2016-02-17 DRC Final MinutesCITY OF ORANGE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MINUTES – FINAL
February 17, 2016
Committee Members Present: Carol Fox - Chair
Craig Wheeler – Vice Chair
Robert Imboden
Tim McCormack
Anne McDermott
Staff in Attendance: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner
Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner-Historic Preservation
Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner
Sharon Penttila, Recording Secretary
Administrative Session – 5:00
Chair Fox opened the Administrative Session at 5:06 p.m.
Chair Fox inquired if there was any Policy or Procedural information. Robert Garcia, Senior
Planner, indicated there was no Policy or Procedural information.
Vice Chair Wheeler stated he would be recusing himself from item #2, Yaghi Accessory Second
Unit; and Chair Fox and Committee Member McDermott stated they would be recusing themselves
from item #4, Albert Residence Accessory Structures.
Committee Members reviewed the Design Review Committee minutes for February 3, 2016.
Committee Member McDermott had questions regarding the exterior paint colors on Watson’s,
which were not on the approved plan. Ms. Moshier explained she has been in contact with Mr.
Skeffington regarding the discrepancy.
The Committee voiced concerns regarding the color scheme on some projects in which the
presentation did not match the intent; the color board that does not have a lot to do with the colors
that the applicant has put on the rendering or extra things that are put on the renderings that have
nothing to do with the building; some projects do not call out colors of doors and windows on the
renderings; important to review the colors especially in the Historic District; beautiful architecture
being marred by a poor paint job; would prefer to condition some items as opposed to just making
them recommendations; prefer to have some type of color board facsimile provided in the DRC
packets and not just a color board at the meetings; and it would not be unreasonable to ask applicants
to reduce some of the unknowns on sufficient portions of buildings.
Mr. Garcia suggested having a study session regarding historic colors and how that should be
treated.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 2 of 11
Committee Member McCormack made a motion to close the Administrative Session of the Design
Review Committee meeting.
SECOND: Anne McDermott
AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION CARRIED.
Administrative Session adjourned at 5:26 p.m.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 3 of 11
Regular Session – 5:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
All Committee Members were present.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
Opportunity for members of the public to address the Design Review Committee on matters not
listed on the Agenda.
There were no speakers.
CONSENT ITEMS:
(1) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 3, 2016
Committee Member Wheeler made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review
Committee meeting of February 3, 2016 as emended during the discussion at the Administrative
Session.
SECOND: Anne McDermott
AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 4 of 11
AGENDA ITEMS
New Agenda Items:
2) DRC No. 4475-10 – Yaghi Accessory Second Unit
A proposal to relocate a historic single family residence and garage, remove non-contributing
additions and construct a new rear addition to the historic building. The building will be
relocated forward on the lot by 8 feet to a 58 foot setback for the attached garage and 63 foot
setback for the primary residence. The building will contain both the primary residence and
an attached 638 square foot accessory second unit.
812 E. Washington Avenue, Old Towne Historic District
Staff Contact: Marissa Moshier, 714-744-7243, mmoshier@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission
Committee Member Wheeler recused himself due his association with the project and left the room.
Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner-Historic Preservation, presented a project overview consistent
with the Staff Report. Ms. Moshier confirmed the Variance for the project would require Planning
Commission approval.
The applicants who were present for this project were Jon Califf and Shucri Yaghi.
Public Comments:
Chair Fox opened the item to the Public for comments. Jeff Frankel, Old Towne Preservation
Association, indicated they are opposed to relocating the 2 structures, finding it was not justified.
The interpretation of the Secretary of Interior’s Standards by staff was not appropriate. The
precedent has been set that the addition should be smaller or equal to the primary structure. He
voiced concern that parking in the driveway in front of a garage would encourage stacked parking;
and the project did not meet required setbacks. The project seemed forced, it was not a good fit for
the lot, and it should be denied.
Tony Trabucco, address on file, had a problem with the tandem parking, best use of the lot would be
a single family residence, and concerned it was an investment property.
Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
The DRC had the following comments:
Questioned the parking solution and the proposed setbacks. Ms. Moshier explained the
Variance for eliminating the required parking space and the side yard setbacks allowed under
the Zoning Code.
Questioned staff if this was the first time seeing tandem parking with 2 units.
Asked if there was concern for setting a precedent of eliminating a parking space.
Impressed with the solution, parking variance was reasonable, streetscape was retained, and
the 2 front doors work well.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 5 of 11
Concerned with the root zone of the existing tree in the front yard.
