08-17-2005 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MINUTES
August 17, 2005
Committee Members Present: Jon Califf
Donnie Dewees
Craig Wheeler
Joe Woollett
o ZLe:
Staff in Attendance: Leslie Roseberry, Planning Manager ~~ ,,,, !°,~
Christopher Carnes ~ ~~ , ~'~'c~ ~•~~
Anne Fox ,~ Y~-~„~ ,A,~~ ~ ~~,~ ~~,~
Howard Morns, Landscape Coordinator
Committee Member Absent: None
Administrative Session - 5:00 P.M.
The Committee met for an administrative session beginning at 5:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned
at approximately 7:55 p.m.
Regular Session - 5:30 P.M.
C
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 2
1. DRC No. 4014-OS- GRIJALVA PARK EXTENSION CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN-
Conceptual Site Plan, and Conceptual Architectural Plans for the Gymnasium.
Proposal to construct a public park on undeveloped property, located at the northwest
corner of McPherson Road and Spring Street. At this time, the project proponent is
seeking a recommendation to the Planning Commission for approval of the conceptual
site plan, and conceptual architectural plans for the gymnasium component only. When
detailed construction documents for the gymnasium are completed, plans will be brought
back to DRC for fmal approval.
Undeveloped property at the northwest corner of McPherson Road and Spring Street,
west of Grijalva Park, which is addressed 368 North Prospect Street.
Staff Contact: Jennifer McDonald, Senior Planner/ Environmental Review Coordinator
DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission
Ms. Jennifer McDonald made the initial presentation of the Grijalva Park Conceptual Master
Plan and the Community Services Capital Improvement Project. Ms. McDonald introduced the
Project Team that consisted of Wendy Rogers of LPA, Bonnie Hagen and Pamela Galara from
the Community Services Department, and also Majid Farhat from the Public Works Department.
She explained the project site is located at the northwest corner of McPherson Road and Spring
Street. She further explained the surrounding uses are primarily residential. Grijalva Park is to
the east and Santiago Creek is to the west. She noted the project is the development of a new
park, and included a gymnasium, community center, aquatics center, skate park, tot lot, outdoor
amphitheatre, picnic shelter, and restroom and open space area. It also included parking, and
landscaping as well as some circulation improvements. The project would be developed in two
phases. Phase One is the construction of the gymnasium as well as the central parking lot and
some circulation improvements, as well as landscaping. Phase Two is the remainder of the
project improvements, Ms. McDonald explained that what's before the Committee is the
conceptual site plan and architectural plans for the gymnasium. Conditions have been included
that would require Phase Two and also final plans for Phase One to come back to the Committee
for final approval. Ms. McDonald is seeking a recommendation to the Planning Commission on
the two items today.
Ms. Wendy Rogers then acknowledged her associate, Krista Smallwood. A diagram of the
overall approach was shown and to look at contextually where Grijalva sits relative to Old Town
Orange. It shows the fact it's an extension to the existing park, and a part of a creek system that
ties back into Hart Park and the development of the Santiago Creek. She noted their inspiration
was from the original building at Grijalva Park, and where we continue to get the kind of
craftsman inspired ideas that the Committee will see in the history of Hart Park and the region.
She mentioned bringing in the idea of the history of the creek. One of the primary issues with
how the building was located was to try to get it as far away as they could from both sides of the
homes given the requirements of a gymnasium that's approximately 35 feet tall.
Ro ers also mentioned that underneath the existing access road into the site is a jet fuel lineMsg
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 3
that puts a lot of restrictions in terms of buildable areas and building placement. One of the
strong components of the design that they have done is to introduce sustainable aspects to the
building out of respect for the land that Grijalva originally founded in terms of being the
namesake. She further mentioned a building that is sensitive to the community in terms of
building placement, is also sensitive to nature in terms of how they're looking at breaking up the
building massing.
Ms. Rogers pointed out the program of the facility is fairly straightforward. It's composed of the
main gymnasium which is a two-court gymnasium. There is also a Walk of Fame which is a
pedestrian walk way system that can recognize important members of the community from a
sports stand-point. It becomes a great way of linking these buildings on the campus together to
the main entry. This could also address the community foundation in terms of signage and donor
opportunities. But the main component of the building is the gymnasium space. It's oriented
toward the north to take advantage of natural light. On the southern edges, there are two
classrooms, restrooms, and building support, and administration, and one small dance studio
that's located on the right. She explained how to bring a human scale to the building by
implementing a wood siding so that there's more texture at the top of the building and
implementing roof forms that once again open the gymnasium and the dance studio toward the
north to break up the large boxy form and make it more park-like in terms of how that sets in to
the overall environment. The idea of the Walk of Fame is a pedestrian scale trellised element
that links around the base of the building. The signage that they show an example of recognizes
it will have strong community participation, naming opportunities, as well as the signage that
will also be required by code.
