2018-03-21 DRC Final Minutes CITY OF ORANGE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MINUTES—FINAL
March 21, 2018
Committee Members Present: Tim McCormack- Chair
Anne McDermott—Vice Chair
Carol Fox
Robert Imboden
Mary Anne Skorpanich
Staff in Attendance: Bill Crouch, Community Development Director
Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director
Marissa Moshier, Historic Preservation Planner
Chad Ortlieb, Senior Planner
Simonne Fannin, Recording Secretary
Administrative Session —5:00
Chair McCormack opened the Administrative Session at 5:00 p.m. and inquired about
Policy/Procedural Information.
Marissa Moshier, Historic Preservation Planner stated Item No. 2 should have been placed under
the heading of Committee Business, rather than Continued Items on the agenda. The description
of the item and DRC action are correct on the agenda.
Committee Members were reminded to submit their 700 forms.
Committee Member Imboden made a motion to close the Administrative Session of the Design
Review Committee meeting
SECOND: Fox
AYES: Imboden, McDermott, McCormack, Fox, Skorpanich
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION CARRIED.
Administrative Session adjourned at 5:20 p.m.
City of Orange—Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for March 21,2018
Page 2 of 10
Regular Session —5:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Committee Members Imboden, Skorpanich, McDermott, McCormack and Fox were all 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: FEBRUARY 7, 2018 AND FEBRUARY 21, 2018
Committee Member McDermott made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review
Committee meeting of February 7, 2018, as emended during the discussion at the Administrative
Session.
SECOND: Fox
AYES: McCormack, Skorpanich, Imboden, Fox and McDermott,
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
Committee Member McDermott made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review
Committee meeting of February 21, 2018, as emended during the discussion at the Administrative
Session.
MOTION CARRIED.
SECOND: Imboden
AYES: McCormack, Imboden, Fox and McDermott
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Skorpanich
MOTION CARRIED.
Chair McCormack made an announcement that Item No. 2 will be heard as Committee Business,
rather than a Continued Item as printed on the agenda.
- __
City of Orange—Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for March 21, 2018
Page 3 of 10
AGENDA ITEMS:
Committee Business:
(2) DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4930-17- FIRE STATION NO. 2
• Fire Station No. 2 Apparatus Bay
• 2900 E. Collins Ave.
• Staff Contact: Chad Ortlieb, (714) 744-7237, cortliebn,citvoforan e.org
• DRC Action: Receive, comment, and file
Chad Ortlieb, Senior Planner provided an overview of the project consistent with the staff report
and provided a materials board for the Committee. Staff asked the Committee to provide design
review comments on the building; no formal action was required.
Committee comments and questions:
• The Committee asked how the colors of new building integrate with the existing building.
Mr. Ortlieb explained the existing fire station building will be maintained as is until funds
become available to paint it. The Committee recommended that the existing building be
altered to match the new building once the funds are acquired.
• The new design departs from the asymmetrical approach of the rear facing apparatus bay
doors.The Committee preferred to have the same approach applied to the front fa�ade since
the existing building is asymmetrical.
• The windows on the addition should be grouped together in sets rather than evenly spaced.
• There should be more emphasis on horizontality of the building.
• Some Committee Members expressed that the current building integrates well into the
neighborhood; the new building is large and doesn't blend in as well. Others felt that even
though the structure is large, it is well-placed and removed from the adjacent homes.
• The color scheme is contrived and not necessary; earth tones are preferred in order to
integrate with the neighborhood. The large red doar does not blend in.
• The Committee asked what the setbacks will be for the sheds once they are relocated
because it appears that they will be very close to the neighboring houses. Mr. Ortlieb stated
the setback is 10 feet from the property line and they are approximately 18 to 20 feet high.
The Committee recommended adding trees in order to help screen the buildings from the
neighborhood.
• The existing building has stacked blocks; the proposed building has fluted blocks and has
a very vertical emphasis which is an opposite design scheme from the existing building.
Staff and Committee discussion clarified that the fluted blocks only occur as lintels above
the windows. The Committee recommended eliminating the fluted block.
