CITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES FINAL April 4, 2018

Transcription

1 0 0 0 CITY OF ORANGE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES FINAL April, 0 Committee Members Present: Tim McCormack - Chair Anne McDermott Vice Chair Carol Fox Robert Imboden Mary Anne Skorpanich Staff in Attendance: Bill Crouch, Community Development Director Monique Schwartz, Associate Planner Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner Historic Preservation Marissa Moshier, Historic Preservation Planner Simonne Fannin, Recording Secretary Administrative Session :00 Chair McCormack opened the Administrative Session at :0 p.m. and inquired about the Policy/Procedural Information. Marissa Moshier, Historic Preservation Planner stated there are no changes to the agenda or announcements. Committee Member McDermott made a motion to close the Administrative Session of the Design Review Committee meeting SECOND: Skorpanich AYES: Imboden, McDermott, McCormack, Fox, Skorpanich ABSENT: None Administrative Session adjourned at :0 p.m.

2 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page of 0 0 Regular Session :0 p.m. ROLL CALL: Committee Members Imboden, Skorpanich, McDermott, McCormack and Fox were all 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: () APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March, 0 Committee Member McDermott made a motion to approve the minutes from the Design Review Committee meeting of March, 0, as emended during the discussion at the Administrative Session. SECOND: Skorpanich AYES: McCormack, Skorpanich, Imboden, Fox and McDermott ABSTAIN: None

3 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page of AGENDA ITEMS: CONTINUED ITEMS: None Committee Business: () DESIGN REVIEW NO. - ROHM RESIDENCE A proposal to construct a SF addition to an existing single family residence, and to construct a SF addition to an existing detached garage for additional parking space and a non-habitable workshop. The property is a contributing resource to the Old Towne National Historic District. N. Pine Street Staff Contact: Kelly Ribuffo, --, kribuffo@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Committee Member Fox works for the architectural firm for the project; therefore she recused herself from Item and left the room. Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner provided an overview of the project consistent with the staff report. Richard Rohm, owner of the home, provided an explanation of why he purchased the home and elaborated on the improvements that they are proposing and asked for approval of the project. Rick Fox, Architect for the project, stated that he and the applicant agreed the garage is contributing to the property; however neither the applicant nor staff know if the lean-to is contributing. In his analysis of the property, he feels the lean-to was constructed prior to 0 and he provided his reasoning for it. He has determined that the lean-to is contributing and if the DRC determines it to be contributing, they could possibly be relocated it. He provided revised drawings of the garage with a detached workshop in an effort to mitigate the size and mass of the garage. He also provided photos of the backyard to provide a sense of why he feels neighbors will not be impacted. He pointed out that the new roof of the addition to the house was lowered on the rear of the existing house in an effort to preserve the gable. The new siding is a inch exposure compared to the original inch exposure; they will use flat corner trim instead of the round corner trim and will reuse doors and windows on the rear of the façade. He stated their changes show that they have met Standards and 0 of the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (SOI Standards). Chair McCormack opened the public comment portion of the meeting. Julie Davis, lives beside the Rohms and stated she is in support of the project because they have a large backyard which can accommodate the addition.

4 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page of Chair McCormack closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Committee had the following questions: Committee Member asked if the addition will have a basement and an outside cellar access. Mr. Fox stated yes. Committee Member asked if the side roofline is continuous between the house and the addition, and Mr. Fox stated it has a continuous transition. The ridgeline of the new roof is lower, which preserves the gable on the existing house. Committee Member asked about the chimney; Mr. Fox stated they are proposing a chimney on the rear porch area. Committee Members and Mr. Fox discussed the rear wall of the house that will remain in place and the placement of the windows and doors. Committee Member asked about the garage walls and Mr. Fox stated they are leaving the opening in the back of the garage exactly as it is, and constructing walls offset from the sides of the existing garage. Committee Member asked if the large pine tree will remain and Mr. Fox stated yes. Chair McCormack stated the tree may not survive the project if the roots are covered by the concrete porch; they may want to propose the project with the tree protected or the tree removed.. Committee Members asked if they would be able to review the paint colors and Ms. Ribuffo stated staff does not review paint colors on single-family residential homes. Bill Crouch, Community Development Director stated they are more than happy to provide recommendations, but it is not mandated. Mr. Fox stated they are going to match the existing house. A miscalculation was found on the plans in the percentage change in square footage of the garage and workshop. The Committee asked if cars could be parked in the existing garage. Mr. Rohm stated it's tight, but they can actually park two cars in the garage currently. Due to the fact that the view of project is minimal from the public and the street, the Committee asked if it mitigates any of the requirements for scale and massing in the rear of the house. Ms. Ribuffo stated staff generally looks at property in a 0 view rather than just a façade on the street and that is why she asked for guidance from the Committee. Committee comments: Committee Members are impressed with the design, reuse and preservation of the doors and windows. All the Members have concerns with the way the two additions form a tunnel between the house and the garage. The addition isn't necessarily too big, it is more about allocation of space and it would be preferred to have more separation between the two buildings. The covered porch behind the family room would be better if it were a pergola and smaller in scale. The Committee Members discussed the design of the porte cochere as a potential reference for the porch. The family room could also be reduced in size. The historic path of travel between the garage and the kitchen door has been disrupted. There is too much of the same covered roof and that could be mitigated if the rear porch was covered with a different material at a different level.

