Loading...
2018-06-20 DRC Final Minutes CITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES - FINAL June 20, 2018 Committee Members Present: Tim McCormack - Chair Anne McDermott—Vice Chair Robert Imboden Carol Fox Committee Members Absent: Mary Anne Skorpanich Staff in Attendance: Bill Crouch, Community Development Director Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director Marissa Moshier, Historic Preservation Planner Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner Simonne Fannin, Recording Secretary Administrative Session —5:00 Chair McCormack opened the Administrative Session at 5:10 p.m. and inquired about the Policy/Procedural Information. Marissa Moshier, Historic Preservation Planner stated there were no changes to the agenda. The meeting on July 4 has been canceled and the next scheduled meeting will be July 18. Committee Member Imboden discussed a meeting he attended with staff from Community Development and Public Works and other community members on the City's Street Tree Master Plan. He pointed out the list of heritage trees is out of date, the proposed tree list for Old Towne lacked species of mature trees that are common and appropriate for the historic district, and the use of Liquidambar trees in the Eichler tracts. Bill Crouch, Community Development Director provided an update of his meeting with the City Manager regarding future meetings between staff, the community and representatives from the DRC for the Street Tree Master Plan. Committee Members provided edits to the June 6, 2018 meeting minutes. Committee Member Fox made a motion to close the Administrative Session of the Design Review Committee meeting. SECOND: McDermott AYES: McCormack, Imboden, McDermott, and Fox NOES: None ABSENT: Skorpanich MOTION CARRIED. Administrative Session adjourned at 5:26 p.m City of Orange—Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for June 20, 2018 Page 2 of 9 Regular Session—5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Committee Members McCormack, Imboden, McDermott and Fox were present. Committee Member Skorpanich was absent 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: JIJNE 6, 2018. Committee Member Fox made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review Committee meeting of June 6, 2018 as emended in the Administrative Session. SECOND: McDermott AYES: Imboden, Fox and McDermott NOES: None ABSENT : Skorpanich ABSTAIN: McCormack MOTION CARRIED. 2 City of Orange—Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for June 20, 2018 Page 3 of 9 AGENDA ITEMS: Continued Items: (2) DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4936-18 ROHM RESIDENCE • A proposal to construct a 499 SF addition to an existing single family residence, and to construct a 335 SF addition to an existing detached garage for additional parking space and a non-habitable workshop. The property is a contributing resource to the Old Towne National Historic District. • 181 N. Pine Street • Staff Contact: Kelly Ribuffo, 714-744-7223, kribuffo@cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Final Determination Committee Member Fox recused herself from this item due to the fact that her firm is involved with the project and left the room. Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner provided an overview of the project consistent with the staff report and pointed out several changes that the applicant made on the plans per the Design Review Committee's comments. Staff is recommending approval of the project. Rick Fox, architect for the project pointed out how the footprint was modified to address the concerns of the Committee. Chair McCormack opened the public comment portion of the meeting; there were no speakers. The DRC had the following comments: • The Committee felt the design of the garage has improved; spacing concerns between the garage and the house were addressed. • The prior roof design is preferred. The new gable design is unnecessarily complicated and does not come together in an aesthetically pleasing way. • The rear patio has a house roof, but is at grade, rather than a raised porch to match the raised foundation of the house. The house already has a language of raised patios and pergolas and if that approach could continue for the covered patio at the rear, it would be more successful and compatible. • The Committee questioned if the addition is meant to match the house or stand away from the house? • The project looks like it was squeezed into a different shape and retained everything that was there before. • The Committee is challenged as to whether or not the project is internally consistent and compatible with the neighborhood. • The visual weight of the gable at the end of the porch is too heavy for the spindly columns it is resting on. Visually, it does not look proportional. 3 City of Orange—Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for June 20, 2018 Page 4 of 9 • Removing the raised deck warrants a different roof type and not just an extrusion of the heavy roof form. • The gable roof could possibly be mitigated by detaching it and make it a standalone structure such as a gazebo or a California garden room which could be treated as a garden element. Rick Fox, architect stated the intent was to retain as much of the existing gable construction on the rear of the house. The formation of the footprint occurred because of the Committee's concerns about the integrity of the tree. The roof shape has been proposed because the cross gable on the previous submittal didn't work well with the revision to the footprint. They lowered the patio in order to get a brick surface at grade in response to concerns about impervious materials. They are willing to work with staff to revise the plan. Bill Crouch,Community Development Director suggested the DRC could approve the project with an added condition of approval to form an Ad Hoc Sub-Committee of the DRC to work