Loading...
10-17-2007 DRC MinutesCITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES -FINAL 17 October 2007 Committee Members Present: Jon Califf Bill Cathcart Donnie DeWees Craig Wheeler Joe Woollett Committee Members Absent: None Staff in Attendance: Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Gary Sheatz, Assistant City Attorney Daniel Ryan, Senior Planner, Historic Preservation Robert Garcia, Associate Planner Chad Ortlieb, Senior Planner Sonal Thakur, Assistant Planner Sandi Dimick, Recording Secretary Administrative Session - 5:00 P.M. The Committee met for an administrative session beginning at 5:00 p.m. Chair Wheeler opened the administrative session and asked Ms. Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager, to give an overview of the items to be heard. Ms. Aranda Roseberry explained that there are two items on the Consent Calendar. First, on Agenda Item No. 3, the item had been noticed; however, in reviewing maps there would not be quorum based on the location of three of the Committee Member's office locations. The item was left on the agenda in the event someone came to the meeting to hear the item. Chair Wheeler stated that he had contacted Mr. Garcia regarding Consent Item No. 2 and he had explained that new drawings were submitted. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated that they might not want to take the item on consent. Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated that in the past the Staff had delivered the packets to Committee Members, and she asked if the Committee Members would be able to pick up their packets and binders at the mailbox that was located in the City Hall parking lot. The implementation of this new procedure would assist in keeping Staff at the office working on projects. The packets would be placed in mailbox #6 and keys were passed out to all Committee Members. Committee Members reviewed minutes from the August 1, 2007 and September 19, 2007 DRC meetings and noted corrections/changes to be made. It was agreed that the minutes could be approved at the beginning of the DRC Meeting and they would be moved up on the Agenda. Administrative Session closed at 5:20. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 2 of 20 Regular Session - 5:30 P.M. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:30 p.m. to the next regular scheduled meeting on Wednesday, November 7, 2007. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Opportunity for members of the public to address the Design Review Committee on matters not listed on the Agenda. No public attendees addressed the Design Review Committee on matters not listed on the Agenda. CONSENT ITEMS: All matters that are announced as Consent Items are considered to be routine by the Design Review Committee and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of said items unless members of the Design Review Committee, staff or the public request specific items to be removed from the Consent Items for separate action. CONSENT ITEMS: 1) DRC No. 4251-07 - SAUCERMAN RESIDENCE A proposal to construct a new 632 square foot accessory second housing unit. 2092 North Genessee Street Staff Contact: Sonal Thakur, 714-744-7239, sthakur(r~cit o~forange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve DRC No. 4251-07 - Saucerman Residence by consent, subject to the conditions contained in the Staff Report and clarification that window, cornice, and fascia would match existing trim. SECOND: Donnie DeWees AYES: Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 3 of 20 AGENDA ITEMS: 2) DRC No. 4265-07 - MOTTRAM RESIDENCE A proposal to convert an existing garage and exercise room to a new accessory 2°d dwelling unit 8206 East San Luis Drive Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination This item was initially placed on the consent calendar, however, per Committee discussion was moved to the Agenda. Staff Associate Planner, Robert Garcia, stated that there was a revised floor plan and provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Public Comment None. Applicant, Jerry Zerg, asked that the DRC permit an option for a shingled roof as well as a tiled roof. There had been a the roof before which had damage and bee hives in the roof. The roof cannot be seen by the neighbors. He felt the the would be too heavy and that shingle material would be better suited for the area. Mr. Zerg reviewed the drawings with the Committee. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion to the Committee. Committee Member DeWees asked the Applicant if he was proposing to take the entire the from the existing roof and replace it with shingle. Mr. Zerg stated that the the had been removed where the damage was and he did plan to use shingle material. Chair Wheeler in reviewing the drawings asked if the thatch roof was obsolete. Mr. Zerg stated yes, it no longer existed. Chair Wheeler pointed out an area of roof that appeared to be trellis and that the drawings were confusing with the various types of roofing shown. Mr. Zerg explained that it was a sloped area that would be shingled. He reviewed the drawings and they discussed the pitch and ridge of the roof. Committee Member DeWees asked if the only difference in the new floor plans was the square footage. Mr. Garcia stated that this was correct. Chair Wheeler asked if the stair area was included in the design. Mr. Zerg stated yes it was. Chair Wheeler stated that it was a fairly minor project and that it was not visible from the neighboring homes and he felt that he would like to see more accurate drawings of what it would look like. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 4 of 20 Committee Member Woollett stated that he had driven by the property and it was visible. Reviewing the aerial photos he showed the Committee Members where the property was located. He also stated that it was hard to tell where the driveway of the property was. Mr. Zerg stated that the driveway was not used for cars. Mr. Mottram came forward to explain that the aerial photo was an older photo and there were not cars located there. Chair Wheeler stated that if the roof was visible that it should match. Committee Member DeWees stated that in keeping consistency, the roof should be the same. Mr. Zerg stated he agreed and would comply with their suggestions and change the pitch accordingly. Committee Member Califf stated that the Applicant could use atwo-layer hot mop underneath the the roof. Mr. Zerg stated that he would resubmit the drawings with the the roof and the pitch of the roof. Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve DRC No. 4265-07, Mottram Residence, with the condition that Staff review the final drawings that show roof material and roof pitch. SECOND: Donnie DeWees AYES: Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 5 of 20 3) DEPOT-PLAZA PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION STUDY Due to conflicts of interest, the DRC will be unable to act on this item. The community was advised of the date of this DRC meeting; therefore, the item remains on the Agenda. However, the project will move directly to the Planning Commission. Staff Contact: Jennifer Le, 714-744-7238, jle@cityoforange.org City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 6 of 20 4) DRC No. 4192-07 & CUP 2638-07 -SMALL COLLECTION FACILITIES A proposal to allow a small recycling facility at a commercial center. 4550 East Chapman Avenue Staff Contact: Robert Garcia, 714-744-7231, rgarcia@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Recommendation to the Zoning Administrator Staff Associate Planner, Robert Garcia, provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Public Comment None. Applicant, Joe Sloan, address on file, stated that they had been in regular contact with Staff over the last several months and he shared the drawings and photos with the Committee. Applicant, Bruce Welch, address on file, was also available for questions from Staff. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion to the Committee. Committee Member Cathcart asked how often would someone go by the facility and he had a concern regarding tagging. Applicant Bruce Welch answered that there would be someone there on a daily basis; the facility would be open five days per week and on the other two days someone would go by to check the facility. He clarified that it was a manned facility. Mr. Welch explained that tagging was a high priority that would be cleared immediately and was looked at daily. Over the years they had used a protective coating on the building and bins to make graffiti clean up easier. Committee Member Woollett asked if the exterior was plaster. Mr. Welch explained that it was metal. Mr. Sloan explained that the two bins would be moved on a regular basis and there were decals on the side of the building that in the event that they were tagged could be replaced. Chair Wheeler stated that what appeared to be the front elevation is the back elevation in regards to Chapman Avenue and that the signage would face the apartments to the rear. He asked if the building could be moved. Mr. Welch stated that it could be turned. When they had started the project they worked with a different planner and it may have also been a preference of Albertsons. Committee Member Woollett asked about the water drainage and would the building block the water; if it did, the water would stay against the building and create deterioration. In looking at the pictures it appeared there had been some water damage. Committee Member Woollett asked if the unit had a floor. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 7 of 20 Mr. Sloan stated that the building and bins had a steel floor and they were placed on steel skids. The bins are set in place with aroll-off truck. The building area could be touched up. Committee Member Woollett clarified the skids laid on the asphalt. Mr. Welch stated that the industry standard was to have just bins in the back. To make the location look nice they added the building (house) in the front so the operation all stays inside. There was a reverse vending machine that dispensed a ticket that was taken into the market for redemption. Chair Wheeler asked how the machines received their power. Mr. Welch stated that they typically tap into a light pole and showed the Committee where the light pole sat in reference to their set up. Committee Member DeWees asked what the impact was on the parking. Mr. Garcia stated that there were five surplus parking spaces on the site and with this addition it would not reduce the required amount. Committee Member DeWees, in reviewing the drawings, asked about the space between the bins. Mr. Sloan stated that the drawings