• One of the Committee Members felt the existing building and the addition do not have to
tie together so strongly due to the breezeway that separates them.
• One of the Coinmittee Member expressed that either the separation should be mare
apparent or the existing building and the addition should have more in common.
• The Committee recommended using a raked joint between the horizontal stacked blocks.
• The Committee recommended shading the sheds and the southwest side of the building
with trees.
RECEIVED AND FILED. NO ACTION REQUIRED.
City of Orange—Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for March 21, 2018
Page 4 of 10
(3) DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4807-15 —KILLEFER SQUARE
• A proposal to adaptively reuse a historic elementary school property for a one- and two-
bedroom multi-family residential development. The school building is designated in the
National Register of Histaric Places. Six units will be located in the historic school building.
Eighteen units will be located in a new three-story building at the northwest side of the
property. Sixty-two parking spaces will be provided in two surface parking lots.
• 541 N. Lemon Street
• Staff Contact: Marissa Moshier, 714-744-7243, mmoshier�citvoforan e.or
• DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission
Marissa Moshier, Historic Preservation Planner provided an overview of the project consistent
with the staff report. She stated the DRC's action is a recommendation to the Planning Commission
on the project design and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) related to aesthetics, cultural
resources and tribal cultural resources.
She stated at a preliminary review in December 2017, there were a number of comments related
to rehabilitation of the school, including paint color,preservation of the historic materials and the
accessible ramp at the front door. Conditions have been added to ensure that the �nal color and
materials board comes back to the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of a building
permit and to engage a Historic Preservation Consultant. Also, the applicant submitted a
conceptual landscape plan which was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Senior
Landscape Project Coordinator.A condition of approval has been added so that the final landscape
plan will return to the Committee prior to issuance of a building permit.
Leason Pomeroy, Applicant, provided a brief description of the changes that were made in
response to the Committee's comments and recommendations and provided a new redesigned
model. He also stated that the lobby will be donated for use as museum space to depict the history
of the site and they are installing a series of pickets down the sidewalk which will provide a
timeline of the school.
Chair McCormack opened the public comment portion of the meeting.
Jeff Frankel, Old Towne Preservation Association, commented on the Aesthetics section of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, stating that he disagreed with the finding that the new building
does not have an impact on the site and on the surroundings. Mr. Frankel also disagreed with the
findings in the Cultural Resource section that there is not a significant impact on the cultural
resource. He commented that there are no mitigation measures related to the impact of the new
building on the school. Although the project was much better than what was original proposed,
Mr. Frankel did not think that the development was compatible with the surrounding area.
However, the historic resource continues to deteriorate week by week because it is not secured.
OTPA does not want to see the resource disappear. Although they are not happy with the infill
project still, it needs to move toward protecting the historic building.
Mark Colin, Orange Barrio Historical Society, stated that OBHS wants to preserve the structure
as a national historic landmark. OBHS is opposed to converting the building into dorms because
it would prohibit community access to this historic building and increase foot traffic in this area.
City of Orange—Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for March 21, 2018
Page 5 of 10
Douglas Westfall, a national historian stated he would prefer to see the building used for
educational purposes and would like to see the building preserved for history and made accessible
to the community.
Committee Members McDermott and Imboden disclosed they met with the applicant to review the
design.
The Committee had the following questions and comments:
• The Committee liked the architectural changes that were made; the new building is a better
fit for the neighborhood than the previous design.
• The Committee asked who would own any archaeological or paleontological finds if there
are any on the property. Ms.Moshier stated it depended on what the find is. The Mitigation
Measures in the MND require developing a monitoring plan for what will be done
immediately after a find is made and what the appropriate avoidance or disposition of those
finds will be. The plan will also specify who the appropriate caretaker is for specific finds.
• The forms of the new building should be complementary to the historic school with the
materials done in a more modern way in order to set it apart. For example, the exterior
plaster of the new building could be smooth to differentiate it from the historic school.
• The new roof greatly improvedthe massing; however, if they moved one of the units from
the top floor down to the ground floor, it would provide more variation in the mass.
