Loading...
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.