were more to show placement and the bins were actually very close together, with no issue of a person going between the bins. They have 450 sites nation-wide and have not had a problem with anyone going between the bins. Mr. Sloan stated that he had a reconfigured drawing that was more accurate. Committee Member DeWees asked about the fascia color and the color of the metal and how much recycled material was being used in the construction. Mr. Welch stated that they could match the color of the surrounding buildings and could use whatever color they recommended. Mr. Welch stated that he did not know what type or if any recycled materials were being used. Committee Member DeWees stated that vinyl, and the manufacturing of vinyl, was a high producer of CFC and they may want to use another material rather than vinyl in the lettering. He also recommended that they use compact fluorescent lighting instead of just fluorescent strip lights. Committee Member Woollett asked where the operator worked. Mr. Sloan stated that there was a roll up door in the front and the operator stood in that area, there was a scale inside and the door remained rolled up when attended. The operator was there to provide customer service. Chair Wheeler made a motion to approve to the Zoning Administrator DRC No. 4192-07, Small Collection Facilities, with the following conditions: l . Rotate front of building to face Chapman. 2. Use compact fluorescent fixtures. 3. Strongly encourage Applicant to use recycled building materials in construction. 4. Assure that there would be no way for a person to gain access between containers. 5. Roof be Terracotta and beige for the fascia and trim. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 8 of 20 SECOND:Donnie DeWees AYES:Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:None RECUSED:None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 9 of 20 5) DRC No. 4220-07 - MANNY'S CHAPMAN RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE FACILITY A proposal to construct a Recreational Vehicle Storage Facility within a 13.48 acre Southern California Edison Property. 1518 North Tustin Street Staff Contact: Chad Ortlieb, 7147-744-7237, cortlieb@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Staff Senior Planner, Chad Ortlieb, provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Leslie Aranda Roseberry clarified that the Committee would be making a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The Applicants, Phil Martin and Manny Goriel, and the Southern California Edison representative, Frank Salomone, were present for any questions the Committee Members had. Public Comment Dan Slater, address on file, came forward to address the Committee. On behalf of Keep Orange Clean, he stated that he felt that this facility was needed. There was such a problem in the City for residents to find places to keep their Recreational Vehicles. He was in support of the project. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion to the Committee. Committee Member Woollett, referring to the pictures of another storage facility, stated that the fence was only 6' in height and many of the vehicles were visible, and this would be more objectionable on Cambridge Street. He asked if there were any height limitations on the vehicles that would be stored there and would the landscaping hide the equipment from the street. Mr. Martin stated that there would be a 30' setback and Mr. Goriel stated it was due to the Southern California Edison restrictions. The Committee Members reviewed the plans with the Applicant. Committee Member Cathcart commented that the boxed Queen palms were nice for the area and stated that in moving a Ficus tree due to safety and leaving the Ruse lancia, which would grow to 30' and 25' tall, he had a concern with the visibility for motor homes. He suggested that they should move one of the trees back 10'. Committee Member Califf asked what had happened with the previous 2005 Minor Site Plan and CUP. Mr. Ortlieb stated that the plan predated his time with the City and the project had been shifted to different planners. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 10 of 20 Ms. Aranda Roseberry stated that the Minor Site Plan review was used as apre-application. That would have been a one look through the various departments prior to the submission of the application. The CUP would be going forward to the Planning Commission and this was the first time the Committee had looked at the project. Chair Wheeler asked if there were any further questions or comments, there were none. Committee Member Cathcart made a motion to recommend approval to the Planning Commission DRC No. 4228-07, Manny's Chapman Recreational Vehicle Storage, with the conditions contained in the Staff Report and the recommendations by the DRC to move the Ruse lancia at the south side Tustin entry west 10' to enhance the visual acuity of the drivers and the Ficas tree that was being removed and the two that were being replaced be on Tustin Street. SECOND:Joe Woollett AYES:Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:None RECUSED:None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 11 of 20 6) DRC No. 4228-07 & CUP No. 2654-07 - NEX GEN RECYCLING A proposal to allow a small recycling facility composed of two on-site storage containers. 