• Seven air-conditioning units are adjacent to residents on the north side of the property; they
will need to be moved to another location on the property in order to reduce the noise for
neighbors. Ms. Moshier stated for the record that there is a Mitigation Measure in the
MND related to noise; cumulatively, the AC units are required to meet the limits in the
noise ordinance.
• The handicap access ramp for the front entrance of the historic school requires additional
development. Committee Members agreed that they want to see the final plans and
recommended that the applicant engage a historic preservation consultant on use of the
California Historical Building Code. Ms.Moshier stated the conditions of approval require
that the applicant wark with a Historic Preservation Consultant and return to the DRC with
a new proposal on the ramp for final approval.
• A suggestion was made to look at the handicap ramp at the Doti Building at Chapman
University as a possible solution. Mr. Pomeroy briefly described the challenges of
providing a ramp at the recessed entrance of the historic building.
• The gutters and downspouts on the historic school should be replicated based on historic
evidence and should be copper plated to limit toxic runoff.
• The Committee asked the applicant about a plan for the retention of the interior features of
the school building. Mr. Pomeroy stated they want to retain as much as they can; however
much of it has already been destroyed by vandalism.
• The Committee would like to see the description of interior features from the Historical
Resources Impact Assessment incorporated into the plans. Ms. Moshier stated a consultant
will review the construction documents and determine the plan for preservation of exterior
and interior historic features.
• The Committee asked what the roofing material will be. Mr. Pomeroy stated the historic
building will be restored to its original terra cotta tile roof. The new building will also have
terra cotta tiles.
City of Orange—Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for March 21, 2018
Page 6 of 10
• The Committee agreed that they would like see the following items for final approval
before the start of the project: awning and window details, roofing materials, paint,
landscape, lighting, and handicap accessibility plans.
• As an individually listed building on the National Register, this project should be
conditioned to obtain a Historic Preservation Consultant prior to the construction process.
Ms. Moshier stated there is a condition to engage the consultant to review the construction
documents for conformance with the Secretary's Standards, and to specifically advise on
the paint color and the ramp. Committee Member Imboden stated he is concerned about
the lack of having someone to review field conditions during construction and make
recommendations for treatments.
• The Committee Members expressed support for the Variances to eliminate the requirement
for covered parking and to eliminate the private open spaces for the units in the historic
building, because both applications preserve important historic features of the site.
• The fa�ade of the new building on Olive looks like the end of a building; it needs something
to elevate it as the street fa�ade.
• The Committee briefly reviewed the landscape plan and suggested a grove of trees in the
parking lot to provide shade. The trunk height of the trees must be tall enough to avoid
blocking the view of the historic building.
Ms. Moshier suggested that the applicant provide staff with information when they have engaged
a consultant prior to the submittal for plan check.
Committee Member Skorpanich made a motion to recommend to the Planning Commission
approval of DRC No. 4807 — 15, Killefer Square in accordance with the conditions and findings
in the staff report with the additional conditions as follows:
• Prior to submittal of plans to the City for building plan check, a historic preservation
consultant shall be engaged to monitor construction and make recommendations on
decisions to rehabilitate or replace features in the historic building. The consultant shall
meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards;
• Prior to submittal of plans to the City for building plan check, the applicant shall return to
the Design Review Committee with details on lighting, the balconies in the new building,
awnings, window trim and reveals in the historic and new buildings, and the east (Olive
Street) fa�ade of the new building;
• The air-conditioning units in the north side yard shall be relocated away from the
residential properties to the north to minimize noise;
• The details on the rehabilitation of the historic structure as described in the Historic
Resources Impact Assessment shall be included as -additional conditions on the plans;
• The rain gutters and downspouts on the historic building shall be copper plated and match
what was originally on the property to the extent that documentation is available;
• Prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the roofing materials on the historic
and new buildings shall return to Design Review Committee. The roofing of the new
building should be the same material as the historic building with some differentiation in
design;
• Prior to issuance of a building pennit for the project, the interpretive elements in the Olive
Street front yard and museum space shall return to the Design Review Committee for
review and approval.
