Agenda packet — Orange City Council, November 15, 2022 (part 6 of 7)

*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Date: T R 1/4 of 1/4 of Sec B.M.
d. UTM: mE/ mN
e. Other Locational Data: Same APN as: 112 N. Cypress and 401 & 403 W. Chapman.

P1. Other Identifier:
*P2. Location:
c. Address: 107 Zip: 92866
(Give more than one for large and/or linear resources)
(Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boudnaries. Continues on Pg.3.) ; ; ;
Zone '
and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a location map as necessary.) - N ATCHISON City: Orange
*P3a. Description:
*P3b. Resource Attributes:
(List attributes and codes)
Reconnaissance
(Describe)
(Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") *Attachments: Continuation Sheet(s) Building, Structure, and Object Record (Name, affiliation, and address)
(View, date, accession #)
*P6. Date Constructed/ Age and Source:

D. Gest, P. LaValley, D.

Matsumoto
*P7. Owner and Address:
*P8: Recorded by:
*P10. Survey Type:
*P11. Report Citation:

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
*Resource Name or #: ATCHISON_N_107__APN_039-171-12
(Assigned by Recorder)
*P9. Date Recorded:

March, 2005
Primary #
HRI #
Date:

NRHP Status Code 6Z
Trinomial ORA
Other Listings:

Review Code: Reviewer:
*a. County: Orange
P5b. Description of Photo:

Unrestricted
3 *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site Element of District District Other (Isolates, etc.) Not for Publication
District Record
Photograph Record
Location Map
Artifact Record
Archaeological Record
NONE
Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Other (List):

Materials: Frame - Wood siding
ST
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
Historic Prehistoric Both

At this site and prior to this building, City directories listed the Park Hotel at 117 N. Atchison in 1925. As of 1930, the hotel had been demolished.
,#
2005
Orange County Assessor Records (2005). Chattel Architecture (2005) Historic Resources Survey.
6318 1222 102
B1. Historic Name: Schwab Chevrolet - Auto Wash
B3. Original Use: IND B4. Present Use: COM
*B5. Architectural Style: Industrial
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, atlerations, and date of alterations) Date of Construction:
*B9. Architect or Builder: Unknown
Period of Significance: Located in Old Towne
*B10. Significance: Property Type: Industrial
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity. Continues on Pg.4.) *B8. Related Features:
*B7. Moved? Date: Original Location:

Theme: Architecture Area: City of Orange
Structural Integrity:
(List attributes and codes)
*Date of Evaluation: September, 2005
B11. Additional Resource Attributes:
(This space reserved for official comments.)
*B14. Evaluator: Robert Chattel
B13. Remarks:

State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
*B12. References:
*NRHP Status Code 6Z
Primary #
HRI #
No Yes Unknown

Page 2 of 3 ends

(Assigned by Recorder)
Historic Prehistoric Both
B2. Common Name:

Applicable Criteria: N/A
Orange Daily News. City Directories (1925). Sanborn Maps (1922, 1950). Arial photo (1938). (Sketch Map with North arrow required.)
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required Information
Opportunities:

Status change since 1991 Survey: Not previously surveyed.

Site Integrity:
(Continues on Pg.3.)
6319 1223 103
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Description of Photo:

Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial ORA
Recorded by:

Date Recorded: March, 2005
P3a. Description (Continued from Pg.1):

DPR 523L (11/98) *Required Information
Continuation Update

Page 3 of 3 ends

B6. Construction History (Continued from Pg.2):

Lot Acre:

Principal Building Sqft:

Planning Zone: SP # of Stories: 1
Years Surveyed: 2005
General Plan: OTMIX-15
# of Units: 1
B13. Remarks (Continued from Pg.2):
1991
D. Gest, P. LaValley, D. Matsumoto
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
*Resource Name or #: ATCHISON_N_107__APN_039-171-12
(Assigned by Recorder)
Listed in National Register:
# of Buildings: 1

6320 1224 104
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

PRIMARY RECORD

Page 1 ends

*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Date: T R 1/4 of 1/4 of Sec B.M.
d. UTM: mE/ mN
e. Other Locational Data: Same APN as: 107 N. Atchison and 403 W. Chapman.

P1. Other Identifier: Same building as: 112 N. Cypress. *P2. Location:
c. Address: 401 Zip: 92866
(Give more than one for large and/or linear resources)
(Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boudnaries. Continues on Pg.3.) ; ; ;
Zone '
and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a location map as necessary.) - W CHAPMAN City: Orange
*P3a. Description:
*P3b. Resource Attributes:
(List attributes and codes)
Reconnaissance
(Describe)
(Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") *Attachments: Continuation Sheet(s) Building, Structure, and Object Record (Name, affiliation, and address)
(View, date, accession #)
*P6. Date Constructed/ Age and Source:

D. Gest, P. LaValley, D.

Matsumoto
*P7. Owner and Address:
*P8: Recorded by:
*P10. Survey Type:
*P11. Report Citation:

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
*Resource Name or #: CHAPMAN_W_401__APN_039-171-12
(Assigned by Recorder)
*P9. Date Recorded:

May, 2005
1920 c
Primary # 30-159847
HRI # 039213
Date:

NRHP Status Code 1D
Trinomial ORA
Other Listings:

Review Code: Reviewer:
(HP8)--Industrial building
*a. County: Orange
P5b. Description of Photo:

Materials: Masonry - Brick
AVE
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
Historic Prehistoric Both

Brick Commercial. As typical with commercial buildings of this era, the lower portion of the store front is devoted almost exclusively to showcase windows. The double door entry features wood doors with a single, plate glass window and transom above. Transom windows were located across all of the windows on the lower portion of the building, but signs have since been placed in these transoms. Horizontal banding distingui
,#
2005
Orange County Assessor Records (2005). Chattel Architecture (2005) Historic Resources Survey. AEGIS (1991) Historic Building Inventory Update. Heritage Orange County, Inc. (1982) Orange Historic Survey. 6321 1225 105
Style previously noted in 1991 Survey as: Commercial.