Committee Member McCormack did not think the tandem parking would work and would
set a precedent. Concerned that a car would back around another car and someone in the
future would pour extra concrete to accommodate that situation. He would support the
tandem parking if it was not 2 units. He could not support the project because the tandem
parking would set a precedent.
Questioned staff if the owner now or in the future wanted to widen the driveway, what would
be the process. Ms. Moshier explained that for properties with 4 or fewer units, the driveway
width could be 9’ to 12’ wide unless the applicant requested a variance.
Concerned with proposing a walkway so close to the tree under the dripline and asked if the
walkway could be moved closer to the house.
Noted this project was a good example of taking the intent of the Standards and applying
them.
Noted that even though the addition is higher, in this case, it would not be visible.
Noted the setbacks and parking are not conventional but had previously asked staff to
consider alternatives to develop this property.
Noted the driveway is 58’ and is deeper than typical driveways in Old Towne.
Wanted to see the dimensions for the concrete/flatwork on the plan and wanted to see
limitations on how much concrete would be poured.
Wanted the hardscape plan to come back to the DRC for approval.
Noted the applicant had listened to the direction the DRC gave at the previous meeting.
The viability of the property was very important and the proposed changes would create a
more sturdy foundation.
Regarding the precedent issue, the DRC reviews each project on a case-by-case basis.
Noted that it was not the purview of the DRC as to whether it was an investment property or
owner occupied property.
Questioned if it was a single family residence, would that guarantee fewer cars on the site?
Requested staff put more detailed notes in the Planning Commission staff report on this
particular item understanding the importance of the discussion and the position the DRC was
taking.
Questioned Sheet A3 on the front elevation and how the ridge of the addition was projecting
above the historic roof. Suggested continuing the front plane back. In favor of pushing the
hip roof of the addition back and preserving the existing ridge line.
The project was so unique, the Committee was not concerned that they were setting an
unwanted precedent.
Committee Member Imboden made a motion to recommend approval of DRC No. 4475-10, Yaghi
Accessory Second Unit, to the Planning Commission based on the findings and conditions listed in
the Staff Report, and with the additional conditions:
1. The ridge of the new construction running the length of the property shall be terminated
behind the crossing ridge of the existing structure to become less visible. The new roof can
be either a gable or hip form. The historic ridge line shall be completely retained.
2. The project shall return to the DRC for final approval of the landscape site plan with
particular attention being paid to the paving, hardscape, and flatwork at the site particularly
adjacent to the tree to support its preservation, prior to the issuance of the building permit.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 6 of 11
SECOND: Anne McDermott
AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, and Anne McDermott
NOES: Tim McCormack
ABSENT: None
RECUSED: Craig Wheeler
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 7 of 11
(3) DRC No. 4830-15 – Ferrentino Residence
A proposal to construct a 143 square foot addition at the rear of a contributing building in the
Old Towne Historic District.
611 E. Jefferson Avenue, Old Towne Historic District
Staff Contact: Marissa Moshier, 714-744-7243, mmoshier@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Final Determination
Marissa Moshier, Associate Planner-Historic Preservation, presented a project overview consistent
with the Staff Report.
The applicants who was present for this project were Craig Beinlich and Joe Ferrentino.
Public Comments:
Chair Fox opened the item to the Public for comments. Jeff Frankel, Old Towne Historic
Preservation, indicated the addition could not be seen from the street and questioned the paint texture
of the original structure. He wished more projects were like this one.
Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
The DRC commented on the following:
Noted how nicely the rear elevation was cleaned up along with the removal of inappropriate,
non-historic elements.
Questioned the stucco coating that was going on the structure and had it been determined
whether the original finish was a smooth or sand texture.
Noted that if the applicant was changing the exterior texture, they would want to remove a
sample of that overcoat to see what the original was. The first response would be to go back
to the original finish. Mr. Beinlich said they would be using a 20/30 sand stucco and the
sand would hide some of the imperfections. He confirmed he would be removing the coating
down to the brown coat.
Questioned the unknown condition of the window on Sheet 2.
Suggested on Sheet 3 on Nos. 8 and 9 instead of calling it painted wood frame to call it
painted wood sash and frame.
On front elevation it was called out for removing the one “arabesque” or quatrefoil but there
were two on the building. Both should be removed.
Questioned if the brackets on each corner of the front porch would remain. It looked original
and thought it best to keep it.