Ms. Rogers indicated that the monument sign on Spring and Prospect really involves some
concrete, and involves natural stone. The small signage shown at the gymnasium is really
picking up on a natural material which in this case is the bronze. In the package in front of the
Committee, it also shows more typical signage on the building. That would be more in keeping
with what's at the Monument Sign in terms of pin-mounted letters, and also being able to up-
light them subtly so that they're legible from a distance. She further explained the elevation
begins to show the same fagade rendered so you see the texture at the bottom and the
differentiation of the pedestrian .scale to the upper half of the gymnasium building that it faces.
The one element that's different is along the Walk of Fame. The columns are done out of a
natural stone as well as the perimeter of the dance .studio. On the south elevation, there are a
couple of examples of the idea of the kind of stone looking at using a smooth plaster for the
building. There is a material board that the Committee can look at that shows dark tones of
plaster for the color of the building. Where the classrooms are located, they want to bring
natural light into the classroom, and the office administration space. Ms. Rogers pointed out the
design of the building is very program specific in terms of addressing the internal functions of
both spaces.
Committee member Joe Woollett asked to go back and look at the south elevation, one-story
element. He mentioned the roof sloping back, and that it couldn't be seen.
Ms. Ro ers res onse was that she a eed it looked bi She proceeded to explain how on thegp ~' g
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 4
next fagade, they show it rendered with the idea of the line of the plaster along the bottom. The
enhanced stone begins to wrap around the dance studio, and then the wood is shown in brown
chipboard as a way of enhancing the facade. She mentioned the idea is really to pick up on the
setting of the creek with the natural light into the gym, the dry creek bed, and the fact that the
classrooms have break out spaces that look out over the restored Santiago Creek that will be to
the south side as well as the true amenity to the overall building program. The idea is the
building is Craftsman inspired in terms of the natural materials, bringing wood into the building,
in terms of the structure on the interior and as a finished material on the upper halves of the
building.
Committee member Joe Woollett asked if it was intentional that the plan for the smaller element
on the south and the element on the north made a square. Why was this done? He wondered
because they're different elements, i.e., different heights, and different roof shapes.
Ms. Rogers response was when they started looking at the design of the building, and on a
recreation building typically, realizing there would be a fixed budget when the project was
started, and that roof forms are very important given the residences on either side, they wanted to
ensure that they would be able to afford roof forms on the project. By maintaining a simple
diaphragm of the building so that the structural systems could be very efficient, the lateral design
of the building began to become an economic strategy recognizing that there is a significant
departure for the dance studio, putting the expression of the project where people drive up and
enter.
Chair Jon Califf asked before continuing if there was any public comment on this item.
There were no public comments.
Chair Jon Califf inquired about the thinking on the wood-siding material.
Ms. Rogers replied that they had a couple of different alternatives for their cost estimate.
Recognizing that there would be economic conditions, they looked at doing a pau lope wood.
They considered something that would be easier to maintain, and have a longer life span. It is a
very costly material so they would fall back to something like a doug fir that could be stained.
They also investigated using something like Trex which is a manufactured material, but the
maintenance might be more practical. Also, once it's viewed from 12 feet up, it might be
perceived a little differently because it has the look, and the color, and the tone that might be a
good alternative to using a real wood product up high.
Committee member Donnie Dewees asked how the Trex budgeted out relative to the other
material.
Ms. Rogers stated it was in the budget that was established to be able to use that material.
Committee member Joe Woollett asked if this was a frame building.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 5
Ms. Rogers explained this was going to be done out of tilt up construction.
Committee member -Joe Woollen asked if texturing -the concrete was considered, and which
avenue would be the least expensive.
Ms. Rogers stated that this was the fourth alternative that was looked at, and that the texturing
would be the least expensive. She also mentioned it would be their fall back position.
Committee member Joe Woollen expressed concern regarding the north and the west sides of the
buildings. He stated it's like they're turning their back on the outside because they are so flat.
He further stated it seemed to almost be an island and that bothered him a little bit. He also
mentioned the parking area in the northeast corner. He wanted to know what purpose there was
drawing people all the way up in what would otherwise be a pedestrian area. He wanted to know
how many cars could be up there.
Ms. Roger's response was that the drawing stated there could be 106 spaces in the upper lot, and
most of that is given that the future aquatic facility will still have a demand for parking.
Committee member Joe Woollett asked about McPherson Street terminating at Spring and
connects Spring coming in from the east. He mentioned there would be cul-de-sac. He asked if
that meant no traffic from Spring down McPherson or vice versa.
