2015-12-16 DRC Final MinutesCITY OF ORANGE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MINUTES - FINAL
December 16, 2015
Committee Members Present: Tim McCormack - Chair
Robert Imboden
Anne McDermott
Craig Wheeler
Committee Member Absent: Carol Fox — Vice Chair
Staff in Attendance: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner
Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner- Historic Preservation
Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner
Sharon Penttila, Recording Secretary
Administrative Session — 5:00
Chair McCormack opened the Administrative Session at 5:20 p.m.
Chair McCormack inquired if there was any Policy or Procedural information. Robert Garcia,
Senior Planner, stated that on Item #2 there would be some public testimony and that
correspondence on this project received from the public had been forwarded to the Committee
Members.
Mr. Garcia noted on Item #5 on the agenda had the address listed as S. Center Street and it should
have been N. Center Street.
Committee Members reviewed the Design Review Committee minutes for December 2, 2015.
Committee Member McDermott made a motion to close the Administrative Session of the Design
Review Committee meeting.
SECOND: Craig Wheeler
AYES: Robert Imboden, McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: Carol Fox
MOTION CARRIED.
Administrative Session adjourned at 5:25 p.m.
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 2 of 12
Regular Session — 5:31 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Committee Member Fox 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: December 2, 2015
Committee Member Imboden made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review
Committee meeting of December 2, 2015 as emended during the discussion at the Administrative
Session.
SECOND: Craig Wheeler
AYES: Robert Imboden, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: Carol Fox
ABSTAIN: Tim McCormack
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 3 of 12
AGENDA ITEM
New Aaenda Item•
(2) DRC No. 4816 -15 — Dang Residences
• A proposal to demolish existing buildings and to construct three new apartment buildings and
one detached two -car garage. The proposal includes a total of seven apartment units. The
applicant is in the design development phase and is requesting an early preliminary review by
the Design Review Committee to receive feedback on the proposed site plan, mass, scale and
design-of the new construction.
• 655 S. Glassell Street, Old Towne Historic District
• Staff Contact: Marissa Moshier, 714 - 744 -7243, mmoshier @cityoforange.org
• DRC Action: Preliminary Review
Committee Member Wheeler recused himself due to his association with the project and he left the
room.
Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner- Historic Preservation, presented a project overview consistent
with the Staff Report.
The applicant who was present for this project was Neeti Dang. Ms. Dang explained how they are
closely tied to the city of Orange and bought this property to do something that feels like Old Towne
but allows them to bring in more residents.
Public Comments:
Chair McCormack opened the item to the Public for comments.
Speakers:
The following persons spoke in opposition to the Dang Residences project citing that the demolition
of the Watson Home would be a cultural loss to the community and history of Orange; the
demolition would cause noise pollution and construction traffic; the denial by the DRC of a previous
expansion proposal in 2003; the traffic and parking impact on surrounding streets; the LSA report
was paid for by the applicants; the property does have historic value; the need for less density, not
more; the historical significance of Keller Watson Jr.; the inventory states the home was built in
1941; the custom features within the home are unique; concern the status code went from a 6L to a
6Z and the downplaying of the architectural significance of the property; the height does not meet
the development standards; the negative impact in the district and on the streetscape; the property is
not within the period of significance but it should be recognized as a significant structure; the house
should be included as part of the project; the street parking on S. Orange Street is only on one side;
concern that the addition of apartment buildings would set a precedent; privacy concerns with the 2-
story aspect of the project; and the need to explore Mrs. Watson's historical contributions.
Donna and Danny Myers
Larry Lopez
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 4 of 12
Richard Zimbelman
Jeff Frankel, Old Towne Preservation Association
Dan Slater
Carrie Hudnall
Lorrie Stastny
Chair McCormack opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
Potential Historic Significance of the Property
• Asked if there were any other types of designations that would protect the property. Ms.