out a solution to address the Committee's concerns. If the Director, sub-committee and applicant revise the design and decide that it does not meet the conditions of approval, then it can return to the Design Review Committee. Mr. Fox agreed to work with the Committee and return with a revised design in July. Committee Member Imboden made a motion to approve DRC No. 4936-18 - Rohm Residence, finding the project consistent with the staff report findings and conditions and including an additional condition: • The applicant shall meet with a sub-committee consisting of DRC Members Imboden and McDermott and staff, as approved by the Chair, to review modifications to the covered porch proposed at the rear of the property on or shortly after July 12. Should the sub- committee not be able to make the required findings for compatibility of the revised porch, the project will be agendized and returned to DRC for further review. SECOND: McDermott AYES: McCormack, Imboden and McDermott NOES: None RECUSED: Fox ABSENT: Skorpanich MOTION CARRIED. 4 City of Orange—Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for June 20, 2018 Page 5 of 9 New A�enda Items: (3) DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4935-18, MINOR SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 0935-18, AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0260-18 —TELEHEALTH FOUNDATION • A proposal to convert an existing residential/office property to medical offices and one apartment unit. The project includes rehabilitation of the historic buildings at 811 E. Chapman Avenue and 127 N. Pine Street, construction of a 668 square foot addition to the building at 815 E. Chapman Avenue, construction of a surface parking lot, landscape improvements, and relocation of a historic accessory structure 11 feet to the west on the same property. The project includes requests for Administrative Adjustments for required number of parking spaces, required drive aisle and parking space dimensions, required landscape area around parking lots, and required loading zones for commercial properties in order to allow the conversion to medical office. • 811-815 E. Chapman Avenue, 127 N. Pine Street • Staff Contact: Marissa Moshier, 714-744-7243. mmoshier@cityoforange.org • DRC Action: Final Determination Marissa Moshier, Historic Preservation Planner provided an overview of project consistent with the staff report. She stated a comment letter from Gloria Boice, a neighbor to the north who shares the alley with this property, was received that afternoon and was submitted to the Committee for review. Dr. Henderson approached and stated services for the elderly population, cancer care, and dementia will be provided at this location. Doug Ely, architect for the project stated they are rehabilitating and restoring the historic structures. He added the landscape was designed to create a nurturing and healing environment with a meditation garden, water elements and drought tolerant plants. In terms of the style, they specifically chose not to replicate a Spanish colonial style and selected a Mediterranean-style in order to keep the existing roof form for the non-contributing building. Chair McCormack opened the public comment portion of the meeting; there were no speakers. Committee comments and questions: • The Committee asked if the existing windows on the larger building(811 E. Chapman)are historic and what is the proposed treatment and what kind of windows are on the smaller building (127 N Pine). Mr. Ely stated the second story windows are not original windows and it is not their intent to replace them. The lower floor windows are original and double hung. • The Committee reviewed Mrs. Boice's letter and found the comments are primarily issues between neighbors, which the applicant should respond to directly with Mrs. Boice. • The Committee asked if any consideration was given to rotating accessory building C in order to create additional parking and avoid an administrative adjustment. Mr. Ely stated they worked with city staff about that option, but it caused greater change to the site. 5 City of Orange—Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for June 20, 20l 8 Page 6 of 9 • The Committee verified that the aluminum clad door on accessory building C on the drawing will be replaced. • The Committee member verified that the wall air-conditioning units will be removed. Mr. Ely stated there is a new system that is being installed and all of the old units will be removed. • The Committee Member asked if there is a reason for two different parapet heights for the addition at 815 Chapman. Mr. Ely stated the parapet in the rear is taller because they need to screen mechanical equipment. • The Committee stated they did not have any comments regarding 127 N. Pine Street. Accessory Buildings A/B comments and questions: • A Committee Member asked if it is reasonable to condition that the two enclosed parking spaces remain reserved for that use and not become storage. Ms. Mosher stated the Zoning Administrator's recommendation on the Administrative Adjustments included conditions to have automatic openers for the garage door and that the garages shall remain entirely for parking and not used for storage. • The Committee pointed out that planters block the man door on the garage. The Committee discussed the inconvenience of the pedestrian path from the garage to the residents of the apartment unit at 811 E. Chapman and asked the applicant to provide options for a more direct path to the residence in order to avoid walking next to a busy intersection to get to the unit. Mr. Ely stated they will provide a walkway,possibly with stepping stones, on site for a more direct path. 811 E. Chapman comments and questions: • Committee Members inquired about the changes at the second floor closet. Mr. Ely stated it appears that this area may have been a porch that was enclosed over time with plywood. They plan to remove the plywood and finish with plaster to match the original building. The Committee and Mr. Ely discussed the proposal for the roof overhang at this area. The drawing detail on Sheet 3.1 is incorrect and the Committee clarified that the overhang will be removed and replaced with a parapet and trim to match the rest of the building. The Committee agreed to include a condition of approval describing the correct roof configuration. • The Committee agreed they do not want additional scuppers on the roo£ Mr. Ely stated if they need to add more scuppers, they will bring it to staff for determination. 