TO: Chair and Members of the Design Review Committee
THRU: Chad Ortlieb, Principal Planner
FROM: Angelo Huang, Planning Aide
1. Subject
title
A request to construct a 484-square-foot addition to an existing one-story single-family residence at 527 E. Sycamore Avenue (Design Review No. 5141-24).
end
2. Summary
body
The applicant proposes a 484-square-foot addition to an existing one-story single-family residence. The proposal also includes a new uncovered deck. This property is not a contributor to the Old Towne Historic District.
3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
recommendation
Approval of Design Review No. 5141-24 by the Design Review Committee.
end
4. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Applicant/Owner: Michael Ontiveros
Property Location: 527 E. Sycamore Avenue
General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (LDR)
Zoning Classification: Residential Single Family (R-1-6)
Existing Development: Single-story 1,153 sq. ft. postwar non-contributing single-family residence with a detached 400 sq. ft. two-car garage.
Associated Application: None
Previous DRC Project Review: None
5. project description
The major components of this project include:
• Addition of a 388-square-foot bedroom and bathroom at the rear of the residence. The addition is subordinate in height to the main structure and also provides a setback different than the existing home to provide a demarcation between the addition and original dwelling. Exterior finishes on the addition include plaster with a Spanish lace texture and matching cedar shingle siding around the bay window opening to complement but differentiate the addition from the exisitng residence.
• Infill of an 96-square-foot covered patio on the east elevation of the home. The infill will increase the dining room area and the exsiting patio door will be replaced with a sliding window.
• A new uncovered 126-square-foot wood deck at the rear of the home.
• Interior floor plan reconfiguration to increase the common living area by decreasing the area of an existing bedroom to comply with the Neighborhood Preservation Overlay requirements of the code.
The proposal to add a total of 484 square feet will increase the floor area ratio (FAR) of this property from 0.231 to 0.304.
6. EXISTING SITE
The existing site is developed with a single-story, vernacular, minimal traditional residence constructed in 1954. The building has wood cedar shingle siding and a hipped roof with composite shingles. The front entrance is centrally located and there are a combination of double hung, sliding and fixed windows. There is a driveway on the east side of the property leading to a detached two-car garage with a hip roof. The existing floor area ratio (FAR) of the home is 0.23.
7. EXISTING AREA CONTEXT
The subject property is located on the north side of E. Sycamore Avenue between N. Shaffer Street and N. Harwood Street. The zoning on the north and south sides of E. Sycamore Avenue is Single Family Residential (R-1-6). All but two properties on the west side of the street are non-contributors to the Old Towne Historic District. The home is surrounded by other post-war development homes sharing a similar architectural style. The existing average floor area ratio of the block is 0.31 and the addition to the home will still be less than the current average.
8. analysis and statement of the issues
Issue 1 - Differentiation of Plaster on New Addition:
The existing home currently has a cedar wood shingle siding. The proposed material for the rear addition siding is plaster. This material is not evident on any other part of the existing home and thus adding a differing material to the home. Per the Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne, the addition should be differentiated from the historic building, while still being compatible with its scale, massing, materials, and features. The plaster siding provides a level of differentiation from the existing cedar shingle siding. Given that plaster was a typical material used in the post-war minimal traditional architecture, the home is a non-contributing property, and the addition is at the rear of the residence, the plaster wall finish and shingle accents would be an acceptable exterior treatment.
Issue 2 - Visibility of Addition:
The addition is at the rear of the existing property and not readily visible from the street, especially with the 2-foot 3-inch inset. The addition is also subordinate in height and shares the same roof pitch as the existing dwelling.
Issue 3 - Infill of the Patio:
On the east side of the property, there is an existing covered patio proposed to be enclosed and converted to additional dining room space. The proposed infill for this area would have a sliding window matching the other window on the exterior. The infill will be flush with the existing wall and will not have an inset or line of differentiation. However, the roof form will not be impacted as the roof is existing.
Overall, staff believes that the project design is appropriate and complies with the Historic Preservation Design standards. Since the property is a non-contributor, the analysis is done with respect to the impact on the neighborhood. Overall, the FAR, scale, and massing of the addition would be compatible with the neighborhood.
9. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION
None.
10. PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice was provided to owners and tenants within 400 feet of the project on or before July 25, 2024, and the site was posted with a notice 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 a negligible addition (484 square feet) of less than 10,000 square feet to an existing single-family 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 building and is not 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. The new proposed roof height and walls will remain lower than the existing portion of the main residence to differentiate the existing structure and addition. Furthermore, the addition is subordinate and will have a 2-foot and 3-inch inset at the west elevation. The floor area ratio of the site will remain below the block average.
• 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 any historic materials, features, or spatial relationships that characterize the non-contributing building or any other structures on the block. Although the existing residence is not a contributor to the historic district, the addition is differentiated from the existing house with an inset at the west elevation and plaster siding. The addition is also subordinate in height with the same roof pitch. The infill of the patio will be flush with the existing home, but the existing roof already covers the infill addition area.
• 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.
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 August 7, 2024, 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. 5141-24, 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. If not utilized, project approval expires 24 months from the approval date. Extensions of time may be granted in accordance with OMC Section 17.08.060.
14. ATTACHMENTS
• Attachment 1 Vicinity Map
• Attachment 2 Letter of Explanation
• Attachment 3 DPR Form
• Attachment 4 Project Plans, FAR Analysis, and Photographs
• Attachment 5 Historical Aerial Appendix
• Attachment 6 Development Standards Table
• Attachment 7 Window and Door Spec Sheet
• Attachment 8 Digital Materials Board