B1. Historic Name: Schwab Chevrolet - Auto Sales and Repair B3. Original Use: IND B4. Present Use: IND
*B5. Architectural Style: Industrial
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, atlerations, and date of alterations) Date of Construction: 1920 *B9. Architect or Builder: Unknown
Period of Significance: Old Towne: Early Settlement (c. 1870 - 1920) *B10. Significance: Property Type: Commercial
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity. Continues on Pg.4.) *B8. Related Features:
*B7. Moved? Date: Original Location:

Theme: Architecture Area: City of Orange
Structural Integrity: Good Condition - No apparent change to original structure. (List attributes and codes)
*Date of Evaluation: September, 2005
B11. Additional Resource Attributes:
(This space reserved for official comments.)
*B14. Evaluator: Robert Chattel
B13. Remarks:

State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
*B12. References:
*NRHP Status Code 1D
Part of Schwab Chevrolet, which encompased the north-side of the 400 block of W. Chapman, including: the auto sales building with repair facilities in rear (403, W. Chapman), the auto repair building (401 W. chapman), and the auto wash building (107 N. Atchison). Past owners/occupants: 1927-1928 - Schwab Chevrolet dealers (P.E. Schwab); 1929 - Sackett-Doty Co. autos; 1932 - H. Vernon Doty Chevrolet; 1940 - Mansur Motors; and 1949-1950 - Mansur Motors.

Primary # 30-159847
HRI # 039213
c
No Yes Unknown

Page 2 of 3 ends

(Assigned by Recorder)
Historic Prehistoric Both
B2. Common Name:

Applicable Criteria: AC
Orange Daily News.
(Sketch Map with North arrow required.)
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required Information
Appears to be a contributor to a district that appears eligible for local listing or designation: Railroad/Packing House NCA.

Opportunities:

Status change since 1991 Survey: None.

Site Integrity:
(Continues on Pg.3.)
6322 1226 106
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Description of Photo:

Primary # 30-159847
HRI # 039213
Trinomial ORA
Recorded by:

Date Recorded: May, 2005
P3a. Description (Continued from Pg.1):
shes the cornice. Since its construction, this single-story brick building has been used for commercial purposes.

DPR 523L (11/98) *Required Information
Continuation Update

Page 3 of 3 ends

B6. Construction History (Continued from Pg.2):

Lot Acre: 0.4436
Principal Building Sqft: 6193
Planning Zone: SP # of Stories: 1
Years Surveyed: 1982, 1991, 2005
General Plan: OTMIX-15
# of Units: 1
B13. Remarks (Continued from Pg.2):
1991
D. Gest, P. LaValley, D. Matsumoto
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
*Resource Name or #: CHAPMAN_W_401__APN_039-171-12
(Assigned by Recorder)
Listed in National Register: 1997
# of Buildings: 1

6323 1227 107
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

PRIMARY RECORD

Page 1 ends

*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Date: T R 1/4 of 1/4 of Sec B.M.
d. UTM: mE/ mN
e. Other Locational Data: Same APN as: 107 N. Atchison, 401 W. Chapman and 112 N. Cypress.

P1. Other Identifier:
*P2. Location:
c. Address: 403 Zip: 92866
(Give more than one for large and/or linear resources)
(Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boudnaries. Continues on Pg.3.) ; ; ;
Zone '
and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a location map as necessary.) - W CHAPMAN City: Orange
*P3a. Description:
*P3b. Resource Attributes:
(List attributes and codes)
Reconnaissance
(Describe)
(Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") *Attachments: Continuation Sheet(s) Building, Structure, and Object Record (Name, affiliation, and address)
(View, date, accession #)
*P6. Date Constructed/ Age and Source:

D. Gest, P. LaValley, D.

Matsumoto
*P7. Owner and Address:
*P8: Recorded by:
*P10. Survey Type:
*P11. Report Citation:

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
*Resource Name or #: CHAPMAN_W_403__APN_039-171-12
(Assigned by Recorder)
*P9. Date Recorded:

May, 2005
Primary #
HRI #
Date:

NRHP Status Code 6Z
Trinomial ORA
Other Listings:

Review Code: Reviewer:
(HP6)--Commercial building
*a. County: Orange
P5b. Description of Photo:

Materials: Frame - Stucco or plaster & metal siding
AVE
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
Historic Prehistoric Both

Small industrial building attached to the rear of the 1920's brick building at 401 W. Chapman Ave.. ,#
2011
Orange County Assessor Records (2005). Chattel Architecture (2005) Historic Resources Survey. AEGIS (1991) Historic Building Inventory Update.
6324 1228 108
B1. Historic Name: Unknown
B3. Original Use: COM B4. Present Use: COM
*B5. Architectural Style: Contemporary
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, atlerations, and date of alterations) Date of Construction:
*B9. Architect or Builder: Unknown
Period of Significance: Located in Old Towne
*B10. Significance: Property Type: Commercial
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity. Continues on Pg.4.) *B8. Related Features:
*B7. Moved? Date: Original Location:

Theme: Architecture Area: City of Orange
Structural Integrity: Good Condition - Low level of alteration. (List attributes and codes)
*Date of Evaluation: September, 2005
B11. Additional Resource Attributes:
(This space reserved for official comments.)
*B14. Evaluator: Robert Chattel
B13. Remarks:

State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
*B12. References:
*NRHP Status Code 6Z
Primary #
HRI #
No Yes Unknown

Page 2 of 3 ends

(Assigned by Recorder)
Historic Prehistoric Both
B2. Common Name:

Applicable Criteria: N/A
Orange Daily News.
(Sketch Map with North arrow required.)
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required Information
Appears to be a non-contributor to a district that appears eligible for local listing or designation: Railroad/Packing House NCA.

Opportunities:

Status change since 1991 Survey: None.

