DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: APRIL 5, 2017 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair Imboden and Members of the Design Review Committee Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director Robert Garcia, Senior Planner DRC No. 4844-16 City Parkway West Apartments (Orange Collection) SUMMARY 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. RECOMMENDED ACTION-RECOMMENDATION TO PC Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee (DRC) review and consider the project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission (PC), subject to conditions of approval contained in the staff report and any conditions that the DRC determines appropriate to support the required findings. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Applicant/Owner: Property Location: General Plan Designation: Zoning Classification: Existing Development: Property Size: Associated Applications: Greenlaw Partners, LLC 500 & 600 City Parkway Urban Mixed Use 30-60 du/ac 1.5-3.0 FAR (UMIX) Urban Mixed Use (UMU) Existing 10-Story Office Building and 4-Story Office Building 8.94 Acres Tentative Parcel Map 009-16 (TPM 2016-126), Conditional Use Permit No. 3020-16, Major Site Plan Review No. 0846-15, Administrative Adjustment No. 0244-16, and Addendum No. 1846-16 Previous Project Review: March 2, 2016, April 20, 2016, and September 7, 2016 PUBLIC NOTICE No Public Notice was required for this project.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Design Review Committee Staff Report Page 2 of 10 The proposed project is subject to environmental review per the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mitigated Negative Declaration (ENV No. 1846-16) has been prepared for this project and is provided for the DRC s review and consideration. The role of the DRC is to provide a recommendation to the PC on this project and the DRC s comments may include any of the environmental impacts associated with the proposal. Comments provided by the DRC will be included in the PC staff report. The Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt this environmental document was mailed to residents, property owners, and tenants within 300 of the subject property. Additionally it was advertised in the Orange City News on March 29, 2017 and posted at the site on March 29, 2017. The public review period began on March 29, 2017 and will end on April 17, 2017. Written comments must be received in the offices of the City of Orange Planning Division by 5:30 pm on April 17, 2017. PROJECT DESCRIP TION The applicant is proposing to replace existing surface parking spaces associated with an office development consisting of a 10-story office building and a 4-story office building with a new 4- level parking structure consisting of 590 parking spaces for the office uses. Then the applicant would construct a 5-story 213 unit apartment building with an internal 7-level parking structure for the residential units. Architecture The work of architect, Richard Neutra, inspired the architectural of the apartment building. Richard Neutra work can be found on the Christ Cathedral campus located to the west of the site across Lewis Street in the City of Garden Grove. The proposed architectural style of the apartment complex would be Contemporary, and design elements such as roof style, window fenestration, and wall material would be consistent with this architectural style. The design elements would include stucco walls, stone veneer, fiber-cement panels and sidings, metal railings, panels, columns, and awnings, vinyl windows, aluminum storefront, and entry stoop. Building pop-outs and offsets, variations in building heights and materials, and balconies would be added to offset the building s massing, provide human scale, and provide relief to and variation in the building form and style. The proposed architectural style of the parking structure would be Contemporary with an enhanced exterior treatment, including metal mesh screens, concrete, and vehicular entry signage. Metal mesh screens and landscaped green walls would be added to offset the structure s massing, provide human scale, and provide relief to and variation in the structures form and style. The green screens and street facing elevations of the structure are interesting yet understated in response to the established development surrounding the site. The parking structure would be designed to be open so that natural light can enter and to enhance visibility for security purposes.
