Loading...
RES-10544 Denying Appeal 0528-11RESOLUTION NO. 10544 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORANGE DENYING APPEAL NO. 0528 -11 AND APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE NO. 4508 -10 AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 185 -10 ALLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF A 450 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION WITH A REDUCTION IN BUILDING SEPARATION BETWEEN THE NEW ADDITION AND EXISTING ONE CAR DETACHED GARAGE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 626 WEST CULVER AVENUE. Appeal No. 0528 -11 Design Review Committee No. 4508 -10 Administrative Adjustment No. 185 -10 Applicant: Doug Ely, DSE Architecture Appellant: Old Towne Preservation Association WHEREAS, on March 8, 2011, the City Council of the City of Orange held a public hearing to consider Appeal No. 0528 -11, an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Design Review Committee No. 4508 -10 and Administrative Adjustment No. 185 -10; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's approval would allow the construction of a 450 square foot addition and a reduction in building separation between the new addition and existing one -car garage /office ( "the Project "); and WHEREAS, Appeal No. 0528 -11 was timely filed by the Old Town Preservation Association (OTPA); and WHEREAS, OTPA's appeal was based on a number of contentions including, but not limited to: (1) the portion of the Project removing 31.5 linear feet of exterior historical siding and altering the roof line does not comply with the Old Towne Design Guidelines or Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines ( "Secretary Standards "); (2) the Planning Commission improperly approved the Project based on the allegation that the new addition, if removed in the future, would not preserve the essential form and integrity of the structure and it would be impaired; (3) the Planning Commission failed to address the remaining Secretary Standards; (4) approval of the Project violates the Mills Act contract; and (5) the Planning Commission and Design Review Committee failed to justify findings conflicting with those of staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orange that based upon the substantial evidence contained in the record that Appeal No. 0528 -11 shall be denied and the Project shall be approved as conditioned by the Planning Commission. Such denial is based on the following reasons: A. Background The Project site is located at 626 West Culver Avenue. The development on the property currently consists of a 617 square foot home and a detached 240 square foot garage, with a 154 square foot office attached. The original residence was constructed in 1923 and is characteristic of the "Bungalow" style architecture. The residence has one bedroom, one bath, a kitchen and a living room. Both the 1923 Bungalow residence and the garage /office are considered historic contributing structures to the City's Old Towne Historic District Historic District ") and are historical resources located in the National Register Historic District ( "National Historic District "). A Mills Act agreement was placed on the property in 2007. The proposed Project includes removal of the open rear patio deck, construction of a one -story addition consisting of converting an existing bedroom into a dining area/hallway, adding a master bedroom, master bath and two bedrooms. The proposed 450 square foot addition has a staggered "L" shaped floor plan at the rear of the residence with the addition wrapping around the west exterior elevation. A substantial portion of the existing exterior walls will be retained and only 10.5 linear feet of existing materials will be removed. The proposal includes a shed roof attached to the underside of the existing gable roof, placed in between the existing and proposed west gable extensions. This will only require removal of 18 square feet of the existing roof materials. Because it is within the Historic District the Project requires design review pursuant to OMC Section 17.10.070. In reviewing the design, OMC Section 17.10.070 requires the City Council to make the following findings: (1) that the proposed work conforms to the prescriptive standards and design criteria referenced and/or recommended by the Design Review Committee or other reviewing body for the project; (2) that the proposed work complies with the Secretary Standards; (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; and (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. The Project also required approval of an administrative adjustment ( "AA ") to reduce the minimum distance between the residence and the accessory structure. In order to grant the AA OMC Section 17.10.050E requires the following findings: (1) the reduction in standards will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare of persons residing or working on the subject property or in the vicinity; and (2) the issuance of the permit does not compromise the intent of this code. 2 B. The Proiect Complies with Design Review. 1. The proposed work conforms to the prescriptive standards and design criteria referenced and/or recommended by the Design Review Committee and the Planning Commission The Project is located in the Historic District and has been designed to incorporate materials, features, finishes and construction techniques consistent with the Bungalow style, character defining features of the original historic structure. Where the addition meets the historic structure, the original, exterior wood siding will be retained in place, with only a small amount (10.5 linear feet) of the exterior wall being permanently removed. The Project has been designed to differentiate the new roof line from the existing roof line by making it secondary in height to the existing historic structure. Also, the addition is setback an additional 2 feet along the east property line to differentiate it from the existing residence and designed so the siding of the new construction will be slightly different than the existing siding. The Project is designed to be compatible with and similar to, both in mass, scale and design to surrounding historic structures. As such, the Project complies with the recommendations made by the DRC, the findings and conditions made by the Planning Commission, and the findings made by the City Council. 