Site Integrity:
(Continues on Pg.3.)
6325 1229 109
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Description of Photo:

Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial ORA
Recorded by:

Date Recorded: May, 2005
P3a. Description (Continued from Pg.1):

DPR 523L (11/98) *Required Information
Continuation Update

Page 3 of 3 ends

B6. Construction History (Continued from Pg.2):

Lot Acre:

Principal Building Sqft:

Planning Zone: SP # of Stories: 1
Years Surveyed: 1991, 2005
General Plan: OTMIX-15
# of Units: 1
B13. Remarks (Continued from Pg.2):
1991
D. Gest, P. LaValley, D. Matsumoto
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
*Resource Name or #: CHAPMAN_W_403__APN_039-171-12
(Assigned by Recorder)
Listed in National Register:
# of Buildings: 1

6326 1230 110
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

PRIMARY RECORD

Page 1 ends

*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Date: T R 1/4 of 1/4 of Sec B.M.
d. UTM: mE/ mN
e. Other Locational Data: Same APN as: 107 N. Atchison and 403 W. Chapman.

P1. Other Identifier: Same building as: 401 W. Chapman. *P2. Location:
c. Address: 112 Zip: 92866
(Give more than one for large and/or linear resources)
(Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boudnaries. Continues on Pg.3.) ; ; ;
Zone '
and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a location map as necessary.) - N CYPRESS City: Orange
*P3a. Description:
*P3b. Resource Attributes:
(List attributes and codes)
Reconnaissance
(Describe)
(Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") *Attachments: Continuation Sheet(s) Building, Structure, and Object Record (Name, affiliation, and address)
(View, date, accession #)
*P6. Date Constructed/ Age and Source:

D. Gest, P. LaValley, D.

Matsumoto
*P7. Owner and Address:
*P8: Recorded by:
*P10. Survey Type:
*P11. Report Citation:

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
*Resource Name or #: CYPRESS_N_112__APN_039-171-12
(Assigned by Recorder)
*P9. Date Recorded:

May, 2005
1920 c
Primary # 30-159847
HRI # 039213
Date:

NRHP Status Code 1D
Trinomial ORA
Other Listings:

Review Code: Reviewer:
(HP8)--Industrial building
*a. County: Orange
P5b. Description of Photo:

Materials: Masonry - Brick
ST
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
Historic Prehistoric Both

Small industrial building attached to the rear of the 1920's brick building at 401 W. Chapman Ave. ,#
2005
Orange County Assessor Records (2005). Chattel Architecture (2005) Historic Resources Survey. AEGIS (1991) Historic Building Inventory Update. Heritage Orange County, Inc. (1982) Orange Historic Survey. 6327 1231 111
Style previously noted in 1991 Survey as: Commercial.

B1. Historic Name: Schwab Chevrolet - Auto Sales and Repair B3. Original Use: IND B4. Present Use: IND
*B5. Architectural Style: Industrial
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, atlerations, and date of alterations) Date of Construction: 1920 *B9. Architect or Builder: Unknown
Period of Significance: Old Towne: Early Settlement (c. 1870 - 1920) *B10. Significance: Property Type: Industrial
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity. Continues on Pg.4.) *B8. Related Features:
*B7. Moved? Date: Original Location:

State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
*B12. References:
*NRHP Status Code 1D
Primary # 30-159847
HRI # 039213
c
No Yes Unknown

Page 2 of 3 ends

(Assigned by Recorder)
Historic Prehistoric Both
B2. Common Name:

Opportunities:

Status change since 1991 Survey: None.

Site Integrity:
(Continues on Pg.3.)
6328 1232 112
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Description of Photo:

Primary # 30-159847
HRI # 039213
Trinomial ORA
Recorded by:

Date Recorded: May, 2005
P3a. Description (Continued from Pg.1):

DPR 523L (11/98) *Required Information
Continuation Update

Page 3 of 3 ends

B6. Construction History (Continued from Pg.2):

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
*Resource Name or #: CYPRESS_N_112__APN_039-171-12
(Assigned by Recorder)
Listed in National Register: 1997
# of Buildings: 1

6329 1233 113
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

PRIMARY RECORD

Page 1 ends

*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Date: T R 1/4 of 1/4 of Sec B.M.
d. UTM: mE/ mN
e. Other Locational Data: Same APN as a shared storage yard at: 136 N. Cypress.

P1. Other Identifier: See B13 Remarks
*P2. Location:
c. Address: 135 Zip: 92866
(Give more than one for large and/or linear resources)
(Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boudnaries. Continues on Pg.3.) ; ; ;
Zone '
and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a location map as necessary.) - N ATCHISON City: Orange
*P3a. Description:
*P3b. Resource Attributes:
(List attributes and codes)
Reconnaissance
(Describe)
(Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") *Attachments: Continuation Sheet(s) Building, Structure, and Object Record (Name, affiliation, and address)
(View, date, accession #)
*P6. Date Constructed/ Age and Source:

D. Gest, P. LaValley, D.

Matsumoto
*P7. Owner and Address:
*P8: Recorded by:
*P10. Survey Type:
*P11. Report Citation:

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
*Resource Name or #: ATCHISON_N_135__APN_039-171-03
(Assigned by Recorder)
*P9. Date Recorded:

March, 2005
1926 c
Primary #
HRI #
Date:

NRHP Status Code 3D
Trinomial ORA
Other Listings:

Review Code: Reviewer:
(HP9)--Public utility transformer building
*a. County: Orange
P5b. Description of Photo:

Unrestricted

4.1 *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site Element of District District Other (Isolates, etc.) Not for Publication
District Record
Photograph Record
Location Map
Artifact Record
Archaeological Record
NONE
Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Other (List):

Materials: Frame - Stucco or plaster
ST
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
Historic Prehistoric Both

The very nice Mission style building has been hidden from the street by an addition with a corrugated metal wall facing the street. The original building is a rectangle with a Mission style parapet on the east and west ends. The walls are a heavy texture concrete and there is a smooth concrete band along the top of the parapet. In the west wall, which is now an interior wall, there is a wide segmental arch opening with a
,#
2005
Orange County Assessor Records (2005). Chattel Architecture (2005) Historic Resources Survey. AEGIS (1991) Historic Building Inventory Update. Heritage Orange County, Inc. (1982) Orange Historic Survey. *** Property status pending review with the National Register! *** 6330 1234 114
Previously known in 1991 Survey as: 109 N. Atchison. According to 1950 Sanborn Maps, 136 N. Cypress appears to have been a former building, which served as a machine shop, on the same lot.