Page 3 of 10 Landscaping A comprehensive landscape plan for the proposed apartment complex would include a variety of new trees, shrubs, and groundcover along the building perimeter, in the courtyards and common areas, and along the Lewis Street frontage. Proposed tree types would include but not be limited to carrot wood, crepe myrtle, southern live oak, and Brisbane box trees. Ground-level landscape planters would be placed in various locations along the building frontages. All setbacks and other common areas not occupied by buildings or hardscape improvements such as drive aisles, and pedestrian walkways would be landscaped. Vehicular entry/exit for the parking garage of the apartments, and the proposed fire lane, would include decorative pavers and an enhanced landscape scheme. Project development requires the removal of a number of trees and other landscape improvements associated with the existing parking lots where the proposed apartment complex and standalone parking structure would be developed. Although development of the overall project would include removal of most of the existing trees within the Project Site (approximately 138 trees), it would provide a greater number of trees (approximately 203 new trees) than currently exist. A comprehensive landscape plan would be provided for the proposed parking structure that includes a variety of new trees, shrubs, and groundcover along the parking structure perimeter. Proposed tree types would include but not be limited to carrot wood, crepe myrtle, southern live oak, and Brisbane box trees. Additionally, landscaped green walls would be provided along certain elevations of the parking structure. The proposed landscape elements for the parking structure would help to visually soften the parking structure when viewed from public areas. Lighting Lighting for the apartment complex would consist of building-mounted light fixtures; lighting for pedestrian walkways; ground-mounted decorative lighting for landscape, architectural features, and signage; interior lighting for the apartment complex and parking garage; lighting for the courtyards, including for the swimming pool area; and security lighting. Lighting for the parking structure would consist of building-mounted light fixtures; lighting for pedestrian walkways surrounding the structure; ground-mounted decorative lighting for landscape and architectural features; and interior parking area lighting. Amenities The proposed apartment complex would have access to a number of amenities, recreation, areas, and services, including a leasing area with offices, employee workroom, and breakroom; a fitness center with restrooms; a media room; a centralized mailroom; a clubhouse for resident entertainment and gatherings; three courtyards; and an area for game courts. Each apartment unit would include either a patio ground-level units only or balcony that would range from approximately 43 to 97 square feet. All units would also include a washer and dryer room. Three courtyards would be provided for use of the project residents. The enclosed courtyard on the north would feature a fire pit with lounge seating and landscaping. The semi-enclosed courtyard on the west would include communal dining tables and outdoor kitchen area, daybeds
Page 4 of 10 on permeable synthetic turf, and landscaping. The semi-enclosed pool recreation courtyard on the south would feature a lap pool and spa, custom cabanas with chase lounges, daybeds on permeable synthetic turf, dining tables and barbecue counter, fire pit with lounge seating, outdoor game lawn, and landscaping. The apartment complex also includes a game court area at the terminus of the proposed fire lane, along the northern end of the project site. Furthermore, a multiuse plaza would front on the clubhouse/leasing area and would feature a tree allée, enhanced paving, and decomposed granite. Access and Circulation Vehicular access for the proposed apartment complex would be provided via an existing fullaccess driveway and a new full-access driveway off Lewis Street. A new northern full-access driveway would provide direct access into the resident parking garage and would feature decorative pavers. The southern driveway, which currently exists and would undergo minor modifications under the proposed project would connect to an internal drive aisle that would lead to a small asphalt parking area, a vehicular entry/exit to the stand-alone parking structure, and a proposed fire lane; decorative pavers would be provided along portions of the drive aisle. Once inside the residential parking garage, vehicles would circulate via internal drive aisles and vehicle ramps, wayfinding signs would be provided within the parking garage. The parking garage would be restricted to residents, guests, and employees of the apartment complex, with gated access entries. Vehicular access to the stand-alone parking structure would be provided via an entry/exit on the west, east, and south sides of the parking structure; access to the parking structure entry/exits would be provided from Lewis Street, City Boulevard West, and City Parkway West. Once inside the parking structure, vehicles would circulate via internal drive aisles and vehicle ramps, wayfinding signs would be provided within the parking garage. Access to the existing office buildings would be provided via the existing full access driveway off Lewis Street, as well as the existing access driveways off City Parkway West and City Boulevard West. Additionally, an east-west drive aisle would be flanked between the proposed stand-alone parking structure and the office buildings onsite. The drive aisle would provide direct access across the Project Site from Lewis Street to City Boulevard West. Decorative paving would be provided along a portion of the drive aisle to pronounce pedestrian crossing areas to oncoming motorists. Pedestrian access for residents, guests, and employees of the apartment complex would be provided via sidewalks that surround the building and tie into the existing sidewalks to the west and south. Along the south side of the apartment complex, pedestrian access would be through streets that are friendly to cars, bicycles, and pedestrians. A pedestrian corridor featuring a pergola, decorative paving and shade trees would be provided along a portion of the southern end of the apartment complex and northern end of the stand-alone parking structure; the corridor would provide a direct connection to The Outlets at Orange for future apartment residents. The proposed fire lane would also function as a pedestrian feature and would include decorative paving. Access to the individual apartment units would be provided via internal pedestrian corridors/walkways on each level of the apartment complex, as well as elevators and stairwells. As with the apartment complex parking structure, pedestrian access to the upper levels of the stand-alone parking structure would be provided via elevators and stairwells.