Moshier explained the different levels of designations. She noted the Orange Municipal
Code currently does not allow designation of an individual historic building, so the
evaluation of the property assessed potential designation in the National Register or the
California Register or as part of a historic district. Three homes have been separately
designated in the National Register in Old Towne. This property has never had a National
Register designation. Creating a local historic district designation for an individual building
would require changing the Municipal Code. She explained how the period of significance
could be expanded for the Old Towne Historic District.
• When the property was last surveyed by the City it was listed as noncontributing because it
was outside the period of significance but the survey form noted potential local cultural
value.
• Assessed by LSA and found ineligible as a stand -alone property.
• Questioned whether the 1940 date ending the period of significance for the National Register
Old Towne Historic District was an arbitrary 50 year cut -off date and whether the period of
significance might be expanded.
• An argument might be made that the property was owned by a person who had a business
that was significant to the City's history.
• The assessment before the DRC tonight was not convincing either way and more evidence
was needed to make a determination of local significance.
• Noted because the original windows have been removed, the house now lacks integrity but
argued that there is the same situation with the contributors to the National Register historic
district which do not have original windows.
• Questioned the stone entry into the park and the stone wall on the property. This information
needs to be addressed in the evaluation.
• Ms. Dang explained that the survey form noted that it was constructed by Keller Watson Sr.
but the assessor's records shows the property was built in 1942 and the grant deed shows it
was never owned by Mr. Watson Sr. It was constructed by Mr. Watson Jr. when he was
nearing retirement.
• The DRC requested additional evaluation about the Watsons' involvement in civic affairs
and the connection between Mr. Watson's professional career and the property.
• Questioned the statement in the survey form that the property may warrant special
consideration. Ms. Moshier stated that the intent of the survey finding was that it was not
considered a historic resource per CEQA but there might be something about the site or the
building itself that should be looked at carefully when designing a project on the site.
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 5 of 12
• Ms. Moshier heard that the DRC would like more in depth analysis of the site as a whole as it
relates to historic value and its association with the Watsons. It would include an assessment
of whether or not the site planning and the setbacks are significant features of the site.
• The DRC and the public have voiced an opinion that there is historic value to the site. The
consultant should be in attendance at the next meeting to answer DRC questions.
Project Design
• The architectural styles shown are inconsistent with Old Towne. Ms. Dang noted that they
drew from the existing style of the home for the design of the apartment. She was trying to
accommodate the zoning of the lot and still bring it down to scale and make it as Old Towne
friendly as possible. She had taken into consideration access to the property and the Floor
Area Ratio on Orange Street.
• Questioned the massing with the three different architectural styles. The massing needs to be
consistent with the architectural style.
• Noted the cantilevers are out of place for this project in Old Towne.
• The Dutch colonial roof with the gable running the long direction of the house was an
inappropriate use of the architectural style.
• Noted the large amount of lot coverage on the site. A lot of bulk and mass was being
proposed for the site. It appeared that the mass was driving the architectural forms.
• Ms. Dang pointed out the existing apartment buildings that surround her property. She was
trying to get less density than the zoning allows.
• Explained that oversized development in Old Towne was one of the primary reasons the
National Register Historic District was formed in the first place.
• Even though it is zoned R3, the structure has to be compatible with the surroundings.
• Agreed with the design separating the duplex residential side on Orange Street from the
multifamily side on Glassell Street.
• Heard the public's concern about the lack of parking in the neighborhood and site access.
• Concerned with the amount of paving for the parking areas and the lack of trees. Would like
to see the landscape as important as the building and a greater connection with Hart Park.
Ms. Dang explained the reasoning for placing the parking spaces behind the building.
• The private open space on the front 2 units is 20' off Glassell Street which does not make it
usable open space.
• Saw a problem with the garage on Orange Street being so close to the street and would want
it redesigned. Suggested looking at some of the older bungalow court sites in the City.
• There are other options that might include new buildings being put on the lot with the
existing house or making additions to it. Another option would be to relocate the existing
home to a different site.
For preliminary review only — no action required
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 6 of 12
((3) DRC No. 4805 -15 - Oakmont Senior Living
• A proposal for a three story assisted living facility within the Urban Mixed Use (UMU)
zoning district. This project was preliminarily reviewed by the DRC on 11/4/2015.