B1. Historic Name: Schwab Chevrolet - Auto Repair Shop
B3. Original Use: COM B4. Present Use: COM
*B5. Architectural Style: Mission Commercial
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, atlerations, and date of alterations) Date of Construction: 1926 *B9. Architect or Builder: Unknown
Period of Significance: Old Towne: Agriculture & Industry (c. 1880 - 1950) *B10. Significance: Property Type: Transformer station
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity. Continues on Pg.4.) *B8. Related Features:
*B7. Moved? Date: Original Location:

Theme: Architecture Area: City of Orange
Structural Integrity: Fair Condition - A collection of minor, inappropriate changes to original structure. (List attributes and codes)
*Date of Evaluation: September, 2005
B11. Additional Resource Attributes:
(This space reserved for official comments.)
*B14. Evaluator: Robert Chattel
B13. Remarks:

State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
*B12. References:
*NRHP Status Code 3D
Front façade and north wall have been covered with metal corrugated additions between 1922 and 1950.

Building may be restored if additions removed.

The old Mission style building originally served as a transformer station (1922 Sanborn Maps), yet was quickly converted to a commercial use. The addition and remodel likely occurred during the use change. City Directories indicate it was the auto repair shop for the Schwab Chevrolet dealership in 1927-28, and continued to service the new dealers, Sackett-Doty Company in 1929, and Cruzen and Smith, and Mansur Motors in 1940. Past owners/occupants: (401-403 W. Chapman) 1927-1928 - Schwab Chevrolet dealers (P.E. Schwab); 1929 - Sackett-Doty Co. autos; 1930 - vacant; 1932 - H. Vernon Doty chevrolet; 1940 - Mansur Motors (401 W. Chapman and Cruzen and Smith (402 W. Chapman); 1949-1950 - Mansur Motors (401 W. Chapman) and Chapman Guaranty Chevrolet (402 W. Chapman); 1991 - All City Import car dealer (403 W. Chapman). This s
Primary #
HRI #
c
No Yes Unknown

Page 2 of 4 ends

(Assigned by Recorder)
Historic Prehistoric Both
B2. Common Name:

Applicable Criteria: AC
Orange Daily News. City Directories, L.A. County (1883-1884) and City of Orange Section (1901, 1907 - of the age 15 years and over). Orange Householder's Guide (1919, 1922-1930, 1932, 1940, 1949-1950). City Directory by Streets and the Classified Business (1919, 1922-1930, 1932). Specific Name sin the Street Directory (1940). Sanbron Maps (1909, 1922, 1950, 1954). Plat Maps (1915-1920). (Sketch Map with North arrow required.)
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required Information
Opportunities:

Status change since 1991 Survey: None.

Site Integrity: Accessory structure or major addition that is appropriate to the site. (Continues on Pg.3.)
*** Property status pending review with the National Register! *** 6331 1235 115
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Description of Photo:

Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial ORA
Recorded by:

Date Recorded: March, 2005
P3a. Description (Continued from Pg.1):
trim band and keystone. There are two large wood sash, double-hung windows set in a segmental arch opening. These also have a keystone at the top. The same motif is repeated on the east wall in one wide door and single window. Another corrugated addition hides the north wall. The original building appears to be intact and could be restored with the removal of the additions.

DPR 523L (11/98) *Required Information
Continuation Update

Page 3 ends

B6. Construction History (Continued from Pg.2):

Lot Acre:

Principal Building Sqft: 1800
Planning Zone: SP # of Stories: 1
Years Surveyed: 1982, 1991, 2005
General Plan: OTMIX-15
# of Units: 1
B13. Remarks (Continued from Pg.2):
1991
D. Gest, P. LaValley, D. Matsumoto
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
*Resource Name or #: ATCHISON_N_135__APN_039-171-03
(Assigned by Recorder)
Listed in National Register: --
# of Buildings: 1
*** Property status pending review with the National Register! *** 6332 1236 116
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial ORA
Recorded by:

Date Recorded: March, 2005
B10. Significance (Continued from Pg.2):
tructure is a good example of the architectural style.

DPR 523L (11/98) *Required Information
Update

Page 4 of 4 ends

D. Gest, P. LaValley, D. Matsumoto
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
*Resource Name or #: ATCHISON_N_135__APN_039-171-03
(Assigned by Recorder)
Continuation
*** Property status pending review with the National Register! *** 6333 1237 117
2012 National Register Amendment:

Resource located within Old Towne Orange National Register Historic District boundaries.

Recommend District amendment to complete district inventory.

Detail:

State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial ORA
Recorded by:

Date Recorded: March, 2005
DPR 523L (11/98) *Required Information
Update

Page 4 ends

D. Gest, P. LaValley, D. Matsumoto
Chattel Architecture
13417 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
*Resource Name or #: ATCHISON_N_135__APN_039-171-03
(Assigned by Recorder)
Continuation
Current Status (2011):

Recommended Action: Amend contributor to NR District
Recommended Status (2012): 1D
(Based upon 2010 Historic Resources Inventory Update)
Not previously listed
Purpose of Amendment:
*** Property status pending review with the National Register! *** 6334 1238 118
Design Review Committee Minutes - Draft September 8, 2022

3.2. A Resolution of Denial for Design Review No. 5018-20, Kornerstone Cemetery, 290 S. Yorba Street and 2205 E. Palmyra Avenue
Committee Member Fox recused from Item 3.2. Committee Member Skorpanich abstained due to her absence from the July 21, 2022, meeting when deliberation took place.

ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. DRC 01-22 entitled:

A Recommendation of the City of Orange Design Review Committee to the Planning Commission recommending denial of Design Review No. 5018-20, a proposal to construct a 3,339-gravesite
cemetery, 5,138 square foot building, 51-stall parking lot, and 800 square foot storage shed on a 5.99-acre property at 290 S. Yorba Street and 2205 E. Palmyra Avenue.

3.3. Approval of meeting minutes of the Design Review Committee of the City of Orange for the August 17, 2022, Regular Meeting.

Committee Member Fox abstained from Item 3.3 due to her absence from the meeting.

ACTION: Approved minutes as presented.

Approval of the Consent Calendar
Item 3.1 was removed for separate consideration. Committee Member Fox recused from Item 3.2 and abstained from Item 3.3. Committee Member Skorpanich abstained from Item 3.2.

A motion was made by Vice Chair McDermott, seconded by Chair Imboden, to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended. The motion carried by the following vote:

Ayes: McDermott, Skorpanich, and Imboden
Noes: None

Absent: Farfan
Recused: Fox

4. CONTINUED ITEMS

4.1. Design Review No.5011-20, Old Towne Gateway, 401 W. Chapman Avenue Public Speakers:

The following spoke in opposition to the project:

Tony Trabucco, Tim McCormack, and James Kushon.

The following spoke on behalf of the project:

Leason Pomeroy, Architect; Casey Tibbett, LSA; and Al Ricci, Applicant.

The Committee discussed the following:
 Door placement and setbacks
 Materials in relation to Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan and finishes for new infill
buildings and canopy
 Height and position of proposed canopy in relation to historic building  Roll up doors on Cypress Street
 Historic imbedded bollards at roll-up on Cypress Street frontage

Page 2 of 4 ends

Design Review Committee Minutes - Draft September 8, 2022  Placement and screening of new mechanical equipment
 Paving material
 Landscape screening of parking and loading zone
 Position of paseo on the site plan
 Design of paseo in relation to the City’s Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
 The City’s historic resource inventory forms
 Lack of specific information about the rehabilitation treatment for the historic buildings
 The need for conditions regarding penetrations to bricks  Period of Significance for National Register District and CEQA implications of building demolition
 Documentation supporting findings of the Cultural Resource Assessment  The General Plan, Cultural Resources, and Historic Preservation Elements  Railroad Packing House Corridor Neighborhood Character District discussion speaks to the importance of historic industrial sheds
 Errors in the City’s DPR form for 112 N. Cypress Street Committee Member Skorpanich made a motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial. Senior Assistant City Attorney Binning reviewed the parameters for preparing resolutions of denial. Motion failed due to lack of a second.

A motion was made by Committee Member Fox, seconded by Committee Member Skorpanich, to deny recommendation to the Planning Commission of Design Review No. 5011-20 Old Town Gateway based on the following reasons:
• The canopy proposed has a size, scale, form, and orientation not compatible with the context, and in competition with the historic buildings. • The parking area lacks landscaping high enough to screen as required, and the loading zone lacks screening altogether.
• There is a lack of detail on the drawings for the restoration and/or rehabilitation of the historic buildings.
• The drawings submitted are not in sufficient detail to confirm compliance with the regulations, most notably the Secretary of the Interior Standards. • The project does not adequately incorporate the recommendations included in the Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study as it relates to the paseo that is proposed. • A majority consensus could not be achieved to find the project a) consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards and b) the conditions required for the CEQA exemptions being used based on the Cultural Resources Assessment and the lack of conformance with the Depot Specific Plan.

Page 3 of 4 ends

6336 1240
Design Review Committee Minutes - Draft September 8, 2022 The motion carried by the following vote:

Ayes: McDermott, Fox, Skorpanich, and Imboden
Noes: None

Absent: Farfan

5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:39 p.m.

The next Regular Design Review Committee meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 5:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber. _________________________________
Anna Pehoushek
Assistant Community Development Director

Page 4 of 4 ends

6337 1241
December 2021

CULTURAL RESOURCES A SSESSMENT

OLD TOWNE GATEWAY PROJECT
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBERS 039-171-12 AND 039-171-03

CITY OF ORANGE

ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
1242
December 2021

CULTURAL RESOURCES A SSESSMENT

OLD TOWNE GATEWAY PROJECT
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBERS 039-171-12 AND 039-171-03

CITY OF ORANGE

ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:

Leason F. Pomeroy, FAIA
LP3 Architecture, Inc.
158 North Glassell Street
Orange, California 92886
Prepared by:

Casey Tibbet, M.A. and Riordan Goodwin, R.A.

LSA Associates, Inc.
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200
Riverside, California 92507
(951) 781-9310
LSA Project No. LPR1702
National Archaeological Data Base Information:

Type of Study: Records Search, Survey, Architectural Evaluation USGS Quadrangle: Orange, California
Resources Evaluated: 401 West Chapman Avenue (30-159847) Acreage: ~0.70
1243

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) i

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
LSA conducted a cultural resources assessment for the Old Towne Gateway Project located at the northwest corner of West Chapman Avenue and North Cypress Street (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APNs] 039-171-12 and 039-171-03) in the City and County of Orange, California. The subject property is approximately 0.70 acre and is within the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan and the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It is developed with three historic-period (50 years of age or older) buildings: a former car dealership building with large additions (401 West Chapman Avenue), a garage (107 North Atchison Street), and a former transformer house with a large addition (135 North Atchison Street).

