows and doors. • Wanted a door and window schedule be added including utility doors. • Wanted to know the sill height of the upper windows which are openable. • Additional hardscape palette to compliment the paint color for the buildings. • Wanted finer detail on the color including the possible percentage of colors used on the buildings. • Use of stack bond on some of the decorative wall details inside the site and call it out. • Provide details on the eaves on the buildings. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for June 15,2016 Page 7 of 8 • Simplify the tree and plant palette inside the site that would give a more contemporary feel. • Additional irrigation and shading on the artificial turf. • Consider replacement of certain plant species, such as the purple leaf acacia and large Cape rush. • Need full display of samples including decorative block. • Defining some of the pedestrian zones or crossings within the site by using striping or some other kind of finish or carrying enhanced paving through those areas. • Include exterior lighting fixtures and/or standards. • Make sure the light fixtures coordinate with the tree palette. • Looking for options for shading on the south side building elevations along the main drive. • Wanted a roof plan. • Wanted to see the stucco reveals aligned with windows. For Preliminary Review—no action required. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for June 15,2016 Page 8 of 8 ADJOURNMENT: Committee Member McCormack made a motion to adjourn to the next regular Design Review Committee meeting on Wednesday, July 6, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Carol Fox, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: Robert Imboden MOTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 6:46 p.m.