Loading...
2016-09-21 DRC Final Minutes CITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES - FINAL September 21, 2016 Committee Members Present: Carol Fox - Chair Craig Wheeler—Vice Chair Robert Imboden Tim McCormack Anne McDermott Staff in Attendance: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner Chad Ortlieb, Senior Planner Anne Fox, Contract Planner 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. Mr. Garcia indicated there was no Policy or Procedural information. Committee Member McDermott wanted to address several issues: • How it would have been helpful if the branded projects the Committee had seen in the past had more corporate identity information like the corporate colors, materials, and architectural imagery, and wanted an internet link to past projects done by the applicants. • Wanted repeat applicants to provide information done on similar projects with the same type of materials. • Noticed the Walkn' Dog had a vinyl fabric sign on the existing pole and asked if this was going before the Committee for review. • Wanted to know if there was any oversight on all the plastic sandwich board signs on the sidewalks. • Wanted to know if there was any design oversight on the legal sidewalk signs and did not want them to be cheap plastic ones and wanted them to be aesthetically sensitive to the historic district. • Noted the Arco station on East Chapman and McPherson had installed a large, bright gas price sign and asked if it was allowed. Vice Chair Wheeler pointed out the medical building on the south side of East Chapman and Cambridge that the Committee had approved in which the fascia on the building should match the type of fascia that is on the original building which was square cut but the new construction was using plumb cut fascias. Committee Members reviewed the Design Review Committee minutes for September 7, 2016. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for September 21,2016 Page 2 of 8 Vice Chair Wheeler made a motion to close the Administrative Session of the Design Review Committee meeting. SECOND: Anne McDermott AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. Administrative Session adjourned at 5:29 p.m. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for September 21,2016 Page 3 of 8 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: September 7,2016 Committee Member McDermott made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review Committee meeting of September 7, 2016, as emended during the discussion at the Administrative Session. SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Tim McCormack MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes far September 21,2016 Page 4 of 8 AGENDA ITEMS Continued Items: (2) DRC No. 4851-16 Rapids Express Car Wash • A proposal to construct a new 4,914 square foot building and related site improvements to establish an automated express exterior car wash. • 2045 N. Tustin Street • Staff Contact: Anne Fox, (714) 744-7236, afox�citvoforange.org • DRC Action: Recommendation to the Planning Commission Vice Chair Wheeler suggested this item could be approved without discussion. Chair Fox found the other Committee Members were in agreement to approve the project without discussion. Public Comments: Chair Fox opened the item to the Public far comments. There were no speakers. Vice Chair Wheeler made a motion to recommend approval of DRC No. 4851-16, Rapids Express Car Wash, to the Planning Commission based on the findings and conditions listed in the Staff Report: SECOND: Anne McDermott AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for September 21,2016 Page 5 of 8 (3) DRC No. 4838-15 Villa Ford Showroom Addition And Parking Structure • A proposal to remove two existing service buildings and replace them with a three-story parking and inventory/service building, and to expand the existing showroom. • 2550 N. Tustin Street • Staff Contact: Chad Ortlieb, (714) 744-7237, cortlieb(a�cityoforan�e.org • DRC Action: Recommendation to the Planning Commission Chad Ortlieb, Senior Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. He discussed the additional materials being given to the Committee for their review. He said the prior staff report remained the same with the exception to the changes made to the plans based on DRC comments at the last meeting. He stated the applicant would return to the DRC after Crime Prevention staff commented on the lighting issues for the parking structure. The applicants who were present for this project were Casey Griffin and Franz Nalenzy. 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. • Asked staff for an elaboration in regard to the change in landscape and any effect it might have on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). Mr. Ortlieb explained how the MND stood defensible against the new proposed landscaping concept. Mr. Nalenzy said they had not reduced the landscape quantity. • Wanted clarification on the options the DRC would be considering. Mr. Nalenzy said the only option issue had to do with the parking structure facing the residential area and the planting breakups on Sheets A3.3 and A3.4. • Noted the Committee had asked for a detail of the projecting awning over the entrance. Mr. Nalenzy said it was an existing awning and just the color was changing. L�htin ig�ssues • On the top deck of the parking structure wanted to see that the lights were adequately shielded so the light source was not visible. Mr. Nalenzy explained that they have pulled the light poles off the residential side. Mr. Ortlieb said they wanted wall packs to shine down on the top deck but it depends on Crime Prevention's requirements. • Wanted to know how the lighting worked on the second level as far as visibility from Heim. Mr. Nalenzy said they don't have any current plans at this point for that. • Liked the fixture choices. • Told the applicants that the lighting details could come back to the Committee for approval before the final inspection. • Thought the lighting standards that exist for parking lots would not be applicable for this project, noting there were other options to consider such as timers for specific hours or reduced lighting after hours. • Verified the parking structure would be secured at night and that should be made clear to the Police Department. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for September 21,2016 Page 6 of 8 Chair Fox asked the Committee if they had had a chance to review the Mitigated Negative Declaration. She asked if there were any concerns with it and there were none. Landscapin issues • Noted the landscape plan was not showing anything in terms of a planting space. Mr. Nalenzy explained the planting zones had been updated. • Noted that the footing placement and depth of soil above footing was critical. • Wanted to use the curb as planting areas as a substitute for a wheel stop. • Noted the wheel stops for handicap and non-handicap were in two different places. Mr. Nalenzy said they could deepen the planting area in the handicap spaces as long as it did not violate ADA regulations ar City of Orange codes. Mr. Ortlieb explained that the code would not accommodate that but the applicant, if they have more than a 25' drive aisle, could encroach the striping further out, as long as Fire Department turnaround still worked, and use that difference to expand the space. • Asked how wide the planters were. Mr. Nalenzy said they originally had the curb stops at 2' and now it was a 2' planter which could have deeper footings. • Asked about the Prunus caroliniana, Carolina cherry on the west side that was in the setback and pushed against the building. • Stated the rule of thumb for top of footing depths were 5' for trees, 3' for shrubs, and 1' for turf. • Explained that often times the top of the footing is level so the top of the footing would need to be sl�ped. • Liked the idea if there was an extra foot in the drive aisle the planters could be pushed out another foot. • Concerned with the vines being planted in a 1 gallon size because of the low light issue with the two walls. • Noted the count on Sheet L-2 for the Prunus caroliniana, Carolina cherry was 19 but had counted 30. Mr. Nalenzy said it should be 30. • Noted there were no quantities shown on the legend for the Red Trumpet Vine or the Star Jasmine and it should be noted there are 14 each. • Thought the spacing far the Rhaphiolepis was spaced perfectly but questioned the Tuscan Blue Rosemary because it would become a hedge which would require trimming and suggested using grasses since they grow up and not out. • Thought the Prostrate Rosemary and the Yellow Lantana would become one mass. • Suggested using the grasses closest to the public sidewalk. • Suggested replacing the Prostrate Rosemary with one gallon 24" on center with small grasses like Pennisetum spathiolatum, Sesleria autumnalis, Festuca idahoensis, or Festuca mairei. • Discussed the landscaping options for the west elevation shown on Sheets A3.3 and A3.4. • Concerned the 8' height line of the Prunus caroliniana, Carolina cherry would not be seen at all when first planted and questioned if that would screen the building. Also since it would be planted at the height of the block wall they would only get light at the very top of the new trees. • Not convinced the screening was enough to meet the expectations when the MND was prepared. Noted the trees would be 14' in 10 years with only 3' of the tree being seen above the 32' building. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for September 21,20l 6 Page 7 of 8 • Questioned why it had to be the Prunus caroliniana, Carolina cherry. • Suggested using a number of different trees to avoid creating a monoculture. • Concerned one tree would become dominant over another if more than one type of tree was used. • Concerned that the MND was vetted with a different assumption and now they were changing it. • The Committee agreed, on the west elevation, that they liked the version shown on A3.4 which breaks up the landscaping; was more in keeping with the MND; and if the trees would underperform, at least the vines would be there. Mr. Ortlieb explained that the DRC was not limited to the options provided. If they wanted a green screen along the whole building that would be fine; if they wanted cypress trees, that would be fine; or a combination of vines and trees. • Suggested switching the Prunus caroliniana, Carolina cherry with the vines. • Commended the applicant for returning the packet to the Committee so quickly. Committee Member McCormack made a motion to recommend approval of DRC No. 4838-15, Villa Ford Showroom Addition and Parking Structure, to the Planning Commission based on the findings and conditions listed in the Staff Report with the following additional conditions: 1. Pushing down the footings to a minimum 5' for tree and a minimum 3' for the vine pockets locations specifically on the west and the south sides of the structure as noted on Sheet L2 and Site Plan A1.0. 2. Have the Site Plan A1.0 be coordinated with Sheet L.2 for vine pocket curb locations. 3. To replace the groundcover noted on the drawing with a 45 degree single hatch Rosemary Rosmarinus Prostatus with either Festuca idahoensis (Idaho fescue), Pennisetum spathiolatum (Slender veldt grass), Sesleria autumnalis (Autumn moor grass), or Festuca mairei at the same spacing noted on the legend. 4. Revise the planting legend to reflect the quantity of the Prunus caroliniana, Carolina cherry which would be 30 and the quantity for the Red Trumpet Vine and the Star Jasmine which would be 14 each in a one gallon size. 5. Have positive drainage away from the structure on the top of footings to be a minimum of 1%, preferably 2%, to drain water off the footings in the planting areas. 6. As written in Condition #9 in the Staff Report, prior to final inspection the lighting shall return to the Design Review Committee for approval. SECOND: Anne McDermott AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange—Design Review Committee Final Meeting Minutes for September 21,2016 Page 8 of 8 ADJOURNMENT: Vice Chair Wheeler made a motion to adjourn to the next Design Review Committee meeting on Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. SECOND: Robert Imboden AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 7:04 p.m.