The proposed project includes: demolition of the building at 107 North Atchison Street and the additions to the buildings at 401 West Chapman Avenue and 135 North Atchison Street; rehabilitation of the buildings at 401 West Chapman Avenue and 135 North Atchison Street; and construction of two one-story commercial buildings, a one-story accessory building, an east/west paseo, and three trash enclosures. The City of Orange (City) as Lead Agency for the project required this study as part of the environmental review process to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The purpose of the study is to provide the City with the necessary information and analysis to determine, as mandated by CEQA, whether the proposed project would cause substantial adverse changes to any “historical resources” that may exist in or around the project area. In order to identify and evaluate such resources, LSA conducted a historical/archaeological resources records search, pursued historical background research, carried out intensive-level field surveys, and completed impacts analyses.

As a result of these efforts, no archaeological resources were identified within or adjacent to the project area. It was determined that the building at 107 North Atchison Street does not meet the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) or the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) either individually or as a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It is not a “historical resource” as defined by CEQA and its demolition will not result in any substantial adverse changes to the Historic District.

The former car dealership building at 401 West Chapman Avenue and the former transformer house at 135 North Atchison Street were evaluated as contributors to the Old Towne Orange Historic District and are, therefore, “historical resources” as defined by CEQA. The proposed rehabilitations of these buildings, as well as the proposed new construction, were analyzed using the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (SOIS), the Historic Preservation Design Standards (HPDS), and the Santa Fe Deport Specific Plan (Specific Plan). In addition, the Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study (Pedestrian Study) was considered. As a result of these analyses, it was determined that the proposed project is in compliance with the SOIS and the HPDS and meets the objectives of the Specific Plan and Pedestrian Study. However, to provide additional detail and clarity, LSA recommends that the City consider applying the following conditions:

Prior to issuance of building permits:

1. The exterior colors for the Building 1 addition and Buildings 2, 3, 4, and 5 are subject to approval by City staff.
1244

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) ii

2. To ensure that the alterations to the bay doors are completed in a manner that is compatible with the historic character of Building 1 and the District, it is recommended that they be subject to review and approval by City staff. It is further recommended that both openings have doors/windows that are similar in appearance, design, and materials in order to maintain the current symmetry.

3. Because only the south and east elevations were visible during the field survey, it is recommended that when the Building 4 addition is removed, the openings be verified and, if necessary, the project plans be revised to reflect all of the openings accurately.

In addition, the following standard regulatory compliance measures regarding buried cultural resources are required in conformance with Section 15064.5(e) of the CEQA Guidelines, PRC Section 5097.98, and State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. • If buried cultural materials are encountered during earthmoving operations associated with the project, all work in that area should be halted or diverted until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the finds.
• In the event human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or their authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD will have the opportunity to offer recommendations for the disposition of the remains. 1245

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... i TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................. iii APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... iv FIGURES........................................................................................................................................... iv TABLES.............................................................................................................................................. v INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1 SETTING .................................................................................................................................................. 4 CURRENT NATURAL SETTING........................................................................................................... 4 Hydrology .................................................................................................................................. 4 Biology ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Geology ...................................................................................................................................... 4 CULTURAL SETTING.......................................................................................................................... 4 Prehistory .................................................................................................................................. 4 Ethnography .............................................................................................................................. 5 History ....................................................................................................................................... 6 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................. 10 RECORDS SEARCH .......................................................................................................................... 10 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH ..................................................................................................................... 10 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD SURVEY .................................................................................................. 10 ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ............................................................................................................... 10 RESULTS................................................................................................................................................ 11 RECORDS SEARCH .......................................................................................................................... 11 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH ..................................................................................................................... 11 Project Area History ................................................................................................................ 12 People and Businesses ............................................................................................................ 14 Automotive Dealerships.......................................................................................................... 19 Old Towne Orange Historic District......................................................................................... 21 Historic Preservation Design Standards.................................................................................. 22 Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan ................................................................................................... 22 Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study.............................................................................. 23 Previous Documentation/Evaluations..................................................................................... 23 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD SURVEY .................................................................................................. 25 ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ............................................................................................................... 25 401 West Chapman Avenue .................................................................................................... 25 1246

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) iv 107 North Atchison Street....................................................................................................... 30 135 North Atchison Street....................................................................................................... 31 SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION................................................................................................................. 34 DEFINITIONS................................................................................................................................... 34 National Register of Historic Places (36 CFR Part 60.4)........................................................... 34 California Register of Historical Resources (14 CCR 15064.5)................................................. 35 City of Orange.......................................................................................................................... 36 EVALUATION .................................................................................................................................. 36 IMPACTS ASSESSMENT......................................................................................................................... 41 CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES ................................................................................................. 41 PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................... 42 PROJECT ANALYSIS......................................................................................................................... 45 Standards for Rehabilitation (36 CFR Part 68.3.b) .................................................................. 45 Historic Preservation Design Standards.................................................................................. 51 Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan ................................................................................................... 57 Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study.............................................................................. 58 PROJECT ANALYSIS SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 58 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 59 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 61

APPENDICES
A: DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION (DPR) 523 FORMS
B: PROJECT PLANS

FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional and Project Location................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2: Project Location....................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3: 1922 Sanborn Map ................................................................................................................ 13 Figure 4: 1947 Aerial Photograph (Orange County Archives 2017) ..................................................... 15 Figure 5: 1950 Sanborn Map ................................................................................................................ 16 Figure 6: Dates of Construction Site Estimated Dates of Construction................................................ 17 Figure 7: 118 West Chapman Avenue (Google December 2020)......................................................... 21 Figure 8: 149 North Glassell Street (Google May 2019)....................................................................... 21 Figure 9: 402–424 West Chapman Avenue (Google December 2020)................................................. 21 Figure 10: 240 West Chapman Avenue (Google December 2020)....................................................... 21 Figure 11: 401 West Chapman Avenue, façade/south elevation. View to the north (11/20/18).................................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 12: 401 West Chapman Avenue, façade and east elevation. View to the northwest (11/20/18).................................................................................................................................... 26 1247