Ms. McDonald replied there would not be traffic from Spring through McPherson. She also
mentioned there would be a cul-de-sac. She explained it would only be accessible for emergency
vehicles, and pedestrians. This is being done to prohibit cut-through traffic going down Prospect
from cutting through the park to Chapman, or using Spring and cutting down to Chapman.
Chair Jon Califf asked if an exit wouldn't be added. Also, he asked about future plans.
Ms. McDonald stated the connection to Walnut is part of Phase One so that an internal
circulation road will be there with the gymnasium. But, it still only connects to Prospect Street.
Committee member Joe Woollett inquired if all the traffic going to the aquatics center has to
drive all the way through the parking area, and all the way up through the northeast headed
driveway to get up to the parking area to get to the aquatics center.
Ms. McDonald said that yes, all traffic would come in that way (off of Spring Street) or come in
off of Walnut.
Committee members, Craig Wheeler and Joe Woollett asked about the open street and whether
this was part of Phase One.
Ms. McDonald explained that the street shown on the drawing would be open, and there is no
access to the park off of Walnut so that would be a new access point. Also, this is indeed part of
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 6
Phase One.
air on a i as e a ou a roa rea ignmen o a u an w e er is wou a ase
Two or if that is future to Phase Two.
Ms. McDonald explained that the access point on Walnut would be Phase One. The extension of
Walnut across the creek is not part of the project. It's shown on the site plan because it is on the
City's Master Plan of Streets and Highways. So, it is assumed for implementation in the 2025
General Plan Build out timeframe, but it is not part of the project for either Phase One or Phase
Two.
Committee member Donnie Dewees mentioned the landscaping presence relative to any of the
activity, and how the interior would function to bring the light in, and the scale did not make this
perception.
Ms. Rogers replied more study was needed. This is a conceptual diagram. One of the things
especially from a gym that I'm always cautious of is how much light emanates from a gym in the
evenings when they're playing. There are some skylights in the roof so even implementing some
of the translucent glass, you won't have all the direct light because the homes north of it are
some distance away. They'll still be looking over the park towards the creek, and that was
something we wanted to be sensitive to.
Committee member Donnie Dewees had questions about some of the landscape plans.
Ms. McDonald explained the conceptual landscape plan is shown on the drawings, and
mentioned there wasn't a detailed landscape plan yet, but there was a condition to bring it back
to the committee upon completion. She added there is a plant palette in the corner of the site
plan.
Committee member Joe Woollett asked if they were suggesting that indigenous plant material
would be used. He also asked if some area of sycamores would be used.
Ms. Rogers replied that yes, especially given the location of the creek. She further stated that
they wanted on that north side to take advantage of some berming of the earth to help give more
level changes to the landscape around it. There are some considerations given that the fuel line
and the amount of earth that is there, but that is still the intention.
Committee member Joe Woollett expressed concern about the windows on the west side, and the
heat they will generate. He mentioned the creek area, and the light bouncing off of that, that's
going to be a big problem. He mentioned getting some big sycamores in there.
Committee member Donnie Dewees asked if the roof of the aquatics center is going to be pretty
close to the gym.
Ms. Rogers replied she thought it would depend. She said the aquatics center should be a fairly
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 7
low building. There will be locker rooms, and pool mechanical equipment.
Committee member Donnie Dewees again mentioned the question of the gymnasium as a beacon
and the roof is sloped to take advantage of the north light. Is there any consideration giving to
butterflying the roof so maybe there was glass on the south side because it talks about a beacon,
but then what you're seeing is just the hard Southeast corner of this one opening here as opposed
to having something that's glass or something like that.
Ms. Rogers stated that was a good point. If they add windows, there may be too much light
around the front of the building; what they actually want are mirrors around the room. She
explained they wanted to be modest with the design along the front side.
Committee member Craig Wheeler conveyed he really liked the jewel-like quality of that dance
studio. He said it reminded him a little bit of the chapter house in a gothic cathedral, i.e., that
there is something kind of special to it by itself. He noticed the rendering seemed to show the
piers were battered on one face, but the other drawings tend to show them as purely rectangular.
Committee member Craig Wheeler stated he thought it would be a nice thing to add on to those
problem windows on the west side. He thinks it would open the classrooms out, and there could
be a nice little sitting area outside. He suggested to articulate this form by bringing it out slightly
just to make it its own thing.
Committee member Joe Woollett also mentioned the tilt-up. He thought by pulling the
clearstory on north side out, and making some other adjustments helped to articulate it a little
better, and make it seem a little more dynamic.
Ms Rogers stated that yes, that's definitely something that would be good to look at.