Page 5 of 10 Environmental Review The analysis contained in the MND determined that implementation of the project may result in significant environmental effects without mitigation. CEQA Guidelines requires that mitigation measures be identified for such impacts in an effort to reduce such impacts to a less than significant level and that mitigation be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally binding instruments. The MND includes six mitigation measures, which will be folded into Conditions of Approval. Incorporation of the mitigation measures into the project results in a reduction of significant impact to a less than significant level. Staff requests that the DRC specifically review Aesthetics Section 3.1, and Cultural and Paleontological Resources Section 3.5 in the MND to determine if there are any impacts that may result from the implementation of the proposed project. EXISTING SITE The 8.94-acre site is currently developed with an existing 10-story office building consisting of 200,000 square feet and an existing 4-story office building consisting of 70,000 square foot with surface parking. EXISTING AREA CONTEXT The project site is located on the east side of Lewis Street, within the Uptown Orange area, which is zoned Urban Mixed Use (UMU). The properties to the west are residential single family and located in the City of Garden Grove. The properties to the north, east, and south are zoned UMU consisting of a mix of professional office uses, retail/restaurant uses, apartments, and the Christ Cathedral. EVALUATION CRITERIA Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Section 17.10.070 establishes the general criteria the DRC should use when reviewing the project. This section states the following: The project shall have an internally consistent, integrated design theme, which is reflected in the following elements: 1. Architectural Features. a. The architectural features shall reflect a similar design style or period. b. Creative building elements and identifying features should be used to create a high quality project with visual interest and an architectural style. 2. Landscape. a. The type, size, and location of landscape materials shall support the project s overall design concept. b. Landscaping shall not obstruct visibility of required addressing, nor shall it obstruct the vision of motorists or pedestrians in proximity to the site. c. Landscape areas shall be provided in and around parking lots to break up the appearance of large expanses of hardscape.
Page 6 of 10 3. Secondary Functional and Accessory Features. Trash receptacles, storage, and loading areas, transformers, and mechanical equipment shall be screened in a manner, which is architecturally compatible with the principal building(s). ANALYSIS/STATEMENT OF ISSUES The DRC reviewed the proposal for the apartment building and office parking structure at their March 2, 2016 and April 20, 2016 Committee meetings. At the September 7, 2016 meeting, the applicant requested Committee comments on the office parking structure only. Apartment Building Comments from March 2, 2016 Wanted to see the colors picked up from the Outlets at Orange instead of the current color palette. Liked the 4 and 5 story variation, which made the roofline more interesting. Liked how the design responded to the residents across the street but still concerned about the single story homes directly across the street. Wanted the applicant to explore the possibility of using color to pop on the corners, but wanted the colors to contrast more than pop. 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 elevation along Lewis Street to be more subdued and because of the residents across the street. Wanted the courtyard celebrated more. Apartment Building Comments from April 20, 2016 Noted the design was a big improvement by simplifying the colors, lightening up the recessed area, and emphasizing the base, middle, and top. Encouraged not making it diagonal where the balconies came together in the corners. Liked the lower portion of the elevation in the rendering. Suggested using one color stone and laying them horizontally. Liked the change in texture and materials. Noted the visual impact of the trees placed on the edge of the project and wanted a unified statement. Liked the plaza and the open space. Complimented the treatment of the paving on the fire lane. Office Parking Structure Comments from March 2, 2016 Parking structure was more interesting than the apartment building.
