TO: Chair and Members of the Design Review Committee
THRU: Chad Ortlieb, Principal Planner
FROM: Ani Mnatsakanyan, Associate Planner - Historic Preservation
1. Subject
title
A request for an addition and to extend the roofline at the rear of an existing historic residence, 230 E. Palmyra Avenue (Design Review No. 5116-23)
end
2. Summary
body
The applicant proposes a 36 square foot kitchen addition and a 68 square foot bathroom addition (total 104 square feet) at the rear of an existing single-story historic residence. The project includes the proposed demolition of an existing shed to accommodate the bathroom addition at the rear of the residence.
3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
recommendation
Approval by the Design Review Committee.
end
4. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Applicant: Sheri Ledbetter
Owner: Sheri Ledbetter
Property Location: 230 E. Palmyra Avenue
General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (LDR)
Zoning Classification: Single Family Residential (R-1-6)
Existing Development: Single-story hipped roof cottage, detached garage, and shed. The property is a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District.
Associated Application: None.
Previous DRC Project Review: None.
5. project description
The major components of this project include:
• A 68 square foot bathroom addition at the rear southwest corner of the residence. The addition will be clad in six inch exposure siding to differentiate from the historic residence’s four inch exposure siding. The bathroom addition will have two new wood windows and a new paneled door providing access to the rear yard. There will be concrete steps and a metal guardrail similar to the existing ones at the rear service porch. The rear window will be relocated to the west elevation at the bedroom to preserve the historic window.
• A 36 square foot kitchen addition at the rear southeast corner of the residence. The addition will be clad in six inch exposure siding to differentiate from the historic residence’s four inch exposure siding. The historic window at the south (rear) elevation will be preserve and relocated to the the east elevation of the addition.
• Demolition of a 160 square foot shed at the rear southeast property line to accommodate the bathroom addition.
• The kitchen and bathroom additions will be located on the west and east sides of the historic service porch and will be inset one foot on the south elevation to be differentiated from the service porch. The hipped roof will extend over the addition but the flat roof of the service porch will be retained below the eave line at the 1-foot projection of the service porch that is to be retained.
• The project will result in a .01 decrease in FAR and will be .27.
6. EXISTING SITE
The existing site is developed with a one-story 1,195 square single-family reisdence built in 1908, a shed, and a detached two-car garage. The subject property is a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It is a hip roof cottage with clapboard siding, a corner recessed porch supported by a single Classical column. There is a bay window at the west elevation and a historic service porch at the rear (south) elevation. The property is in good condition and maintains a high level of historic integrity with no apparent changes to the original structure.
Aerials and Sanborn maps indicate there existed a shed at the southwest corner of the property that no longer exists and an unidentified one-story structure roughly in the same location as the “shed” that exists today. Staff conducted a site visit to observe the existing structure. The structure is of single wall construction of board and batten over a concrete slab, which is indicative of early 20th century rapid construction practices. It has a front facing gabled roof with exposed rafter tails. There is a window at the north elevation and an entry door and window opening at the west elevation that appear to have been cut after the construction of the shed. In addition, the existing structure is slightly larger than the concrete slab. Some of the battens appear to be slightly different measurements and slightly different levels of deterioration. In addition, the roof boards appear to have been changed at a later time. The west elevation of the shed has board pieces that were cut and replaced as well. The interior of the shed is drywalled and has various types of supporting braces that were added overtime. The wood shows signs of deterioration, including dry rot. While the shed is roughly in the same location as it historically was. The level of deterioration and changes have resulted in a significant loss of integrity of materials and workmanship.
As a result of the current conditions, the shed is deteriorated, and the owner believes that the historic structure cannot be rehabilitated and repaired.
7. EXISTING AREA CONTEXT
The subject property is located on the south 200 block of E. Palmyra Avenue between South Orange Street and South Grand Street. It is surrounded by other single-family residences zoned R-1-6. All property along E. Palmyra Avenue between S. Grand and S. Orange Streets are contributors to the Historic District. The predominant architectural styles on the block are hip roof cottage and bungalow Craftsman. There is a prairie style house and a Victorian residence at the west corners of the property.
The applicant provided an FAR analysis that assesses the existing FAR of the block. The FAR of the block ranges from .21 to .43. The proposed average FAR of the block will remain unchanged at .31.
8. analysis and statement of the issues
Issue 1 Service Porch:
According to Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, the service porch at the rear elevation of the residence was constructed at the same time as the residence. The historic service porch projects towards the south of the property. There is a paneled door located at the service porch that leads to the backyard with concrete steps and a metal railing. The service porch is characterized by its flat roof and clapboard siding. A service porch may look like a later addition because it has a different roofline from the house, but it is an important character-defining feature of many historic homes in Old Towne and should be preserved per the Historic Preservation Design Standards.