Committee member Craig Wheeler mentioned he hoped the pop out on the north side wouldn't
pop out on the bottom. He was hoping it would pop out above so it would be fun. It would be a
wedge intercepting the rectangular mass of the building. He mentioned the city emblem or
something on the wall, but he thinks it would be awfully nice if there were some windows here
looking from the entry toward the dance center so that you could get a feeling of something
going through there. He also thought that there ought to be some sort of security at the offices,
maybe a door here, so the offices area can be locked up at night if the building is being used and
there's no chance of people wandering through this second door.
Ms. Rogers thought this was a good point.
Chair Jon Califf asked about how the restrictions of the landfill area are imposed on them.
Ms. Rogers explained the building has been kept out of where the landfill has been designated.
She stated it affected where they had the community building which at one point was angled.
They had to look into pushing it back to ensure it was out of the landfill.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 8
Committee member Craig Wheeler mentioned he was up at the pavilion at Grijalva Park with the
arroyo stones. He noticed that there's an awful lot of cracking on that slab which made him
wonder if there was maybe some landfill on this area at one time.
Ms. McDonald stated that also part of Phase One construction is capping the landfill and also
putting some riprap on Santiago Creek for stabilization purposes. The landfill is lead
contaminated. It's construction debris mostly but it is a stabilization issue. It doesn't have
methane, but it does limit what you can do with the site plan.
Committee member Joe Woollett stated he had a question about just exactly what the Committee
is doing with this. It says, "recommend approval to Planning Commission of the conceptual
Master Plan". Now, does that mean, this is going to come back?
Ms. McDonald replied that it is going to come back to the Committee. She pointed out this is the
conceptual site plan and conceptual architectural plans for the gymnasium. The focus is on the
architecture for the gymnasium. Staff will be taking this to the Planning Commission. They'll
also be taking it to City Council for final approval of the conceptual plan. At that point,
Community Services will be hiring an architect to prepare fmal plans. Those detailed plans will
come back to the Committee before they're finalized. Then, they'll go back through to City
Council.
Committee member Craig Wheeler stated he really enjoyed the plant palette that was selected.
He mentioned he lived in Silverado Canyon and it seemed like they picked the plants that are
native to the area, and he hopes that continues.
Committee .Member Joe Woollett made a motion to approve design for 4014-OS to the Planning
Commission.
SECOND: Donnie Dewees
AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler, and Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION CARRIED
C
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 9
2. DRC No. 4010-OS -CITY TERRACE APARTMENTS
Proposed exterior remodel of an apartment complex.
200 City Boulevard West
Staff Contact: Christopher Carnes
DRC Action: Final Determination
Mr. Christopher Carnes made the presentation to the committee regarding the proposal to
remodel the exterior of their existing apartment buildings. He stated the apartments are located
off Lewis and just west of the Block of Orange. The project includes two types of
improvements. One, they have buildings that are flat-roofed, and one is as a gable. The flat roof
where they propose to add some tower elements on the end, and then the middle where there's
existing balconies. They're replacing the wood with wrought iron for the balconies.
Mr. Michael Pahl explained the apartments had metal roofs. He stated they would be three-sides,
open in the back. The architect is using a band to split up the look of the building somewhat.
There are wood balconies on five buildings, and he wants to switch that to wrought iron. On this
elevation, the balconies are stucco, and he intends to cut down the balconies to about a foot of
stucco, and the rest wrought iron railing. He will add all new windows and sliding glass doors.
Committee member Joe Woollett asked if the balconies had water-proof protection, i.e., if the
deck was weather proof.
Mr. Pahl stated that yes, they have a concrete finish on them, and they're on a plywood structure,
and yes they are weatherproof.
Committee member Craig Wheeler stated he had a concern where Mr. Pahl was going from
larger windows to divided windows. He mentioned it has come up so many times before. He
encouraged him to check and make sure the egress requirements were met. He also asked about
the type of sliding windows.
Mr. Pahl's response was that he understood that their egress requirements were met, and that he
would be having horizontal sliding windows.
Committee member Joe Woollett wanted to ensure that a finish coat of plaster would be in place
as well as how the joining of the materials would happen.
Mr. Pahl explained that the foam would be attached to the stucco with an epoxy system so no
water would be allowed behind the foam. He further stated he was concerned about that because
then it could drip down at the bottom of the sills.
Chairman Califf asked if he wasn't going to skin coat or do a new finish coat over the other
existing parts of it.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 10
Mr. Pahl stated no, that he would just paint the existing stucco.
Committee member Joe Woollett stated the reason he was asking this is because he was thinking
in terms of what happens to it in the future. How it may or may not deteriorate, how it will hold
its appearance over time.
Mr. Pahl replied that there's a coat of paint on the building. Five years ago, it was painted the
same color so the paint lasts about five years. Then, he will have to come in and repaint.