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) v Figure 13: 401 West Chapman Avenue, east elevation detail. View to the west showing filled in windows (11/20/18). ............................................................................................................... 27 Figure 14: 401 West Chapman Avenue, east elevation, including circa 1940 addition. View to the southwest (11/20/18)............................................................................................................ 27 Figure 15: 401 West Chapman Avenue, rear (north) elevation. View to the south showing the circa 1940 addition (11/20/18).............................................................................................. 27 Figure 16: 401 West Chapman Avenue, west elevation and partial north elevation. View to the east (11/20/18)...................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 17: 403 West Chapman Avenue, north elevation. View to the southwest (11/20/18). ........... 28 Figure 18: 403 West Chapman Avenue, north and west elevations. View to the southeast (11/20/18).................................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 19: 403 West Chapman Avenue, south elevation. View to the northwest showing alterations (windows and doors) to this addition (10/31/17)..................................................... 29 Figure 20: 401–403 West Chapman Avenue, west and south elevations. View to the east (11/20/18).................................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 21: 401 West Chapman Avenue, portion of west elevation. View to the southeast (11/20/18).................................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 22: 401–403 West Chapman Avenue, overview of west and south elevations. View to the northeast (11/20/18)............................................................................................................. 30 Figure 23: 107 North Atchison Street, west elevation. View to the east (11/20/18). ......................... 31 Figure 24: 107 North Atchison Street, south and east elevations. View to the northwest (11/20/18).................................................................................................................................... 31 Figure 25: 135 North Atchison Street, façade. View to the east (11/20/18). ...................................... 32 Figure 26: 135 North Atchison Street, east and north elevations. View to the southwest (11/20/18).................................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 27: 135 North Atchison Street, door in east elevation (11/20/18). .......................................... 33 Figure 28: 135 North Atchison Street, window in north elevation (11/20/18).................................... 33 TABLES
Table A: Documented Resources Mapped at the SCCIC ...................................................................... 11 Table B: Extant Buildings’ Dates of Construction ................................................................................. 18 1248

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 1

INTRODUCTION
LSA conducted a cultural resources assessment for the Old Towne Gateway Project, which involves approximately 0.70 acre located at the northwest corner of West Chapman Avenue and North Cypress Street (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APNs] 039-171-12 and 039-171-03) in the City and County of Orange, California (Figures 1 and 2). The Old Towne Gateway Project area, which is within the Old Towne Orange Historic District and the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan, is developed with three historicperiod (50 years of age or older) buildings: a former car dealership building with large additions (401 West Chapman Avenue), a garage (107 North Atchison Street), and a former transformer house with a large addition (135 North Atchison Street). There is currently a retail store operating out of the former dealership building and the other buildings are being used for storage of miscellaneous items such as cars, car parts, wood, metal barrels, and furniture.

The project proposes to remove the garage (107 North Atchison Street), as well as the additions to the other buildings (401 West Chapman Avenue and 135 North Atchison Street) and rehabilitate the original structures for use as restaurants. In addition, the construction of two one-story commercial buildings, a one-story accessory building, an east/west paseo, and three trash enclosures is proposed.

The City of Orange (City), as Lead Agency for the project, required this study as part of the environmental review process to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As part of that process, the buildings will be evaluated for historical significance under National Register of Historic Properties (National Register) and California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) criteria. In addition, the proposed project will be analyzed for compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (SOIS) and the City of Orange Historic Preservation Design Standards (HPDS), as well as the objectives of the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan (Specific Plan) and the Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study (Pedestrian Study). 1249
ÄÆ22
ÄÆ57

GLASSELL STREET

MAIN STREET
§¨¦5

LA VETA AVENUE

CHAPMAN AVENUE

CAMBRIDGE STREET
SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quad - Orange & Anaheim (1981); ESRI Streetmap, 2013.

I:\LPR1702\Reports\Cultural\fig1_RegLoc_05-11-2018.mxd (11/26/2018) FIGURE 1
Old Towne Gateway Project
Cultural Resources Assessment
Regional and Project Location
0 1000 2000
FEET
S
!!
N
Project Location
San Bernardino
County
Orange
County
Ã142
Ã73
Ã261
Ã39
Ã133
Ã19 Ã72
Ã90
Ã60
Ã1
Ã71
Ã55
Ã22
Ã57
Ã91
Ã241
Project Location
§¨¦105
§¨¦605
§¨¦5
§¨¦405
§¨¦5
Project Vicinity
1250

CHAPMAN AVENUE

ATCHISON STREET

CYPRESS STREET
SOURCE: ESRI Streetmap, 2013; Google Earth, 2018.

I:\LPR1702\Reports\Cultural\fig2_ProjectAreas_05-11-2018.mxd (11/26/2018) FIGURE 2
Old Towne Gateway Project
Cultural Resources Assessment
Project Area
0 50 100
FEET
LEGEND
Project Site
1251

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 4

SETTING

CURRENT NATURAL SETTING
The project area is within an urban context with mixed-use buildings and supporting infrastructure.

Hydrology
The project region is characterized by a temperate climate, with dry, hot summers and moderate winters. Rainfall ranges from 12 to 16 inches annually (Beck and Haase 1974). Precipitation usually occurs in the form of winter rain, with warm monsoonal showers in summer. The nearest natural source of water is the Santiago Creek (approximately 0.8 mile south), which drains to the west.

Biology
At an elevation of approximately 190 feet above mean sea level (amsl), the project is within the Lower Sonoran Life Zone of California (Schoenherr 1992), which ranges from below sea level to 3,500 feet amsl. Natural vegetation has been removed from the project by development and the only pioneer species noted on the property were xeric grasses. Landscaping vegetation includes oak, sycamore, and fan palm trees as well as various shrubs. Extensive fauna are known locally, including many endemic species of reptiles, birds, and insects.

