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.