The existing service porch projects 99 feet from the residence. The applicant is proposing the 8-foot addition of the bathroom and kitchen at the west and east sides of the service porch and to extend the hipped roof over the historic service porch to accommodate a ceiling height that is continuous with the ceiling height in the residence. The service porch will project 1 foot from the kitchen and bathroom additions. The rear façade of the service porch and a 1-foot flat roof area will be preserved to retain the form, roof height, and location of the service porch. Should the addition be removed in the future, the essential form, west elevation and height of the service porch will be retained. The bathroom will retain the existing ceiling height, but the new kitchen addition and new bathroom addition will match the ceiling height of the rest of the house.
Issue 2 Visibility of Addition:
The addition will be located at the rear of the house and its walls will be aligned with the west and east elevations of the historic residence. Due to the location and the small size of the addition, the applicant is proposing to not inset the walls at the west and east elevations, which is typical of small rear additions in the Historic District. The addition will be minimally visible from the street and will not impact the historic streetscape and the street view of the residence.
Issue 3: Differentiation of Addition:
Per the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and the Historic Preservation Design Standards, additions should be differentiated from the old will still being compatible in color, material, scale and massing and proportions. Typically, additions in the Historic District are differentiated by an inset or a hyphen, difference in siding size, and subordinate in massing and size so that the addition does not create a false sense of historic development and provides line of demarcation. Due to the small size of the addition, the applicant is proposing to differentiate the addition with a 6-inch wood siding that will be inset at the rear (south) elevation by one foot to differentiate the addition from the historic service porch and a wood vertical line of demarcation at the west and east elevations, while being compatible in materials, size, and details.
Issue 4 Demolition of Shed:
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing shed at the rear southeast property line. The shed is depicted on Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps as an unidentified structure. Available aerials indicate a similar shed-like structure in roughly the same location as the one present on site. The Historic Preservation Design Standards identifies accessory structures as character defining features of contributing properties but does not identify them as individually contributing resources. The Old Towne Orange Historic District itself is the historic resource per CEQA, and the potential demolition of small accessory structures is evaluated for its cumulative impact on the Historic District as a whole, and not the individual property or the structure itself. The demolition of the shed is to allow for physical space on the lot to accommodate the historic building addition and to facilitate a more functional floor plan for modern day living.
Staff discussed potential relocation of the structure in a manner that maintains the original orientation to the structure and to retain the historic relationship between the house and accessory structure. The residence has a large tree at the southwest corner of the property that the homeowners would like to preserve in place. Due to the existing garage and the minimum open space at the rear of the residence, the applicant will not be able to accommodate a relocation of the structure in a manner that preserves the tree at the corner of the lot or maintain a 6-foot separation between structures per the Orange Municipal Code Table 17.14.210 or retain the original orientation to the residence and streetscape. Furthermore, as mentioned above, the several alterations that the shed has undergone have resulted in a loss of integrity of materials and workmanship. Although it retains its original location, the footprint has changed and does not appear to be the footprint of the original shed.
While the project proposes to demolish the existing structure, the demolition of the structure is not anticipated to have a detrimental effect on the character and the historic integrity of the district because the essential character, streetscape, and historic character of the district will be preserved. Overall, staff is in support of the project and believes that the addition at the rear of the project will not impact the integrity of the historic district.
9. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION
None.
10. PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice was provided to 209 owners and occupants within 400 feet of the project on or before October 19, 2023, and the site was posted on or before that date.
11. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Class 1 - Existing Facilities), because it consists of an addition of less than 10,000 square feet to an existing residence, in conformance with allowable development in the General Plan and in an area where public facilities and services are available.
12. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUIRED FINDINGS
Findings for DRC applications come from four sources:
• The Orange Municipal Code
• The Infill Residential Design Guidelines
• The Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne (commonly referred to the Old Towne Design Standards or OTDS)
• Orange Eichler Design Standards (or OEDS)
The Findings are applied as appropriate to each project. Based on the following Findings and statements in support of such Findings, staff recommends the DRC approve the project with recommended conditions.
• In the Old Towne Historic District, the proposed work conforms to the prescriptive standards and design criteria referenced and/or recommended by the DRC or other reviewing body for the project (OMC 17.10.070.G.1).
The proposed project is in conformance with the Historic Preservation Design Standards, which are the prescriptive design criteria for projects within the Old Towne Historic District. The proposed rear addition is subordinate to the existing historic building and is minimally visible from the street. It is compatible with the mass, scale, and roof form of the historic building and would not affect the appearance of the Historic District from the street view. Materials and color proposed would match the existing residence. The proposed addition will extend the existing hipped and flat rooflines but preserve a one foot area of the historic service porch at the rear. The addition will be inset one-foot on at the rear and will have a two inch variation in the exposure of the siding and a line of demarcation to differentiate the addition. The project proposes the removal of an existing deteriorated shed to accommodate the addition. The removal of the shed is not anticipated to have an impact on the integrity of the Historic District as a whole due to its degraded condition.