In addition, the Design Review Committee made the following recommendations:
City of Orange—Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for March 21, 2018
Page 7 of 10
� Additional vertical trees should be added to the parking lot as a grove in the center of the
lot. The trunk height and canopy of the trees should allow views of the historic school
from Lemon Street.
• The selection of Soap Bark and Scarlet Oak trees in the landscape plan should be
reconsidered.
SECOND: Fox
AYES: McDermott, Fox, Imboden, McCormack, Skorpanich
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange—Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for March 21,2018
Page 8 of 10
(4) DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4702-13 —ARIA RESIDENCES
• A request to modify the approved window and garage door materials and slatted gables for a
new multi-family residential building in the Old Towne Historic District. The applicant is
requesting to substitute vinyl windows for the approved wood windows and metal garage doors
for the approved wood garage doors. The project was recommended for approval by the Design
Review Committee on May 7, 2014 and approved by the Planning Commission on July 7,
2014.
• 429 S. Lemon Street
• Staff Contact: Marissa Moshier, 714-744-7243, mmoshier(c�cityoforange.org
• DRC Action: Final Determination
Marissa Moshier, Historic Preservation Planner provided an explanation of the project consistent
with the staff report. She explained this project was approved in 2014; however the applicant did
not apply the decorative wood slats in the gable ends of the new building, and vinyl windows and
metal garage doors were installed. The front door of the historic home was replaced with a
fiberglass door. The doors in the new building are also fiberglass. The applicant is now requesting
a modification of the design from the Community Development Director; however staff does not
believe that the request is substantially in conformance with the original design, therefore the
project is before the Design Review Committee for a determination.
Paymon Roshan,Applicant, stated the door has embossed wood grain,is painted and does not look
like fiberglass. He stated he did not put pediments on the rear house because the front house doesn't
have them and he thought it would be better to keep the same style throughout. He stated the garage
door is also embossed wood grain with old looking antique hardware. He added the windows have
the same operating system and color as the old ones on the front house. He asked the DRC to allow
him to keep everything as is.
Chair McCormack opened the public comment portion of the meeting.
Tony Trabucco, Old Towne Preservation Association(OTPA), stated the vinyl windows and doors
are not appropriate especially when that is not what was approved. He stated the bright yellow
paint makes it look even larger and per the old and new standards, the yellow day glow paint is
not appropriate
Jeff Frankel, OTPA, stated they were opposed to the bulk and mass of the rear building when it
was approved in 2014;however the minutes from that meeting did not reflect their opposition. The
slatting and gables that were approved in the plans are an important element to the new structure.
The bright yellow day glow paint makes it stick out like a sore thumb. Wood siding, windows and
doors were approved and allowing vinyl will set a precedent in the historic district.
Chair McCormack closed the public comment period and the Committee began deliberation.
The following comments were made by the Committee:
• The slatted wood in the gables adds value to the design, particularly on the large facades
of the rear building.
• Vinyl windows are not compatible in the Historic District; vinyl is not a traditional building
material that was used in the period of significance and the detailed trim around the
windows was poorly done.
City of Orange—Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for March 21,2018
Page 9 of 10
• The garage doors are obviously rollup doors; the hardware is false and inauthentic,they do
not look like wood and the texture of the metal doors is dissimilar from a wood door.
• The fiberglass entry door is contemporary and inappropriate and creates a negative impact
on the historic streetscape.
• The Committee agreed with the members of the public who spoke about setting a precedent
in the historic district.
• The project would not have been approved initially with these materials, so there is no
justification to approve the request for a modification now.
Committee Member Fox made a motion to deny the request to modify Design Review No. 4702—
13, based on the Committee's discussion.
The Committee Members and staff briefly described the appeal procedure for the applicant.
SECOND: Skorpanich
AYES: McCormack, Imboden, McDermott, Fox, Skorpanich
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange—Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for March 21,2018
Page 10 of 10
Committee Member McDermott made a motion to adjourn to the next Design Review Committee
meeting on Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 5:00 p.m.
SECOND: Skorpanich
AYES: McCormack, Imboden, McDermott, Fox, Skorpanich
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION CARRIED.
Meeting adjourned at 8:36 p.m.