5 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page of The Committee Members all agreed that the alternate site plan (presented by the applicant), with the separate workshop, is preferred. The lean-to was constructed with materials that date from the period of significance, however the materials don't match the other historic buildings on the property, the design is not reflective of the local culture and they do not feel it is a character defining feature. One of the Committee Members was conflicted about the lean-to and was reluctant to lose a piece of history, even though it is poorly constructed. The lean-to seems like a service porch and should be treated similarly. However, other Committee Members expressed that screened porches had an established style, while the same cannot be said for the lean to in the back of the garage The fireplace pipes coming out of the roof would be better if they had a simple chimney cap instead of a spark arrestor. The scale and massing is incompatible with the historic period; the area consists of small homes on large lots. Committee recommendations: Consider whether part of the covered patio area could be detached from the house or incorporated in the garage. The covered porch should be re-imagined with more openness or separation between the house and garage. The alternative plan provided at the meeting with a detached workshop is preferred. The fireplace should have a chimney cap instead of a spark arrestor New windows need to be called out to match existing or have a detailed drawing Try to save the pine tree on the property. Committee Member Skorpanich made a motion to continue the item with the recommendations made by the DRC. SECOND: McDermott AYES: McDermott, Imboden, McCormack, Skorpanich ABSENT: None RECUSED: Fox

6 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page of () DESIGN REVIEW NO. - WOODY RESIDENCE A proposal to convert an existing attached garage into a new accessory dwelling unit and construct a new attached garage onto the rear of an existing single family residence. The property is a non-contributing resource within the Old Towne National Historic District. S. Orange Street Staff Contact: Kelly Ribuffo, --, kribuffo@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Final Determination Kelly Ribuffo, Associate Planner provided an explanation of the project consistent with the staff report. Mr. Woody, owner of the home stated he would like to use the existing garage door. It was put on the home by the city when they removed the second unit. Chair McCormack opened the public comment of the meeting; there were no speakers. Committee comments: The elevation labels on the plans are reversed. The front porch has proposed railings and pickets. They agreed that the railings should be removed and the double post at the front porch should be maintained The Committee Members, except for two, found the metal garage door and its reuse to be acceptable, but would like to see it painted. Two of the Committee Members preferred a wooden door. The proposed entry doors are all overtly craftsman and out of style with the house; they should be simplified. The backdoor should not be treated like front doors and should also be simplified. The light fixtures are craftsman style and should be replaced with lights that are in keeping with the 0s style. The proposed windows and surrounds are inconsistent with the house. The Committee would like a drawing that specifically calls the details or a note that states they will match the existing windows. The end of the roof over the new garage should be converted to a hip instead of a proposed gable. The Committee Members discussed potential conditions of approval for the project. The Committee Members agreed to impose the following conditions: The color of the garage door should be a darker color. The two front doors shall be a simple wood design in keeping with the 0s. The exterior lighting shall be a concealed light source and simple design in keeping with the 0s style. The proposed railing will be removed and the existing porch configuration, including the two columns, be retained. Eliminate the details on sheet EXT regarding the windows. Everything should match the existing. The drawings shall be revised to reflect staff's approval. Correct the labels on the elevations.

7 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page of If the existing garage door cannot be reused, the proposed replacement must come back before the DRC for review. The Committee recommended that the existing trees be retained and to try to include additional trees if it can be done. Committee Member Skorpanich made a motion to approve DRC No., Woody Residence with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report except for condition number three and with the additional conditions: The roofline on the west elevation shall be change to a hip roof. Windows shall be wood frames, with sashes and sills and match the existing ones. The details shown on sheet EXT do not apply. If the existing garage door is reused, it shall be repainted in the darker color of the color scheme that is used. If it is not reused, the replacement garage door must come back to DRC for approval. All of the doors shall be of a simple design made of wood and in keeping with the 0s style of the house. The exterior lighting shall be simple, nonpoint source and in keeping with the 0s style of the house. The front porch shall retain the existing double posts. The railings and the single post on drawings shall be removed. All of the drawings shall be updated and resubmitted to staff for approval. Committee recommendation: The two existing trees be retained and consideration be given to the addition of more trees. The Committee Members discussed adding a tree or trees to shade the garage and minimize the mass. Mr. Woody stated the lot is not conducive to adding an additional tree; however he would be agreeable to adding bushes or some kind of plants. He also stated the back doors are utility type doors with the sliding windows and he wanted to change them to solid doors for security purposes. Committee Member Skorpanich modified the motion to state that in regard to the three doors along the north façade, they can be maintained or if they are replaced, that they be replaced in a simple style compatible with 0s architecture. SECOND: Fox AYES: McDermott, Fox, Imboden, McCormack, Skorpanich ABSENT: None