• 630 The City Drive South
• Staff Contact: Kelly Ribuffo, 714 - 744 -7223, kribuffokcityoforang�e.org
• DRC Action: Recommendation to the Planning Commission
Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
The applicants who were present for the project were Bill Mabry, Pete Wurtz, Briana Rempel,
Rachel Zborowska, Hannah Daughety, and Gregg Wanke. They explained the design changes they
had made since they were before the DRC for a preliminary review. The changes included the
windows; adding more awnings on the front and west side; making the massing more horizontal;
grouping the facades together; marking out the height of the existing building; adding concrete
areas in the asphalt paving in the fire lane that would match the approaches to the driveways; the
street trees changing to Tristanias; adding green screens (metal grills) at various heights to add
vertical interest; adding on the residential sidewalks parkway planter strips; the legend being edited
to show shade tolerant species; and adding sight lighting in various areas on the site plan.
Public Comments
Chair McCormack opened the item to the Public for comments. There were no speakers.
Chair McCormack opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
• Questioned the height of the green screen, how it would be maintained, and if the plant
species would grow to that height.
• Concerned about the material colors noting that some of the neutral colors on the buildings
did not seem to play well with each other. The stone seemed to stand out better than some of
the other colors.
• Suggested getting rid of the decorative outriggers.
• Hoped to see a shade tolerant vine on the northwest side at the hammerhead.
• Commended the applicants on the professional renderings.
• Suggested putting one more band of enhanced paving at the hammerhead.
• Wanted clarification on site plan SP1 versus the landscape plan. Suggested using green
screen on the transformer and the trash enclosure.
Ms. Ribuffo recommended that Don Equitz, the City's Landscape Coordinator, review the
landscaping plans when it is submitted for plan check. William Crouch, Community Development
Director, indicated he would review the landscaping plans with Mr. Equitz.
Committee Member Wheeler made a motion to recommend approval of DRC 4805 -15, Oakmont
Senior Living, to the Planning Commission based on the findings and conditions listed in the Staff
Report, and with the additional conditions:
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 7 of 12
1. That the walkway on Sheet SP 1 at the east end of the fire turnaround/hammerhead be
continued across that turnaround /hammerhead to match the walkway on the north which
turns south.
2. Green screen be incorporated around the transformer compartment in the area of the
resident's gardening at a minimum height of 6.
3. All the elements described on Sheet Al as decorative metal or wood outriggers be removed.
SECOND: Anne McDermott
AYES: Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: Carol Fox
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 8 of 12
(4) DRC No. 4814 -15- Lugo Residence
• A proposal to construct an addition to the rear of a non - contributing single family residence
within the Old Towne Historic District.
• 810 E. Culver Avenue
• Staff Contact: Kelly Ribuffo, 714 - 744 -7223, kribuffokcityoforange.org
• DRC Action: Final Determination
Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
The one issue on the project was the timing of the replacement of all the existing vinyl windows with
new wood windows. The applicants were requesting to replace the vinyl windows at a later date.
The applicants who were present for this project were Marzi Zion, Benny Lugo, and Kristin Lugo.
Mr. Lugo explained the need for the addition was due to his aging Mother who is living with them.
Public Comments
Chair McCormack opened the item to the Public for comments. Jeff Frankel, representing OTPA,
wanted to know if there would be a deadline established for removing the vinyl windows and asked
what the material on the slider would be.
Chair McCormack opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
• Concerned with the roof plan and how the water would drain. Suggested building a
cardboard model of the design first.
• Questioned the trim material around the windows.
• Questioned the window on the south elevation which looked like glass blocks and wanted to
know what type of window would replace it.
• Questioned the dimensions of the windows on the elevations.
• Noted the floor plan of the home was intriguing.
• Agreed it was difficult to determine from the information given to the Committee to feel
confident about what the windows would look like but noted it was also a very simple house.