3022 East Chapman Avenue Staff Contact: Sonal Thakur, 714-744-7239, sthakur@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Staff Assistant Planner, Sonal Thakur, provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Gregory Navarro, was present to answer any questions from the Committee. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion to the Committee. Committee Member Woollett stated that one of the suggestions/requirements by the Police Department was that the units would have no space between them and he wanted to know how this would be monitored. Ms. Thakur stated if they violated the condition, Code Enforcement could cite them. Committee Member Woollett asked if there was any consideration for a barrier at the end of the containers to alleviate the space issue. Mr. Navarro stated that the containers were moved frequently and he would be present when they were moved and they would be completely adjacent with no space between them. They are brought in with a truck and lined up precisely with no space. Committee Member Califf suggested if there was a painted border then the containers would be dropped in the same spot each time. Code Enforcement would also have an idea of where the containers needed to sit. Mr. Navarro agreed that a painted area would work. Committee Members discussed this and agreed it would be a good solution. Chair Wheeler asked where the power for the lights would come from. Mr. Navarro stated that they would get the power from the liquor store next door and they have spoken with the store owner who had agreed to allow this. The lights being used would be LED which would be bolted onto the containers; they would be removed and reattached each time the containers were moved. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 12 of 20 Committee Member Woollett asked if the lights could go onto the side of the building. Ms. Thakur stated that Crime Prevention specified that they could be mounted on the containers or added to the side of the liquor store. The main concern was to have more lighting and visibility. Committee Member Woollett felt uncomfortable with the project as it relied on someone else taking steps to make sure it things fell into place each time. Mr. Navarro stated that they could add lighting on the building which would not interfere with the bin movement. Chair Wheeler stated that they needed to assure that the lights did not spill over to the residents. Committee Member Califf recommended that they add a light stanchion that would be more stable and permanent and he did not like the idea of having the cords hanging from the building. Chair Wheeler suggested they add lighting onto the building on the east side and a stanchion on the west side. Committee Member Califf was concerned with graffiti and tagging. Mr. Navarro stated that there would be clear coating added to the outside of the containers to allow easier removal of any graffiti. Committee Member DeWees asked where the dumpster would be placed and where the open ends of the containers faced. Mr. Navarro stated the dumpster would be in the alley and the opened ends of the containers would face Chapman. Ms. Thakur stated that the applicant had also completed anon-priority WQMP; if they were not in compliance they could be cited. Committee Member DeWees was concerned with the height of the containers and the parking space as he referred to the drawing. Mr. Navarro stated that the parking space was not utilized as this was where the previous dumpster had been. Chair Wheeler asked if they were in compliance with parking. Ms. Thakur stated there was not additional parking required and as this was an under-utilized parking lot, not an issue. Ms. Thakur asked if there were any comments regarding the aesthetics of the containers. Chair Wheeler recommended that they add green trim to match the Nex Gen two-color logo. Mr. Navarro stated that if there was a concern with the vinyl they could paint the image rather than use the replaceable vinyl logo. The Committee Members discussed the placement of lighting with the Applicant and made recommendations. Committee Member Woollett stated there were still some uncertainties on the project. With a new building the City required a trash bin area, and several conditions and here were two bins sitting in an open area. There was no provision for the trucks possibly breaking up the pavement with heavy loads. He felt they needed to take more care regarding the aesthetics and being consistent with City Guidelines. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 13 of 20 Committee Member Cathcart stated that if a masonry enclosure was added at the ends of the containers there would be no question of where the containers would be dropped. Mr. Navarro stated that this could be done and the containers could be maneuvered into an enclosed area. The containers sat on steel skid pads that would allow water to go through and not collect. The skid pads would be swapped out twice a month to protect the pavement and containers from breaking up the ground. Committee Member Woollett asked where the trucks would position themselves. In looking at parking lots like this there were different depths of paving used in parking areas which would be the weakest area of the pavement. Generally in front of the trash bins there was concrete or extra pavement for the heavy trucks. Mr. Navarro