Committee member Donnie Dewees stated he was glad to see that color scheme he picked was to
his liking. He thought this was a much better color scheme. He commented that this little arch is
so flat that it's almost going to be hardly noticeable. It's just so flat relative to the width of that
opening that it looks awkward, it looks sort of too subtle that it almost looks like a mistake.
Mr. Pahl explained the elevation, and the arch are away from the sliding glass door an
approximate foot. The roof line just comes down, this is just a surface application, and what they
are trying to do is tie this into this building that has a structural beam running across the top of it
and this deck is 100% covered. The deck on this other building is not.
Committee member Donnie Dewees stated he had a concern about the roof. He thought the roof
should be pushed up.
Committee member Joe Woollett asked what if he made it a little deeper because what it's doing
is breaking up this very severe horizontality.
Committee member Donnie Dewees continued that he didn't think this was being done. He
mentioned that talking about starting from a pedestrian level, you're looking at three stories.
Member Dewees doesn't think you're ever going to perceive that curve. He did say it was just a
suggestion.
Mr. Pahl's response was that it's 12 inches high in the middle which would bring it up. It's
about 7 foot 6 inches. But, he did say he would bring it up to the architect.
Committee member Donnie Dewees expressed concern with the tower and the size of it. He
thought the proportions were not right. He thought that more work would be created, and
thought the size of the tower looked too hotel-like. He did state that ultimately, he was making a
suggestion.
Mr. Pahl replied he would bring that up to the architect.
Committee Chair Jon Califf made a motion to approve the Item 4010-OS-City Terrace
Apartments with the recommendations in the Staff Report, and recommendations, as submitted.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 11
SECOND:Craig Wheeler
AYES:Jon Califf, Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler, and Joe Woollett
NOES:None
ABSENT:None
MOTION CARRIED
C
C
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 12
3. DRC No. 4016-OS - WINE RESIDENCE
Proposed modification to an existing residence, and demolition of an existing
garage/storage buildings and construction of a detached garage/storage building.
264 N. Shaffer Avenue (located within the Orange Historical District)
Staff Contact: Christopher Carnes
DRC Action: Final Determination
Chairman Jon Califf recused himself from this item.
Planner Christopher Carnes gave an overview of the project and explained staff's
recommendation regarding the demolition of the existing storage sheds, proposed two-car garage
with storage attic, and the river rock foundation under the cantilevered bay window. He
explained that the proposed garage/storage building was defined as a story and half, and not a
two story structure; therefore, not requiring a Conditional Use Permit as required for atwo-story
structure in the Old Towne District.
The applicant, Rick Wine explained that he has been working on restoring and repairing the
existing residence and he had removed the existing rock facing on the front porch columns and
the chimney because the original construction materials were failing and the previous conditions
posed a safety hazard. He built the foundation of river rock under the cantilevered window
because the area was dirty and nothing could grow under the window. He believed the river rock
foundation blended with the building's architectural.
The Chair invited public comment.
Janet Crenshaw discussed her concerns that the rock under the cantilevered window was not in
keeping the rest of the house and that the river rock was noticeable from the public street.
Jeff Frankel discussed his concerns that the historical characteristics of the residence had been
changed because the rock work on the columns and chimney did not match in dimension or
construction detail the original stone work, and that by not replacing the chain railing that existed
between the front porch columns removed a historical feature that was unique to the residence.
He also questioned if the applicant was going to replace the existing driveway with a "ribbon"
driveway.
Rick Wine responded that the porch columns were the same size as the original columns, but
that the rebuilt chimney was larger than the original because of building requirements. He
explained that the rock that was removed from the columns and chimney was reused and that
additional rocks were purchased because of the larger chimney. The rocks appeared different
after the restoration work because they had been acid washed. He further explained that the
chain railing was not safe and that in the future he will be preparing plans to add a low railing
with clapboard wood siding the same as on the existing residence.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 13
Todd Wine, the applicant's son, explained that he did not believe the chain railings were part of
the original construction because of different materials were used to attach the rocks than that
that attached the railings.
Mr. Carnes explained that Mr. Wine has applied for building permits for rebuilding the front
porch columns, the chimney, and the front porch. The permits for the columns and chimney
have been finalized, while the porch work still is in progress.
Rick Wine asked the DRC if he could construct the external stairway on the south side of the
garage.
Mr. Carnes further explained that the Zoning Ordinance allows the external stairway on the south
side of the proposed garage, and if the stairway were added to the south facade, then the attic
vent would have to be relocated to the building's north facade.
In summary, the DRC members had the following comments:
The existing storage sheds in the rear yard appear to non-contributing structures.