2. The proposed work complies with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines. The Project would not require change or alteration so radical that its character defining features would be compromised to a point where the structure no longer conveyed its historical value, which formed the basis for its inclusion as a contributing structure to the Historic District. The residence will maintain the character defining features of the "1923 tiny little bungalow." The current residence is slightly larger than 600 square feet and the addition of 400 square feet, to a total square footage of 1,000 square feet will not alter the character defining features of the residence. The Project complies with the Secretary Standards as follows: a. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment The Project does not include any modification to the current or historic single - family residential use of the property. The proposed addition is secondary in height to the existing historic structure, located at the rear of the structure, and has been designed to incorporate similar architecture and like materials so there will be minimal change to the character defining features of the building and site. b. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided 3 Located to the rear of the existing historic resource, the addition has been designed so as to avoid the removal or adverse alteration of any character - defining features that characterize the Bungalow style property. Only 18 square feet of roof, located at the western rear corner of the existing residence is being removed. Original, exterior wood siding will be retained at the area of the addition with only a small amount (10.5 linear feet) of the exterior wall being permanently removed. The proposal includes removal of one contemporary metal window and one sliding glass door. One pair of historic wood -sash windows will be salvaged and reincorporated into the new addition. C. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be iindprtAr -n The Project is similar in design, mass and scale to the existing historic resource. Roof heights and their slopes, windows and siding are similar to those utilized in the original construction and currently existing throughout the structure. The addition utilizes materials respective of the historical period of the original structure and does not include any inappropriate or inconsistent features or architectural elements not currently present. d. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved Evidence and testimony introduced into the record indicate that the existing historic resource appears to have had three separate additions since the original construction in 1923. The construction methods and materials used in those additions appear to be consistent with those commonly used during the period of significance established for the surrounding Historic District. The Project has been designed to retain most of the exterior walls and wood siding at the area of the addition and does not include the removal of, or alteration of, significant portions of the historic resource. e. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craft that characterize a property shall be preserved The existing historic resource has a raised foundation, wood framed structure with wood siding, doors and windows. The materials, features, finishes and construction techniques that establish the Bungalow style, character defining features of the historic resource will be preserved and the same materials, features, finishes and construction techniques are incorporated into the approved design. Original, exterior wood siding will be retained at the area of the addition with only a small amount (10.5 linear feet) of the exterior wall being permanently removed. 0 f. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence This finding is not applicable to this Project. The proposed Project does not include the identification or replacement of any deteriorated historic features. g. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible This finding is not applicable to this Project. The proposed Project does not include the chemical or physical treatment to any historic material on the existing structure. h. Significant archeological resources affected by project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken The subject property and its surroundings are not commonly known to be located in an archeologically sensitive zone. Similar projects in the vicinity have not yielded significant archaeological discoveries. However, the applicant's submittal states that archeological resources, if any, will be protected and preserved in place. i. New additions exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment The Project has been designed to preserve a majority of the historic materials that characterize the property. Where the new addition meets the historic structure, the original, exterior wood siding will be retained in place, with only a small amount 10.5 linear feet) of the exterior wall being permanently removed. The Project has been designed to differentiate the new roof line from the existing roof line by making it secondary in height to the existing historic structure. Also, the addition is setback an additional 2 feet along the east property line to differentiate it from the existing residence and designed so the siding of the new construction will be slightly different than the existing siding. The proposed addition is designed to be architecturally compatible (Bungalow style) with the existing structure, is modest in size, and remains secondary to the larger historic structure to make it compatible in mass and scale. Evidence and testimony introduced into the record shows that upon completion, the proposed Project will remain similar in massing, size and scale with the surrounding historic structures. E j. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired The Project has been designed to retain the original footprint of the historic structure. Where the addition meets the historic structure, the original, exterior wood siding will be retained in place, with only a small amount (10.5 linear feet) of the exterior wall being permanently removed. Based on the approved design, if the addition were removed in the future, a substantial portion of the essential form and integrity of the historic resource would remain unimpaired. 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 As noted in the findings in B.2. above, the Project complies with all applicable design standards, as previously stated and incorporated by reference as fully set forth herein. 4. For infill residential development, as specified in the City infill residential design guidelines, the new structure(s) or addition are compatible with the scale, massing, orientation, and articulation of the surroundingg evelopment and will preserve or enhance existing neighborhood character As noted in the findings in B.2. above, the Project is designed to be architecturally compatible (Bungalow style) with the existing structure, is modest in size, and remains secondary to the larger historic structure, making it compatible in mass, scale orientation and articulation of the surrounding development. The Project will remain similar in massing, size and scale with surrounding historic structures, preserving and enhancing the character of the existing neighbor. C. The Protect Complies with the Requirements for an AA. The Applicant requested an AA for building separation between the addition and the existing garage /office. The 10% reduction sought by the Applicant amounts to a 6 -inch deviation from the OMC requirement, leaving a 5 -foot, 6 -inch separation rather than the required 6 foot building separation between the residence and any accessory structure. In addition, the 6 -inch reduction in separation between the new addition and the existing garage /office is located at the utmost rear of the property, a substantial distance from the public right of way. The approval of the AA was not appealed by OTPA, nor has any evidence been introduced indicating approval of the AA would be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare to those on the property or in the vicinity. The reduction in separation is virtually unnoticeable from a streetscape perspective and will not impact the existing streetscape pattern or the intent of the OMC. 2 D. The Proiect is Consistent with the City's General Plan One goal in the Historic Preservation Element of the General Plan is to identify and preserve potential and listed historic resources, including buildings, structures, objects, sites, districts and archaeological resources citywide. In part, the goal is to ensure that the rehabilitation of historical resources occur in a manner that preserves the defining characteristics and significance of the resource. The City Council continues to encourage the use, maintenance and rehabilitation of potential and listed historic resources if the projects will assist in achieving this General Plan goal. However, projects for listed historic resources must comply with the Secretary Standards. For the reasons noted above, this Project preserves the defining characteristics of the building, rehabilitates this listed historic resource in compliance with the Secretary Standards and does it in a manner that is consistent with the City's General Plan. E. The Proiect is Categorically Exempt from CEQA. California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") Guidelines 15331, Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation (Class 31) consists of projects limited to maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary Standards. The Project rehabilitates the historic structure for an efficient contemporary use while preserving historic features like exterior walls and siding. Additionally, approval of the Project includes the requirement that the foundation of the existing historic structure be stabilized through the installation of earthquake straps. As such, the Project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the CEQA. F. Approval of the Project does not Violate Provisions of the Mills Act. Appellant asserts that approval of the Project would breach applicable provisions of the Mills Act agreement ( "Agreement "). In sum, Appellant contends that the purpose of the Agreement is preservation and any attempt by Applicant to expand the historic structure fails to preserve the historic resource, in violation of the Agreement. The significant benefit of having the Agreement in place is to require a homeowner to preserve, stabilize and rehabilitate historic structures so they aren't lost to decay and neglect. A component of the Project would secure the original foundation with earthquake straps, which will assist in the preservation of the contributing historic structure in compliance with the Agreement. The Agreement does not preclude alterations, nor does preservation mean that change to the structure cannot occur, rather any such changes must comply with the Secretary Standards. As previously stated, the Project complies with the Secretary Standards and as such, does not violate the provisions of the Agreement. 7 H. Conclusion. The findings required for an administrative adjustment and design review approval are hereby made. For the foregoing reasons, Appeal No. 0528 -11 is denied. The Project is approved, as conditioned by the Planning Commission, and further identified by the plans labeled Applicant's Preferred Site, Elevation and Floor Plans with requested revisions from the Planning Commission, dated February 24, 2011." ADOPTED the 12 day of April, 2011. ATTEST: Mary E. urn y, City Clerk, Qty.f Orange I, MARY E. MURPHEY, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the 12 day of April, 2011, by the following vote: AYES:COUNCIL MEMBERS:Whitaker, Smith, Cavecche, Dumitru, Bilodeau NOES:COUNCIL MEMBERS:None ABSENT:COUNCIL MEMBERS:None ABSTAIN:COUNCIL MEMBERS:None Mary E u , City Clerk, City o e E