8 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page of () DESIGN REVIEW NO. - - TOWN AND COUNTRY APARTMENTS AND TOWNHOMES A proposal to redevelop an existing. acre office complex with multi-family residential units ( apartments and townhomes), multi-level parking structures, residential amenities, and related site improvements. 0-0 W. Town and Country Road Staff Contact: Monique Schwartz, --, mschwartz@cityoforange.org DRC Action: Recommendation to Planning Commission Monique Schwartz, Associate Planner provided an explanation of the project consistent with the staff report. She stated that the project came before the Committee for a preliminary review on August, 0 and September 0, 0, whereby further comments and project refinements were provided. Ms. Schwartz provided an overview of the DRC comments and suggestions made those dates that were now incorporated into the architectural design and landscaping, as outlined in the minutes. Tobin Symmank, project architect, provided a packet of drawings to each of the Committee Members which consisted of architectural renderings showing side-by-side comparisons of what was presented at the prior meetings and the changes incorporated into the project, as a result of the Committee s comments and recommendations. Mr. Symmank described the following changes: The color of the rectangular architectural window panes on Building A were changed from white to a gray-brown color tone. The architectural table legs were removed on all elevations of Building A to simplify the composition of the façade. The exterior changes recommended by the DRC for Building A and implemented into the project provide for a better distinction from the project located at W. Town and Country Road. An explanation was provided regarding the difficulty of achieving the desired finish of the proposed architectural metal fins, specifically the engraving and gradient finish. Mr. Symmank provided a sample of a more reflective architectural metal,that could be used in the event that the manufacturer is not able to provide the gradient finish that was originally proposed. The amount of red panels was increased on Building B and the architectural box details on the corners of the building were reduced in order to provide more red panels. The red panels on Building B are now the dominant color feature in the hierarchy and proportion of colors values for the building. The checkerboard color contrast of the spandrel details was replaced with a tone on tone color scheme. Chair McCormack opened the public comment portion of the meeting; there were no speakers.

9 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page of A Committee Member commented that it is troublesome to receive a packet during the meeting because a lot of time was spent reviewing what was in the staff report. He asked the applicant if there were any changes in the packet that are different from what was previously provided. Mr. Symmank stated there were no changes. The new metal sample was provided because of previous suggestions from the Committee that perhaps a lighter, more reflective metal could be considered. There are no changes to the material aspect of what was reviewed, with the exception of the gradient finish of the proposed architectural metal that could be difficult to manufacture, as previously explained. The Committee Members and applicant discussed the metal finish at length. The Committee commended the applicant for incorporating the previous DRC comments and suggestions into the project. The Committee had the following comments and suggestions regarding the architecture of Buildings A and B, the Townhomes, and the Landscape/Streetscape: Building A: The Committee was pleased to see the color change of the rectangular, architectural window panes from white to a gray-brown tone. This color change helps differentiate Building A from the project located at W. Town and Country Road. The color change of the rectangular, architectural window panes from white to a darker tone on the south elevation make the panes appear floating, as if they are defying gravity. Under-planting and canopy trees will help in regards to this appearance. The simplified signage successfully integrates into the metal panels. The Committee requested to see the final sample of the architectural metal material that will be used, whether it is reflective or non-reflective. R.C. Alley, architect for the project, indicated that the applicant will return to the Committee with the final sample for their review and approval. Building B: The Committee was pleased with the incorporation of additional red fiber cement panels on the building facades. The Committee would like some assurance that the red fiber cement panels will not fade and require painting. They also recommended using a higher percentage of the darker red color (as shown on the color and materials board), as opposed to the lighter colors that have more orange in them. Mr. Symmank responded that they will verify the probability of fading with the manufacturer and will incorporate a higher percentage of the dark red color, perhaps a ratio of 0% (dark red), 0% and 0%. Townhomes: The Committee inquired if the roll-up garage doors will be metal. Mr. Symmank responded that the garage doors will be aluminum.

10 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page 0 of 0 0 The Committee inquired if the applicant had a sample of the fencing that will be used on the townhomes. Landscape representative, Dane Delle, stated that the fencing material will be similar to a fiber cement-type product, but did not have an actual sample. The Committee wanted to make sure there was coordination between the project's landscape/streetscape lighting and the City's street lighting. Mr. Delle stated that streetscape lighting will be typical architectural patio lighting. Ms. Schwartz stated that the landscape, lighting, and sign plans will return to the Design Review Committee for further review and final approval prior to building permit issuance. Council Member Fox made a motion to recommend approval to the Planning Commission of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. - and Design Review No., Town & Country Apartments and Townhomes subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report and with the additional condition that the metal panel materials for Building A return to the DRC for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. SECOND: Skorpanich AYES: McCormack, Imboden, McDermott, Fox, Skorpanich ABSENT: None

11 Final Meeting Minutes for April, 0 Page of 0 Committee Member McDermott made a motion to adjourn to the next Design Review Committee meeting on Wednesday, April, 0 at :00 p.m. SECOND: Skorpanich AYES: McCormack, Imboden, McDermott, Fox, Skorpanich ABSENT: None Meeting adjourned at : p.m.