This determination is based both sheds appear to have relatively modern building
materials and construction techniques. Furthermore, the removal of the sheds will
not. have an impact on the Old Towne District because the sheds do not have any
notable architectural features nor are noted as having any historical significance.
The proposed garage/storage building is not anticipated as having an adverse impact
on Old Towne District nor the City's Historical Resources because the proposed
architecture and building materials are similar to the existing residence and are
consistent with Craftsman architecture, the proposed structure is similar in scale and
massing as existing accessory structures located in the vicinity of.the project site,
and the proposed structure is not anticipated on having an adverse impact on privacy
on surrounding properties.
The applicant has maintained a high level of workmanship for the work done to the
existing residence.
The cantilevered bay windows, such as on the existing residence, were a defining
feature of the Craftsman architecture and were common on Craftsman homes in the
Old Towne District.
The chain railing on the front porch is not a defining feature to Craftsman
architectural and probably was not built as part of the original structure.
The placement of the stairway on the south side of the proposed garage/storage
building was appropriate for the Craftsman architecture of the structure.
Reconfiguration of the rear of the garage/storage building for compliance with the
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 14
10' setback requirement does not require DRC review if the structural design is
substantially the same as presented on the plans dated August 17, 2005.
C
Committee member Joe Woollett made a motion to approve DRC 4016-OS with the following
conditions:
1. That the stairway be relocated to the south side of the building with the accompany
relocation of the vent presently shown on the south side.
2. The building permits for the demolition of the existing storage building shall be
issued concurrently with the building permits for the new garage storage building.
3. In-lieu of removal of the rock foundation below the cantilevered bay window the
applicant be given the option of modifying the existing driveway so it's aribbon-type
to dimensions as worked out with Staff.
4. Encourage an interpretation that would allow it to remain as drawn. The applicant
would be allowed to configuration elements on the west side of the building be
permitted as drawn if at all possible.
5. A design for the railings between the stone columns at the front of the house shall be
reviewed by the Design Review Committee.
SECOND: Donnie Dewees
AYES: Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler, and Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: Jon Califf
MOTION CARRIED
C
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 15
4. DRC No. 3974-04 -ELY RESIDENCE
A request to add 270 square feet to an existing 2,049 square foot single-family residence,
a contributing 1923 Mediterranean Revival structure.
139 North Waverly Street (Old Towne Orange Historic District)
Staff Contact: Anne E. Fox, Contract Staff Planner
DRC Action: Final Determination
Ms. Anne Fox provided the overview of the item. She explained this was a request for a
relatively small addition to an existing historic structure. The structure is located in Old Towne,
with a 1923 Mediterranean Revival Style that previously had an addition done to it in the 90's
when the City had guidelines rather than specific standards. Most of the addition is proposed to
occur at the rear of the structure, and would result in providing an additional bedroom. There's
some rework on some of the interior space related to the bathrooms, and hallways to be more
functional. A minor addition occurs to the side elevation along the driveway somewhat visible
from the street, and is proposed off the dining room area to provide what looks like a homework
station.
Ms. Fox explained what they're trying to recommend is taking a look at how the roof ties in to
the new addition particularly how the rear is going to work with the existing structure. The
interesting point for this project is the addition is being proposed to an addition, rather than the
original structure in this particular portion of the project. So, Staff has outlined two alternatives
and in discussing it with the applicant a little bit further as late as today, there's a concern now,
that our first suggestion of trying to bring in the cross gable that ties in with the hip, which was
common for that time period, and as seen in other structures in that same time period, may
present a massing issue and because the roof tie in will be at a much higher elevation. She thinks
Staff would recommend that the position of having the flat roof raised return to that portion of
the original residence in replicating and that would provide a better balance. So, Staff would
want to modify the condition and obviously the DRC may wish to modify even further and have
further discussion with the applicant on that.
The second item Ms. Fox presented was a projecting bay window that's along the rear elevation.
It currently exists on the addition that was done back in 1990. It is not original, but is being
proposed to being reused and put back on the rear elevation again, of the newest addition. .This
is not in keeping with what was typically found in the architectural style, so Staff would
recommend that it not be reused. She suggested either a window that replicates some of the
flavor of what goes on in front of the residence or just add some interest to that elevation in the
building that could be replicated in a style in line with a wall plane type of window. The third
item that Staff brought to the Committee's attention is related to the water heater location. It is
an allowable projection the way it's been shown. It can remain and not be in violation of zoning
code requirements. Staff thought that it was a rather interrupting feature along that particular
wall plane, and would suggest that it be recessed in that location. (It's having to be relocated
because it's currently on the porch.) Ms. Fox didn't know if there's a way to rework it and not
move it maybe quite as far. She turned over the floor to the applicant, Doug, to explain a little
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 16
bit more.