• Asked for the design to be consistent and wanted a time frame assigned now for replacing the
vinyl windows. Mr. Lugo would like 5 years. Mr. Crouch indicated the applicants would
need to sign an agreement of understanding that the window replacements would be done
within that time period.
Committee Member Wheeler made a motion to approve DRC 4814 -15, Lugo Residence, based on
the findings and conditions listed in the Staff Report, and with the additional conditions:
1. Applicant study the drainage shown on the roof to ensure it works properly. If it should turn
out in the opinion of the staff that a major change is to be made that is visible to the public,
that the project come back to the DRC.
2. The window in the existing bathroom over the bathtub be replaced with either a single light
fixed window or a pair of single light casement windows.
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 9 of 12
3. The existing vinyl windows are to be replaced within 5 years. The applicants should work
with staff to develop a memo of understanding to ensure the windows are replaced in 5 years.
SECOND: Robert Imboden
AYES: Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: Carol Fox
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 10 of 12
(5) DRC No. 4809 -15 — Michaelis Residence
• A proposal to reconstruct and expand an existing service porch on the rear of a single family
residence. This property is a contributing historic resource within the Old Towne Historic
District,
• 288 N. Center Street
• Staff Contact: Kelly Ribuffo, 714 - 744 -7223, kribuffogcityoforange.org
• DRC Action: Final Determination
Committee Member Wheeler recused himself due to his association with the project and left the
room.
Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
The applicants who were present for the project were Rodger Busch, Nicole Michaelis, and Chris
Michaelis. Ms. Michaelis explained the reasons why the service porch has to be removed which
included the 4" drop from the side of the house to the porch, the lack of a foundation, and the
termite and dry rot damage.
Mr. Busch, the builder and consultant, knows what materials are salvageable and will be reusing
some of the existing material such as windows and siding. He explained the poor construction of the
existing service porch and the need to replace it.
Public Comments
Chair McCormack opened the item to the Public for comments. Jeff Frankel, representing OTPA,
had no problem with the addition but it should be called a demolition and not a dismantling. OTPA
always wants to go in the direction of the Secretary of Interior's Standards and just replace materials
that are deteriorated and features that are beyond repair. He also wanted clarification about the
second dwelling unit on the site. Mr. Michaelis indicated when the second dwelling unit was
permitted, they had gotten a Conditional Use Permit, and a Variance for the substandard size of the
unit.
Chair McCormack opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
• Questioned how the structure would be rebuilt in the same way. Mr. Busch said it would be
built per a plan that would be approved by the City Building Division which would meet
code. Mr. Michaelis stated it will look much like the original but in a structurally sound way.
• No problem moving ahead on the project with the understanding it would be replicated as
close as possible to the original structure and should there be a discovery that it needs to get
8" or 10" higher, that it come back to the DRC for approval. This would be left up to staff to
determine.
• Wondered if there was more concern with the roof connection getting higher or the roof
changing pitch. Also concerned with the door on the low side being too low. The DRC
would want to see how these problems would be solved.
• Suggested bringing the permit set to the DRC for review.
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 11 of 12
Questioned the use of the horizontal bead board below the windows which is the opposite of
how the service porch was built. It does read as new but it is peculiar.
Noted the two existing bathroom windows will remain and look into the new bathroom.
Asked if there would be added ventilation in the new addition.
Committee Member Imboden made a motion to approve DRC 4809 -15, Michaelis Residence, based
on the findings and conditions listed in the Staff Report, and with the additional condition:
1. That the Committee is aware that minor changes will have to occur either in the roof pitch or
the overall height and more detail drawings clearly illustrating those changes shall be
reviewed and approved by staff or return to the DRC for approval.
SECOND: Anne McDermott
AYES: Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, and Anne McDermott
NOES: None
ABSENT: Carol Fox
RECUSED: Craig Wheeler
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange — Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2015
Page 12 of 12
Committee Member Wheeler made a motion to adjourn to the next regularly scheduled Design
Review Committee meeting on January 20, 2016.
SECOND: Robert Imboden
AYES: Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: Carol Fox
MOTION CARRIED.
Meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m.