• In any National Register Historic District, the proposed work complies with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards and guidelines (OMC 17.10.07.G.2).
The new addition will not destroy historic materials, features, or spatial relationships that characterize the historic building. The project will result in the removal of a historic shed. However, the removal of the shed will not impact the overall integrity and historic significance of the property or the historic district. The new work is differentiated from the old with the one-foot inset at the south elevation and six inch exposure siding while being compatible in material, size, scale, proportion, and massing. The one foot inset at the south elevation allows for the historic porch’s flat roof and south elevation to be visible. If the additions are removed in the future, the form of the historic service porch will be unimpaired. Consistent with Standard 10, new additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment will be unimpaired.
• The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards, and their required findings (OMC 17.10.07.G.3).
Projects located in the Old Towne Orange Historic District must comply with the Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne. As described above, the work conforms with these design standards. The project upholds community aesthetics through an internally consisted and integrated design theme.
• For infill residential development, as specified in the City of Orange Infill Residential Design Guidelines, the new structure(s) or addition are compatible with the scale, massing, orientation, and articulation of the surrounding development and will preserve or enhance existing neighborhood character (OMC 17.10.07.G.4).
The design of the new addition is subordinate to the historic structure and retains scale, massing, and orientation that is similar to the surrounding development. The new addition is located in the rear and will not detract from the existing neighborhood character.
13. CONDITIONS
The approval of this project is subject to the following conditions:
1. This project is approved as a precise plan. All work shall conform in substance and be maintained in general conformance with the plans (date stamped approved November 1, 2023, and in the project case file), including modifications required by the conditions of approval, and as recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee. Any changes from the approved plans shall be subject to subsequent review and approval by the Design Review Committee.
2. After any application has been approved, if changes are proposed regarding the location or alteration of any use or structure, a changed plan may be submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. If the Community Development Director determines that the proposed change complies with the provisions and the spirit and intent of the approval action, and that the action would have been the same for the changed plan as for the approved plan, the Community Development Director may approve the changed plan without requiring a new public meeting.
3. The applicant agrees, as a condition of City’s approval of Design Review No. 5116-23, to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless, at applicant’s expense, the City, its officers, agents, and employees (“City”) from and against any claim, action or proceeding brought against the City, including, but not limited to, any claim, action or proceeding commenced within the time period provided in Government Code Section 66499.37 to attack, review, set aside, void or annul the City’s approval, to challenge the determination made by the City under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) or to challenge the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached hereto. City shall promptly notify applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding to which the City receives notice and to cooperate fully with the applicant in the defense thereof. Applicant shall reimburse the City for any and all costs and expenses, including, but not limited to, court costs and attorney’s fees that the City may be required to pay, including any expenses ordered by a court or expenses incurred through the Office of the City Attorney in connection with said claim, action or proceeding. City may, in its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any claim, action or proceeding but such participation shall not relieve applicant of the obligations of this condition. In the event the applicant is required to defend City in connection with such claim, action or proceeding, City shall have the right to approve counsel to so defend the City, approve all significant decisions concerning the manner in which the defense is conducted and approve any all settlements, which approval(s) shall not be unreasonably withheld. The obligations set forth herein remain in full force and effect throughout all stages of litigation including any and all appeals of any lower court judgment rendered in the proceeding. Further, applicant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City for all costs and expenses incurred in enforcing this provision.
4. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, including all City regulations. Violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this permit.
5. The final approved conditions of approval shall be reprinted on the first or second page of the construction documents when submitting to the Building Division for the plan check process.
6. Construction permits shall be obtained for all future construction work, as required by the City of Orange, Building Division. Failure to obtain the required building permits will be cause for revocation of this permit.
7. Design Review No. 5116-23 shall become void if not vested within two years from the date of approval. Time extensions may be granted for up to one year, pursuant to OMC Section 17.08.060.
14. ATTACHMENTS
• Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
• Attachment 2 - Letter of Explanation
• Attachment 3 - Project Plans, FAR Analysis, and Photographs
• Attachment 4 - DPR Form
• Attachment 5 - Historic Aerial Appendix
• Attachment 6 - Sanborn Appendix
• Attachment 7 - Development Standards Table
• Attachment 8 - Digital Color and Materials Board
• Attachment 9 - Window and Door Specifications
• Attachment 10 - Rear Porch Photo Appendix