Committee member Craig Wheeler asked if there wasn't a question about the steps leading down
from that homework center as far as clearance in the driveway?
Anne Fox replied that what that has to do with is this portion is going to require a Variance right
now because (and that action will be taken by the Zoning Administrator) the DRC, although
they're making a recommendation on that portion, what they're taking a final action on is more
how it looks and appears and any changes the Committee may want to its appearance rather than
on the Variances. Ms Fox also mentioned there was a requirement. to provide a minimum of 12
feet of driveway.
Mr. Doug Ely introduced himself and his wife, Laura. They've been residents of the house for
20 years. They added on in 1990, and are requesting to add a small addition. He took the
Committee through the floor plan, and explained his initial intent was just to take the existing
door, and the existing windows and just move them out so it appears the same from the outside.
He mentioned putting in some stained glass from the dining area. They want to add a bedroom,
and had some responses from the Staff Report. The first one is regarding the roof. He provided
photos of the house. He explained the view of the rear of the house. When this was designed in
the 90's, the intent was to anchor the back of the house. There was the front of the house, and it
anchored to the back of the house. What he did not want to do is to extend the same roof height
because it starts getting too massive here. He provided a pictorial view in 3-D. By raising the
roof up so that this hip and the gable connects to the existing, it raises this roof form to a higher,
a greater mass. So, his original intent is to have a low plate height here which is at eight foot one.
They want to extend the floor. It matches the existing elevation of the existing floor. When he
got the Staff Report, he struggled with it from a design standpoint. He drove around the
neighborhood, and saw the Smith building on Harwood and Chapman. To the side on Harwood,
there is an extension and is treated much in the same manner instead of raising this roof form to
the same height as that front, larger volume. It scales it down a little bit more proportionately.
That's what he is proposing to do. The structure has the same type of relationship from this form
to this form as you have on the Mediterranean Revival. The arches respond back to the front
porch. His intent is to put in a planter and a fountain, and there's a window here. As far. as the
bay window, he thought the Staff Report is correct. He has no objection to eliminating the bay
window. When he submitted the application, he thought more as a home owner having to pay
for a new window rather than as an architect.
Doug Ely explained his intent was. to take the window and move it. The one request he has is to
pick up the extra 18 inches of square footage. He intends to have a bay window feel on the
inside of the room by reversing the window. He spoke on the water heater closet, and the reason
that it's there. He further explained there was a bit of an architectural trick to break the plane
when he stuccos and the difficulty to match it and wanted to get a craftsman who could match it
as much as possible. He is using that to treat that break between the two. He is re-evaluating his
thinking and would consider putting a shed roof up above that to keep it consistent with the rest
of the house. He mentioned being. surprised by Staff's response to the office alcove since he had
been dealing with this since last December and wasn't brought up until Ms. Fox was assigned to
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 17
it, and she found the discrepancy. He stated his plan to add to the exterior of the existing house
which is hidden by a post.
Committee member Craig Wheeler asked about the problem regarding the stoop and steps from
the door. He wanted further clarification about whether this would impinge the driveway.
Mr. Ely explained that although there is a step right now, he was planning on leaving one step,
and the two posts are on the outside of the step. He would remove these two posts, but the step
would still be there creating a better access.
Ms. Fox added that this where it's an existing non-conforming circumstance that triggers,
because you're expanding that circumstance, that triggers that variance requirement. It may also
be that many of the things Mr. Ely is talking about could be used as a basis for the ZA to
consider the Variance.
Mr. Ely continued that in the Staff Report, it suggested a gable. He would not be opposed to
doing something like this if it was a gable coming to the end of the house. His intent was to
match the hip feature of the house. The only problem is that they don't have a gable anywhere
on the house.
Ms. Fox stated that the two coming together, was having the gable and the hip, and having that
cross, that was fairly period to do that rather than two hips bringing them in. She explained that
Mr. Ely showed the roof as a hip rather than a true gable, but could be tied back into the hipped
portion and end up with a hip to hip roof.
Committee member Donnie Dewees stated he still didn't understand the suggestion of the gable
and asked why it would go there.
Ms. Fox replied that it was just a period of architectural style. It was just how they joined when
you had the L-shaped on the Spanish revival style, and was very typical for them to do that if
they didn't do a flat roof.
Mr. Ely mentioned his preference and stated it would be a lesser mass on this portion of the
house.
Ms. Janet Crenshaw had a question about the F.A.R. She stated it looked like a small lot with a
really narrow driveway. She asked how long it was.
Mr. Ely replied, it's .44.
Ms. Crenshaw asked about the access to the back bedroom, and if the hallway existed presently.
