DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: DECEMBER 16, 2015 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair McCormick and Members of the Design Review Committee Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Kelly Christensen Ribuffo, Associate Planner DRC No. 4805-15 Oakmont Senior Living/Oakmont of Orange SUMMARY The applicant proposes a three story assisted living facility within the Urban Mixed Use (UMU) zoning district. RECOMMENDED ACTION RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Staff recommends the Design Review Committee recommend action for Planning Commission approval the proposed project 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: Oakmont Senior Living/ Bill Mabry 630 The City Drive South Urban Mixed Use Urban Mixed Use 29,509 SF two story office building with surface parking 65,776 SF (1.51 acres) Associated Applications: MJSP No. 818-15 Previous DRC Review: 11/4/2015 Previous Entitlements: None
Page 2 of 6 PUBLIC NOTICE No Public Notice was required for this project. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Categorical Exemption: The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects.) The project involves demolition of an existing two story office building with associated surface parking on a site less than five acres in size. The property has no value as habitat for rare or endangered species, as it already fully developed and paved, with no natural vegetation remaining. The applicant has also provided technical reports that conclude that the project will have no significant impact relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality. A Notice of Exemption will be filed by staff at such a time as the project is approved by the Planning Commission as meeting all general plan policies and zoning designation regulations. PROJECT DESCRIP TION The applicant proposes to construct a new 91,919 SF three story assisted living facility. The new development will have 98 units, with 27 units specifically dedicated to memory care for residents with Alzheimer s Disease and other similar disorders. The project also includes a 28,102 SF underground parking structure, and the site will provide 61 parking spaces for employees, residents and guests. The proposed floor area ratio (FAR) of the project is 1.4, which staff has determined meets the intent of the minimum FAR requirements set forth in the General Plan. As proposed, the design of the project meets the minimum development requirements for the Urban Mixed Use (UMU) zoning district. The proposed building is irregular in shape with a central open courtyard. Due to the shape of the lot and the minimum FAR and fire access requirements, a substantial amount of the property is covered with buildings and hardscape. This urban street-oriented development format is what the General Plan envisions for Urban Mixed Use Districts in the City. Development is intended to be pedestrian-oriented and be of a scale and design that contributes to a comfortable district-oriented identity for multiple types of users. As such, the majority of the landscaping is concentrated around the perimeter of the property and within the central courtyard. Due to the size and scale of the new project, staff presented the proposed project to the Design Review Committee for preliminary review on November 4, 2015. The new design reflects the applicant s response to the Committee s comments, as summarized in the Analysis section below. EXISTING SITE The site is developed with a 29,509 SF two story office building. The building is surrounded by associated surface parking. The entire site will be demolished and cleared to make way for the new development.
Page 3 of 6 EXISTING AREA CONTEXT The subject property is surrounded to the north by the CA-22 freeway off-ramp, to the east and south by multi-story office buildings in the Urban Mixed Use zoning district and to the west by a duplex neighborhood development zoned R-2-6. 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. 3. Signage. All signage shall be compatible with the building(s) design, scale, colors, materials and lighting. 4. 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 THE ISSUES Issue #1: Response to Design Review Committee Comments On November 4, 2015, the Design Review Committee undertook a preliminary review of the proposed project. Overall, the Committee was satisfied with the massing and scale of the proposed building, but had concerns as to the design being too busy, with too many decorative architectural features. The Committee also had several comments concerning the landscape planting palette and provided feedback on how to enhance the pedestrian experience for residents and visitors around the site. The applicant has subsequently revised their design to incorporate the design
Page 4 of 6 recommendations from the Committee. The applicant and their design team has provided a written response to comments, included as Attachment 2 of this report. Updates to the design of the proposed project include: Simplification of the use of the proposed material and color palette for the building Removal of false Juliette balconies from below upper story windows Addition of enhanced paving within the fire lane access on the west side of the property Addition of greenscreen wire trellises to the east and west sides of the building Addition of landscape planting areas along Park Central Avenue Addition of a second street tree along The City Drive South Addition of shade tolerant plant species to the planting palette Staff is in support of the revised design for this project. The design theme for the property is contemporary, consistent with other large-scale projects approved in adjacent areas of the city zoned as Urban Mixed Use. The changes made have simplified the design of the structure through use of fewer decorative architectural features, while still breaking up the massing of the building through use of different materials and colors. The enhanced landscaping around the perimeter of the building provides a pedestrian friendly environment for residents and visitors to the property. Overall, the design provides for a residential feeling that is respectful of the more urban, commercial character along The City Drive South. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION The SMART Committee (former the Staff Review Committee) reviewed this application on May 27, 2015 and September 16, 2015 and has recommended approval of this project to the Design Review Committee with conditions of approval as stated in Attachment 5 of this report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND 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 5 of 6 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). This finding is not applicable to this project, as the property is not located within the boundaries of the Old Towne Historic District. 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). This finding is not applicable to this project, as the subject property is not located within any National Register listed historic district, no contains any known historic resources. 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 project as proposed has an internally consistent design theme compatible with the dense, urban landscape that is anticipated to develop in the Urban Mixed Use zone over time. Section 17.19.075 and 17.19.160 provide specific development and landscape standards for the Urban Mixed Use zoning district that require emphasis on pedestrian friendly development. The applicant has designed a project which has a contemporary design theme, consistent with the standards and other large-scale projects approved in the adjacent areas of the city also zoned as Urban Mixed Use. The architectural features, materials and colors are compatible with each other and present a unified design theme. The landscaping proposed provides a pedestrian friendly environment for both residents and visitors, and encourages interaction between the public and private areas of the property. 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). This finding is not applicable to this project, as the proposed development is not considered infill residential development. At this time staff recommends that the DRC recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission as having met all of the above required findings for conformance with the City s design review standards.
Page 6 of 6 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS The approval of this project by the Design Review Committee is subject to the following conditions. These conditions shall be in addition to the potential list of conditions of approval recommended by the SMART Committee, included as Attachment 5 of this report. 1. This project is approved as a precise plan. All work shall conform in substance and be maintained in general conformance with plans and exhibits labeled as Attachment 3 (dated revised on December 1, 2015), including modifications required by the conditions of approval, and as recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee. Any changes from the approved plans shall be subject to subsequent review and approval by the Design Review Committee. 2. No site or building signage is approved as part of this project. All signage will be reviewed and approved as part of a sign program or building permit process at a later date. 3. 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 permit, save and except that caused by the City s active negligence. 4. Construction permits shall be obtained for all future construction work, as required by the City of Orange, Community Development Department s Building Division. Failure to obtain the required building permits will be cause for revocation of this permit. 5. If not utilized, project approval expires twenty-four months from the approval date. Extensions of time may be granted in accordance with OMC Section 17.08.060. The Planning entitlements expire unless Building Permits are pulled within 2 years of the original approval. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Applicant Response to Comments 3. Proposed Plans (dated revised 12/1/2015) 4. Green Screen Product Details 5. Potential Conditions of Approval from SMART Committee 6. Color and Material Boards (to be presented at the meeting) cc: Bill Mabry Oakmont Senior Living 9240 Old Redwood Hwy; Suite 200 Windsor, CA 95492 Bill.mabry@oakmontsl.com