Page 7 of 10 Thought the design of the structure was too forced and suggested something more free form. Liked the treatment of the green screen and the fin treatment on the south side, it was a nice balance between the different elements. The up and down was a good first try but the design needed to be developed further. 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. Office Parking Structure Comments from April 20, 2016 Noted the random live green wall heights and questioned if the randomness of the width had been considered. Liked the corners with the stair elements and the entries. Office Parking Structure Comments from September 7, 2016 Suggested having something that signaled entry like a canopy. Corner of the Lewis Street elevation may not reflect the two trees that were there. Suggested addressing a ground plane on the south elevation at the entry. Verified there would be rolled curbs on the plaza. Discussed the Heritage tree in the plaza. Suggested using three different vines on the three parking structures. The applicant has made multiple revisions to the proposed architectural style of the apartment complex and office parking structure in an effort to address the concerns and previous discussions with the Committee during the preliminary review stages. REQUIRED FINDINGS The courts define a Finding as a conclusion, which describes the method of analysis decision makers utilize to make the final decision. A decision making body makes a Finding, or draws a conclusion, through identifying evidence in the record (i.e., testimony, reports, environmental documents, etc.) and should not contain unsupported statements. The statements, which support the Findings, bridge the gap between the raw data and the ultimate decision, thereby showing the rational decision making process that took place. The Findings are, in essence, the ultimate conclusions which must be reached in order to approve (or recommend approval of) a project. The same holds true if denying a project; the decision making body must detail why it cannot make the Findings. The Findings are applied as appropriate to each project. Below are the four findings that, as applicable, are used to determine whether a project meets the intent of the code related to design review and historic preservation guidelines:
Page 8 of 10 1. In the Old Towne Historic District, the proposed work conforms to the prescriptive standards and design criteria referenced and/or recommended by the DRC or other reviewing body for the project (OMC 17.10.070.G.1). The project is not located in the Old Towne Historic District; therefore, this Finding does not apply to the application at hand. 2. In any National Register Historic District, the proposed work complies with the Secretary of the Interior s standards and guidelines (OMC 17.10.07.G.2). The project is not located in the Old Towne Historic District; therefore, this Finding does not apply to the application at hand. 3. The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards, and their required findings (OMC 17.10.07.G.3). The built environment is characterized by a variety of architectural styles, ages of buildings, types of development, and sizes. The project would be designed in a modern architectural style for both the wrap around apartment complex and the office parking structure that would incorporate architectural features that complement the surrounding styles, while creating a balance design internally. The landscaping introduces pedestrian oriented elements that enhance the streetscape and establish linkage between the project and surrounding office and retail uses. These elements contribute to the City s long-term goal of a vibrant mixed-use district. There is no specific plan for the site. 4. For infill residential development, as specified in the City of Orange Infill Residential Design Guidelines, the new structure(s) or addition are compatible with the scale, massing, orientation, and articulation of the surrounding development and will preserve or enhance existing neighborhood character (OMC 17.10.07.G.4). The proposal is a large-scale multi-family residential development that falls outside of the applicability of the City s Infill Residential Design Guidelines; therefore, this Finding does not apply. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION City staff completed its review of the submitted plans on March 1, 2017, and has recommended approval of the applications requested subject to standard conditions. CONDITIONS Staff is recommending that the DRC recommend approval of the project design and the environmental determination to the PC subject to standard conditions of approval, and additional conditions as deemed appropriate by the Committee to support the required findings and ensure the preservation of community aesthetics. 1. The project shall conform in substance and be maintained in general conformance with plans and exhibits date labeled including any modifications required by conditions of approval, and as recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee. Any future expansion in area or in the nature and operation of the use approved by Tentative Parcel Map 009-16 (TPM 2016-126), Conditional Use Permit No.