Mr. Ely stated that the access was through the family room, there's a little hallway right here, so
the access would be through the hallway. He also stated that the hallway did not exist yet.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 18
Ms. Crenshaw stated she did not understand the gable roof either. She'd rather see a flat roof
than a gable roof.
Mr. Ely explained that as far as a flat roof, because of what he did before, there was an anchor
element, hip flat, hip flat. It just didn't seem to flow. So, he just wanted this as an element to
still feel like it belonged.
Ms. Crenshaw asked in reference to the roof drawing what does this do. She noted this is sort of
flat, and then here it goes up.
Mr. Ely replied that there is a hip roof here, and this is all flat.
Ms. Crenshaw mentioned those were the only questions. She mentioned a plaster planter. She
asked Mr. Ely before the meeting, but he couldn't explain where that was going to be. She also
asked replacing the front windows with wood windows.
Mr. Ely stated since he's been through these plans seven different times, he thought it was an old
note that pertained to a planter. He also stated yes the windows would be replaced with wood
windows.
Mr. Frankel introduced himself and stated he represented Old Towne Preservation Association.
He said he agreed with Staff on matching the proposed roof element with the original structure
rather than matching the roof style with the addition. As far as the windows, he agreed with
matching period wood windows. He mentioned he agreed with Staff on the water heater. He
stated if a gable or hip was done, he'd like to see an appropriate tile, matching the roof.
Mr. Ely concurred.
Ms. Crenshaw asked if the property line had always been there, and if the driveway was that
narrow.
Mr. Ely replied he thought it had a ribbon driveway at one time. There was a previous owner
that was a concrete contractor.
Mr. Frankel further stated he thought when the house was built, cars were a lot narrower. He had
one question concerning the Variance and if it's up to the Zoning Administrator to make that
determination, and whether it does not necessarily have to go to Planning Commission. He also
asked who was the Zoning Administrator?
Ms. Fox answered that no, it doesn't go to Planning Commission, but it does get publicly
noticed. Every Variance is required to be publicly noticed.
Ms. Leslie Aranda Roseberry replied that currently, it is Mr. Jim Reichert of the Economics
Development Department. He has been an acting Planning Manager in the past. Generally, the
Zoning Administrator is our Building Official, Mr. Brent Mullins, but he's been out on medical
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 19
leave for some time. So, Mr. Reichert is filling in.
Chair Jon Califf suggested that if Mr. Ely liked the element, it is fairly typical of this style for
somewhat of a smaller pop-out to have a window in it with a little eyebrow of tile, and maybe a
little slanting support. He would not say typically this big, but it may be more useful just to do
what he was saying.
Mr. Ely stated he'd just extend the house out like this, and use the bay window on the inside.
Committee member Craig Wheeler stated that he personally agreed with Staff. He thought the
best solution is a flat roof. He further mentioned that Mr. Ely has the original hip roof element
and the newer hip roof element, and they all tie together by this little matrix of flat roof. Rather
than introduce new forms, which that original proposal seems to be doing, he'd be happier by
seeing the continuation of the old forms.
Mr. Ely stated that he disagreed with Mr. Wheeler. By doing this, this is a much taller form.
Committee member Craig Wheeler replied that he disagreed. He stated that it keeps this from
having more elements added to it with more different forms.
Chairman Jon Califf added it might not come out as far yet.
Mr. Ely replied that he respectively disagreed.
Craig Wheeler pointed out in regard to the water heater department, that if Mr. Ely were to take
the new construction wall, on the north side and bring it back six inches, he could mimic that
relief for the front part of the house, and then just put in a good old-fashioned metal water heater
cabinet. He rather see a metal cabinet since there are akeady so many in existence.
Chair Jon Califf asked Mr. Ely how the flat roof drains.
Doug Ely explained that the roof drains to a drain in the middle, and it comes through the attic
out the side through a down spout. That's existing. There's a little section of flat roof that flows
to scuppers. .
Chair Jon Califf made the motion to approve DRC 3974-04, Ely Residence addition subject to
the following conditions:
Staff s condition, Item One.
The roof form of the proposed addition be the hip form that the applicant has proposed.
The proposed bay window be eliminated and/or included in the footprint of the bedroom. In
other words, that it not protrude as a bay window.
The water heater closet be allowed to remain. However, that the roof form not be continuous
with the upper roof of the addition. The water heater closet either be metal or as proposed
with a shed roof, a the-shed roof, not in plane with the upper roof.
City of Orange -Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2005
Page 20
C
We approve the existence of the office alcove subject to the Zoning Administrator's finding
that it can be there through the Variance.
Item No. 6 of the Staff Report, the basic boiler plate requirements.
SECOND: Donnie Dewees
AYES: Jon Califf, Donnie Dewees, Craig Wheeler, and Joe Woollett
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION CARRIED
C
C