stated that the trucks would go through the alley and back in and out. They had not experienced problems in the past; extra concrete could be added where the trucks would approach. In adding a block wall enclosure the trucks would still be able to maneuver the pick up and drop off. Committee Member Woollett stated that the lights could be attached to the wall. He was concerned as walls were very vulnerable to being broken by trucks. The walls do much better in steel. Committee Member Califf suggested that they add a post or bollards to each end of the wall to protect from damage as he had concerns about what the wall would look like over time. The Committee discussed various options with the Applicant and reviewed the drawings for placement of posts. Mr. Navarro agreed that they needed to protect the walls. The Committee Members discussed the length and height of the walls and the possibility of adding lighting to the wall. Committee Member DeWees asked the Applicant if any of the recommendations were cost prohibitive. Mr. Navarro stated that they would be willing to add fencing or whatever it would take to get the project approved. Chair Wheeler made a motion to recommend to the Zoning Administrator DRC No. 4228-07 & CUP No. 2654-07, Nex Gen Recycling, with the conditions stated in the Staff Report and the following conditions: 1. Addition of a 6' L shaped concrete block wall at the west and south ends of the bins and that the wall be painted to match the building. 2. Lighting be attached to the west wall. 3. Green be added to trim and logo to match the existing building. 4. Plan will show the proposed placement of the trash container, subject to Staff approval. 5. Bollards be installed on the west and south ends (two at the south wall) of the walls to protect the walls from damage. SECOND: Donnie DeWees AYES: Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSED: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 14 of 20 7) DRC No. 4263-07 - MATTHEWS RESIDENCE A proposal to install an electrical solar system on the roof. 1822 North Cambridge, Old Towne Historic District Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Staff Senior Planner, Daniel Ryan, provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Sean Dock, address on file, commented that there was some discussion on the 8-12" platform and what was shown in the drawings was the maximum height of the panels which would be 8", and if needed they could be lower. He shared photos with the Committee. He asked for clarification on the negative environment impact on solar. Mr. Ryan stated that this was in reference to the historic resource for systems that were visible to the public view or the adjoining properties and the impact would be the negative aesthetic impact on the area. Also, the cumulative effect in promoting future installations. Mr. Dock stated there are a lot of design restrictions on how a solar system is built. On the five landscape panels it would seem that they could be mounted on the top portion of the west roof. In order to do that they would need to achieve the proper voltage and have them on a separate inverter. There were design constraints that may have been thought of but have not been presented as each option presents itself they had to look at the restrictions. In reference to the trees, they eliminate the entire guest house roof due to the shading they provide. To make it solar feasible it would include the elimination of five trees, including a neighbor's tree. To add a ground mount would not work as most of the yard was pool area. Their options were limited on where they could locate the panels; he reviewed the drawings and gave information to the Committee Members on the percentages of optimum performance for solar panels. Public Comment Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the Old Towne Preservation Association, stated he was opposed to the project and his concerns with the project was that the design was in violation of their design standards, the panels would be visible from the street and it would have a negative impact on the streetscape. Mr. Frankel stated that he was not opposed to solar energy; however, he had to look at the project from the impact on the historic area. Janet Crenshaw, address on file, stated when she looked at the project she read that the panels could not be within the first 50% of the lot. Mr. Ryan clarified that the conditions read that the panels could only be on the rear 50% of the roof section. Mr. Dock stated that there was a State Law called The Right to Solar, that could essentially prohibit that type of restriction. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion to the Committee. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 15 of 20 Committee Member Woollett stated that he had solar panels on his home. This was a very important issue for the City. If there was a need to gather more information the Committee should do that and evaluate this project very carefully. If there was a State Law then this would need to be reviewed as well. Economics played a huge part in the project and the way the Committee moved on the project could preclude the use of solar panels in Old Towne entirely. He felt they should avoid that and also be sensitive to the Guidelines and any kind of panels that would be installed would need to very specific in type and design. Mr. Dock stated that the the panels were 50% more expensive and required 50% more material to get them to work properly. Committee Member Woollett stated that the angle and orientation was important and he felt it necessary that they explored the State Law. Committee Member DeWees stated that the standards were written some time ago and didn't take into consideration the use and design of these panels. Mr. Dock stated that there was an existing solar thermal panel on the residence and disassembled in 1990. Committee Member DeWees asked the applicant why the panels did not take up the whole plane and if they could be turned. Mr. Dock stated that was due to the restrictions and how the panels are built. With the panels being rectangular it limited how they could be laid out. In regards to turning them, there were landscape and portrait panels and they run perpendicular to the rafters, this was why they used the portrait panels on this design. Mr. Ryan asked if they could use a combination of the solar panels. Mr. Dock stated that it would be cost prohibited. Committee Member DeWees stated that the whole idea regarding the adverse effect on the area needed to be considered. The City did not require gas lights nor did they require residents to buy 1930's cars. Committee Member Woollett asked, looking at the drawings, when there are panels surrounded by roof it called attention to the panels, and if they went from edge to edge then only panels would be seen. Mr.Dock stated with two portrait panels and one landscape panel on the east edge they would be within inches. Committee Member DeWees asked what modular size did the Applicant have to work with. Mr. Dock stated that they were 33" X 63". Chair Wheeler stated that for a cost effective approach, and the impact of the City codes, he felt that they needed to find a way to implement the project that met the City codes. The Applicant should be able to install solar and look at another place to put the panels. He suggested that they might look at installing the panels on the carport as they would not be visible. Another possibility would be to install on the back portion of the roof, tilting them to gain the most efficiency. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 16 of 20 Committee Member DeWees, reading from the report, "the DRC may allow skylights and solar panels on the roof" Committee Member Woollett stated that he had completed an analysis with flat panels and was amazed at how much efficiency he was still able to get. Mr. Dock stated that it was approximately a 12% reduction in efficiency. Also, space would be taken into consideration and would the carport experience any shading from the trees. On the west option on the back of the roof you had more of a wind issue and the space of the area would be enough to accommodate approximately 14 panels, and with tilt eight panels. There would still be design restrictions in how to configure electrically. Committee Member Califf asked what the life expectancy of a panel was. Mr. Dock stated that the life of the system was warranted for 25 years and the panels could last 30-40 years. If re- roofing was required it would be approximately one day of labor to take off and reinstall panels. Committee Member DeWees asked if the Applicant had looked at battery technology. Mr. Dock stated that solar unlocked itself in California about six years ago when the Net Metering Law was passed, this essentially did away with a battery, and you would have panels, inverter, wiring and racking. They hooked up directly to the electrical service with the meter running backwards and at night utilizing utility power. It was the net effect of the meter running backward and forward that generated the billing and the use of rebates available. Mr. Ryan asked how was the number of panels needed determined. Mr. Dock stated that a bill was obtained from the customer and the solar system generated about 80% of the kilowatts used with 20% coming from the utility. Each panel generated approximately 170 watts of power and these numbers were used to estimate how many panels would be needed. Chair Wheeler suggested that the item be continued to look at alternative designs. Committee Member Woollett stated that the City needed to review the State Codes. Mr. Dock stated that the Code was CA Civil Code, Solar Rights Act -Section 714. Committee Member Woollett made a motion to continue DRC No. 4263-07, Matthews Residence. SECOND: Craig Wheeler AYES: Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSED: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 17 of 20 8) DRC No. 4279-07 & AA No. 0150-07 REYES RESIDENCE A proposal to demolish anon-contributing garage and construct a new one-car detached garage, a 720 sq. ft. addition to the main residence, and a new 640 sq. ft. detached accessory unit with an attached two car-garage. 215 North Clark Street, Old Towne Historic District Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Recommendation to the Planning Commission Staff Senior Planner, Daniel Ryan, provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Al Maciel, was present to answer any questions from the Committee. Public Comment None. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion to the Committee. Chair Wheeler asked if the ribbon driveway was appropriate and commented the window trims should match the existing trim. On the exterior finish it showed 2 x high density foam trim with stucco finish, this should be wood trim. Committee Member Cathcart commented that the driveway should be plain concrete. Committee Member DeWees asked why the bedrooms were located at the front of the property. He also pointed out an area on the plans that had a dark recessed area and had a concern for safety. Mr. Maciel stated that in front of the units there was a detached garage and the open spaces with views were at the rear of the property. Mr. Ryan stated that in regards to the safety issue the recessed area was based on a design restriction. The Committee reviewed the plans with the Applicant and gave their recommendations on the driveway, trim areas, and stucco. Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve to recommend to the Planning Commission DRC No. 4279-07 and AA No. 0150-07, Reyes Residence, with the following recommendations: 1. The ribbon driveway would be optional. 2. Wood trim should match the existing trim. SECOND: Jon Califf AYES: Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSED: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 18 of 20 9) DRC No. 4282-07 - CRENSHAW RESIDENCE A proposal to construct a new two-car detached garage. 280 North Cleveland Street, Old Towne Historic District Staff Contact: Daniel Ryan, 714-744-7224, dryan@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Staff Senior Planner, Daniel Ryan, provided a project overview consistent with the Staff Report. Applicant, Janet Crenshaw, was present to answer any questions from the Committee. She shared photos of where the previous garage sat on the property. Public Comment Jeff Frankel, address on file, representing the Old Towne Preservation Association stated that the Applicant had done a good job of matching what was previously there. Many of these structures did not match the house and Ms. Crenshaw had done research in building the new garage. Unfortunately, the structure could not be built on the original footprint. He felt it was a good project. Chair Wheeler opened the item for discussion to the Committee. Committee Member Califf stated that 2 X 8's should be the size of barge and he asked how the barge would be supported, and that this would be a condition of the project. The Committee Members discussed the use of 1 X 3 Board & Batten vs. 1 X 3 rough sawn plywood and Baton and which would be a better use for the project. Chair Wheeler asked if there was an attic on the structure. Ms. Crenshaw stated that there would be a place for storage and the windows above the doors would be operable. Committee Member Califf stated that the Building Department would ask for light and ventilation. Committee Member DeWees stated that if the structure would be used as a garage the Applicant would want to show where the concrete slab would be located and the overhang should be smaller. Chair Wheeler stated that the building may need to be moved forward as the plans showed 11' to the building back property line. Committee Member Califf stated that if the addition was not there and with the existing overhang, 10' to the property line would be allowed. Ms. Crenshaw stated that the original garage was located right on the property line and reviewed the recommendations with the Committee Members. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 19 of 20 Committee Member Califf stated, in reference to the siding, plywood could be used if it was rough sawn and they would want to see 1 X 3 Battens. If the Board would be plywood and Batten, the Committee would want the Applicant to present any horizontal joint details to Staff prior to a building permit. Chair Wheeler stated that the trim should match the detail from the house. Committee Member DeWees stated that the design idea was to make the garage different from the house. Committee Member Califf stated that the Applicant could use plywood and place boards over it. Committee Member Woollett made a motion to approve DRC No.4282-07, Crenshaw Residence, with the following condition: 1. The Applicant may utilize either 1 X 3 Board & Batten siding or Plywood and Batten as long as the jointing of the plywood is reviewed and approved by Staff. SECOND: Donnie DeWees AYES: Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSED: None MOTION CARRIED. City of Orange -Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes for October 17, 2007 Page 20 of 20 REVIEW OF MINUTES: 10)APPROVAL OF MINUTES: (1) AUGUST 1, 2007 (2) SEPTEMBER 19, 2007 A motion was made by Committee Member Califf to approve the minutes of the August 1, 2007 meeting with changes as noted. SECOND: Bill Cathcart AYES: Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None MOTION CARRIED. A motion was made by Chair Wheeler to approve the minutes of the September 19, 2007 meeting with changes as noted. SECOND: Donnie DeWees AYES: Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Donnie DeWees, Craig Wheeler NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Joe Woollett MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Committee Member Califf to adjourn to the next regular meeting on Wednesday, November 7, 2007. SECOND:Craig Wheeler AYES:Jon Califf, Bill Cathcart, Craig Wheeler, Joe Woollett NOES:None ABSENT:Donnie DeWees RECUSED:None MOTION CARRIED.