Page 9 of 10 3020-16, Major Site Plan Review No. 0846-15, Design Review Committee No. 4844-16, Administrative Adjustment No. 0244-16, and Addendum No. 1846-16, shall require an application for a new or amended Site Plan Review. 2. Except as otherwise provided herein, this project is approved as a precise plan. After any application has been approved, if changes are proposed regarding the location or alteration of any use or structure, a changed plan may be submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. If the Community Development Director determines that the proposed change complies with the provisions and the spirit and intent of the approval action, and that the action would have been the same for the changed plan as for the approved plan, the Community Development Director may approve the changed plan without requiring a new public hearing. 3. Subsequent modifications to the approved architecture and color scheme shall be submitted for review and approval to the Community Development Director or designee. Should the modifications be considered substantial, the modifications shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 4. Any modifications to the plans including, but not limited to, the landscaping and parking as a result of other Department requirements such as Building Codes, Water Quality, Fire, or Police shall be submitted for review and approval to the Community Development Director or designee. Should the modifications be considered substantial, the modifications shall be reviewed and approved by the appropriate determining body. 5. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, all landscaping located within public areas shall include the installation of root barriers acceptable to the Public Works Department on the sidewalk side of the tree, or where conditions warrant, the installation of a Deep Root box as directed by the Public Works Director. 6. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director that new mechanical equipment screening shall be installed that architecturally matches the building. 7. Prior to building permit issuance, City required irrigation and landscape inspection notes shall be placed on the final landscape plan, to the satisfaction of the Community Services Director. 8. The project is considered a Priority project and will need to prepare and submit a Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) with treatment BMPs and site design features such as more permeable pavements, landscaping infiltration, directing roof runoff into planters and other BMPs that will serve as buffers for runoff from the site. The WQMP shall be approved prior to issuance of building permits. 9. Prior to building permit issuance, construction plans shall show that all structures shall comply with the requirements of Municipal Code (Chapter 15.52 Building Security Standards), which relates to the use of specific hardware, doors, windows, lighting, etc. (Ord. No. 7-79). Architect drawings shall include sections of the Ordinance that apply under Security Notes. An Approved Products List 1/08 of hardware, windows, etc. is available upon request. 10. Prior to building permit issuance, security and design measures that employ Defensible Space concepts shall be utilized in development and construction plans. These measures
Page 10 of 10 incorporate the concepts of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED), which involves consideration such as placement and orientation of structures, access, and visibility of common areas, placement of doors, windows, addressing, and landscaping. 11. Prior to building permit issuance, the final landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Orange Fire Department. 12. Prior to building permit issuance, final landscaping plans for the project shall be designed to comply with the City s Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines as described in Section IX et al of the City of Orange Landscape Standards and Specifications. 13. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall schedule a light reading inspection with the Crime Prevention Bureau. The lighting shall be tested and confirmed to determine if the lighting meets or exceeds the exterior boundary standards. The applicant shall use shielding so as to ensure that the light standards meet the requirements of OMC Section 17.12.030 for the areas beyond the property s exterior boundaries; light spillage or pollution to surrounding residential areas shall not exceed a maintained minimum of 0.5 foot-candle. 14. The applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liability or claims that may be brought against the City arising out of its approval of this permits, save and except that caused by the City s active negligence. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceedings and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 15. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, including all City regulations. Violation of any of those laws in connection with the use will be cause for revocation of this permit. 16. Building permits shall be obtained for all construction work, as required by the City of Orange, Community Development Department s Building Division. Failure to obtain the required building permits may be cause for revocation of this entitlement. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Design Review Committee Minutes from the March 2, 2016, April 20, 2016, and September 7, 2016 Meetings 3. Proposed Plans cc: Donald Lamm Tarek Shaer Diamond Star Associates, Inc. Urbanestgroup 4100 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 330 1007 N. Sepulveda Boulevard, #231 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Manhattan Beach, CA 90267