815 E. Chapman comments and questions: • The east and west elevations for the building are missing. • The parapet heights are not clear on the additions, and the Committee expressed concern about the height of the parapet on the east side. • The Committee and Mr. Ely discussed the height of the parapet and roof. Mr. Ely described that the taller parapet is intended to screen mechanical equipment on the roof. To eliminate the higher parapet, the Committee recommended that the air conditioner should not be placed on the roof; it compromises the aesthetics of the building. • The gable entrance to the north from the parking lot matches the gable parch on the front; a simpler parapet might be more appropriate for a secondary elevation. 6 City of Orange—Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for June 20, 20l 8 Page 7 of 9 • The design for the addition does not exhibit a hierarchy in relation to the existing building, especially where the massing gets taller at the edges of the building. Part of the design references Spanish Colonial Revival and the other part Prairie, without a system of responding to each other. • The Committee agreed that the parapet could be lower;Mr. Ely stated they thought of other options and he provided a rendering of another option which showed larger massing at the center of the building stepping down in height toward the edges. The Committee preferred the massing of this option. General Committee comments and concerns: • The Committee discussed their concerns about the three feet of backup space for parking space 14 and agreed landscaping should be placed along the 815 E. Chapman building in order to avoid backing up into the building. • Committee Members stated the landscape plan is not specific enough. The plants that have been chosen will change in 3 to 5 years and should be selected so that they will not be trimmed into hedges. The landscape could be simplified to give homage to the architecture. • The Committee discussed their preference for the types of shrubs that should be planted. • The Committee discussed shade trees in the parking lot area. Mr. Ely stated the Doctor wanted to paint murals on the walls and wants to keep it open. The Committee recommended Platanus acerifolia `Columbia' trees which will provide shading and still allow a view of the wall. The Committee agreed three trees, approximately 27 feet apart would be acceptable. • The Committee Members stated they should consider placing a historic tree on the site to set the character. • The Committee agreed all of the requests for administrative adjustments were appropriate. In response to a question about proceeding with the motion, Ms. Moshier suggested that the Committee could approve the project and condition that the elevations for the 815 E. Chapman Building and the landscape plan return to the Committee prior to submittal for a building permit. Committee Member Fox made a motion to approve Design Review No. 4935-18, Minor Site Plan Review No. 0935-18, and Administrative Adjustment No. 0260-18—TeleHealth Foundation with the following conditions: • Keynote number five regarding the aluminum door on sheet A5.1 shall be corrected to read that it will be replaced. • On Sheet A2.5, the air-conditioners shall be removed from the accessory building. • Sheet 1 shall include an on-site path from the garage (Accessory Building A/B)to the front door of the residential unit at 811 E. Chapman Avenue. • The drawings shall be clarified on the 811 E. Chapman Avenue Building, and the existing non-historic overhang at the second story closet shall be removed and replaced with a parapet and trim to match the existing parapet. • The historic wood screens shall be refurbished and retained on Building 127. • All of the elevations for the 815 E. Chapman Avenue Building shall return to the Committee prior to building permit submittal. 7 City of Orange—Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for June 20, 20]8 Page 8 of 9 • The landscape plan shall return to the Committee priar to building permit submittal. • The applicant shall review options to remove the 3-foot back up space adjacent to parking space number 14 and continue the curb straight back to the no parking area. The area created by removing the back up space adjacent to the wall of the 815 E. Chapman building shall be landscaped. • The landscape plan shall indicate final plant materials,especially for areas that will contain shrubs. • The applicant shall consider reducing the number of trees along the east wall of the parking area and replacing them with larger shade trees in diamond cut outs into the parking spaces to maximize access to water. • Planting shall be added in front of trash area on N. Pine Street. SECOND: Imboden AYES: Imboden, McCormack, Fox and McDermott NOES: None ABSENT: Skorpanich MOTION CARRIED. 8 City of Orange—Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for June 20, 2018 Page 9 of 9 ADJOURNMENT: Committee Member McDermott made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled on Wednesday, July 18, 2018, at 5:00 p.m. SECOND: Imboden AYES: Imboden, Fox, McCormack and McDermott NOES: None ABSENT: Skorpanich MOTION CARRIED. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Adjourned to the next regular meeting on Wednesday, July 18, 2018 9