Committee Member Imboden made a motion to approve DRC No. 4830-15, Ferrentino Residence,
based on the findings and conditions listed in the Staff Report, and with the additional conditions:
1. The walls shall be resurfaced with a sand plaster finish.
2. Both decorative quatrefoil reliefs on the front of the house shall be removed.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 8 of 11
3. The inverted bracket-like elements at the front porch shall be retained unless they are found
to be a later addition. They may be removed only with staff review and approval.
4. If the window identified as being “replaced if needed” does need to be replaced, it shall
match the existing in material, size, and profile.
SECOND: Tim McCormack
AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, Anne McDermott, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 9 of 11
(4) DRC No. 4826-15 Albert Residence Accessory Structure
A proposal to undertake several modifications to the existing single family residence and
detached accessory structure. The subject property is a contributing historic resource within
the Old Towne Historic District.
428 S. Orange Street
Staff Contact: Kelly Ribuffo, 714-744-7223, kribuffo@cityoforange.org
DRC Action: Recommendation to the Zoning Administrator?
Committee Member McDermott recused herself due to the proximity of the project to her residence
and Chair Fox recused herself due to her association with the project. Both Committee Members left
the room.
Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner, presented a project overview consistent with the Staff Report.
The applicants who were present for this project were Rick Fox, Ted Albert, and Debbie Albert.
Mr. Albert stated he was grateful for the DRC in their preservation efforts. He explained the reason
for adding a third bedroom. Mrs. Albert loved the house and was very happy to be there.
Mr. Fox explained their objectives included adding a third bedroom to the house, enhancing the
service porch at the rear of the house and adding a covered outdoor dining area. The best alternativ e
was to convert the hobby room into a bedroom. The exterior modifications to the carriage house
were only being undertaken to bring it into code compliance and it would be altered as minimally as
possible. The existing service porch has a number of inappropriate windows and to make the service
porch usable as a laundry area, they have to swap the location of the existing door with the existing
window. The scale change from the main house to the rear of the house was better now.
Public Comments:
Vice Chair Wheeler opened the item to the Public for comments. Jeff Frankel, Old Towne
Preservation Association, stated he had met with Mr. Fox to view the site. He thought the relocation
of the door on the service porch would now be functional, suggested getting a deed restriction for the
additional bedroom, thought everything being done was appropriate, and suggested keeping the
window on the south side and on the interior fill it in with drywall.
Tony Trabucco, address on file, supported the project.
Chair Fox opened the item to the Committee for discussion.
The DRC commented on the following:
Thought the project was well done.
Questioned the access hatches on the north side of the house and did not understand what
was existing and what was proposed. Mr. Fox explained where they are creating a new crawl
space access on the north elevation.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 10 of 11
Questioned the existing vinyl windows and that there was no benefit for retaining them on
the exterior.
Asked for clarification from staff if the addition of a bath to an accessory structure required a
deed restriction. Mr. Garcia said it was not required by code.
Questioned the finials on the carriage house.
Noted the window on the south elevation where the siding will partially fill in the opening
doesn’t quite tell the story and suggested using a different siding like a vertical siding or
beadboard.
Questioned the siding on the north side and was that a traditional beadboard. Ms. Ribuffo
indicated the applicant was going to use salvaged material by the crawl space.
Questioned the railing on Sheet A2.
Wanted no exposed hardware on the “folly” or gazebo.
Noted the gap on the railing and suggested placing a raised planter in that location.
Committee Member Imboden made a motion to recommend approval of DRC No. 4826-15, Albert
Residence Accessory Structure, to the Zoning Administrator based on the findings and conditions
listed in the Staff Report, and with the additional conditions:
1. The location of the existing window to be infilled in the service porch area shall be done with
a material with a vertical orientation and that it not match any existing historical material that
occurs on the building now so it does not create a false sense of history.
2. No exposed structural hardware shall be left visible on the “folly” or gazebo.
SECOND: Tim McCormack
AYES: Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RECUSED: Carol Fox and Anne McDermott
MOTION CARRIED.
City of Orange – Design Review Committee
Final Meeting Minutes for February 17, 2016
Page 11 of 11
ADJOURNMENT:
Chair Fox made a motion to adjourn to the special Design Review Committee meeting on February
24, 2016.
SECOND: Craig Wheeler
AYES: Carol Fox, Robert Imboden, Tim McCormack, and Craig Wheeler
NOES: None
ABSENT: Anne McDermott
MOTION CARRIED.
Meeting adjourned at 7:31 p.m.