Geology
The project area is located at the northern end of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province, a 900- mile-long northwest-southeast trending structural block that extends from the Transverse Ranges to the tip of Baja California and includes the Los Angeles Basin (California Geological Survey 2002; Norris and Webb 1976). The province is approximately 225 miles wide, extending from the Colorado Desert in the east, across the continental shelf to the Southern Channel Islands (Santa Barbara, San Nicolas, Santa Catalina, and San Clemente) in the west (Sharp 1976). This region is characterized by a series of mountain ranges separated by northwest-trending valleys subparallel to faults branching from the San Andreas Fault. The geology of this province is similar to that of the Sierra Nevada, with granitic rock intruding into the older metamorphic rocks.

CULTURAL SETTING
Prehistory
Chronologies of prehistoric cultural change in Southern California area have been attempted numerous times, and several are reviewed in Moratto (2004). No single description is universally accepted as the various chronologies are based primarily on material developments identified by researchers familiar with sites in a particular region and variation exists essentially due to the differences in those items found at the sites. Small differences occur over time and space, which combine to form patterns that are variously interpreted.

Currently, two primary regional culture chronology syntheses are commonly referenced in the archaeological literature. The first, Wallace (1955), describes four cultural horizons or time periods:

Horizon I – Early Man (9000–6000 BC), Horizon II – Milling Stone Assemblages (6000–3000 BC), 1252

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 5 Horizon III – Intermediate Cultures (3000 BC–AD 500), and Horizon IV – Late Prehistoric Cultures (AD 500–historic contact). This chronology was refined (Wallace 1978) using absolute chronological dates obtained after 1955.

The second cultural chronology (Warren 1968) is based broadly on Southern California prehistoric cultures and was also revised (Warren 1984; Warren and Crabtree 1986). Warren’s (1984) chronology includes five periods in prehistory: Lake Mojave (7000–5000 BC), Pinto (5000–2000 BC), Gypsum (2000 BC–AD 500), Saratoga Springs (AD 500–1200), and Protohistoric (AD 1200–historic contact).

Changes in settlement pattern and subsistence focus are viewed as cultural adaptations to a changing environment, which begins with gradual environmental warming in the late Pleistocene, continues with the desiccation of the desert lakes, followed by a brief return to pluvial conditions, and concludes with a general warming and drying trend, with periodic reversals that continue to the present (Warren and Crabtree 1986).

Ethnography
The project area is near the intersection of the traditional cultural territories the Gabrielino (Kroeber 1976; Heizer 1978). The first written accounts of these southern California tribes are attributed to the mission fathers and later documentation was by others indicated below.

Gabrielino
The territory of the Gabrielino included portions of Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernardino Counties during ethnohistoric times, and also extended inland into northwestern Riverside County (Kroeber 1976; Heizer 1968). It encompassed an extremely diverse environment that included coastal beaches, lagoons and marshes, inland river valleys, foothills, and mountains (Bean and Shipek 1978).

The Gabrielino caught and collected seasonally available food resources, and led a semi-sedentary lifestyle, living in permanent communities along inland watercourses and coastal estuaries.

Individuals from these villages took advantage of the varied resources available. Seasonally, as foods became available, native groups moved to temporary camps to collect plant foods such as acorns, buckwheat, chía, berries, and fruits, and to conduct communal rabbit and deer hunts. They also established seasonal camps along the coast and near bays and estuaries to gather shellfish and hunt waterfowl (Hudson 1971).

The Gabrielino lived in small communities, which were the focus of family life. Patrilineally linked, extended families occupied each village (Kroeber 1976; Bean and Smith 1978). Both clans and villages were apparently exogamous, marrying individuals from outside the clan or village (Heizer 1968).

Gabrielino villages were politically independent and were administered by a chief, who inherited his position from his father. Shamans guided religious and medical activities, while group hunting or fishing was supervised by individual male specialists (Bean and Smith 1978).

The Gabrielino were described by Johnston (1962), Blackburn (1962–1963), Hudson (1971), and others.
1253

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 6 History
The history and development of Orange is well documented and several good summaries of its history have been prepared and are readily available. The following narrative contains consolidated sections of a history authored by notable local/regional historian Phil Brigandi for the Orange Public Library (2011). To read it in its entirety and with accompanying photographs, visit https://www.cityoforange.org/937/Old-Towne.

In the 1860s, the vast Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana had been broken up, opening the way for the founding of several new communities. Los Angeles attorneys Alfred Beck Chapman and Andrew Glassell acquired about 9,400 acres of the old Mexican rancho. In 1870 they had several thousand acres near the northern end of the rancho subdivided into large parcels (40, 80, and 160 acres) and placed them on the market. Captain Glassell, Andrew’s brother, served as sales agent.

Downtown Orange began in the center of the Plaza [three blocks east of the project area]. In the summer of 1871, Captain William T. Glassell drove a survey stake at the common corners of sections 29, 30, 31, and 32, and laid out a townsite originally known as Richland. In the center, where the two main streets crossed, eight lots were set aside to create a Plaza Square.

When the town of Richland was laid out a year later, several factors determined its location.

The area was open and generally level, sloping gradually down towards the confluence of Santiago Creek and the Santa Ana River. The stage road from Los Angeles to San Diego passed not too far west of the townsite. But most importantly, it could be irrigated from the Santa Ana River. In order to develop this site, Chapman and Glassell had to buy another large parcel adjoining their lands. In 1871 an irrigation ditch was dug from the river following the natural contour down to the townsite. (Canal Street, behind The Village of Orange, still marks part of its curving path.) A reservoir was created at the northeast corner of Chapman and Shaffer [seven blocks east of the project area], and iron pipe laid under the street down to the Plaza.

The original Richland townsite was made up of eight city blocks, from Grape Street (now Grand) on the east, to Lemon Street on the west [one block east of the project area]; and from Walnut Avenue (now Maple) on the north to Almond Avenue on the south. Surrounding the townsite were ten-acre plots known as the Richland Farm Lots. The townsite and farm lots covered one square mile.

When the community applied for a post office in 1873, they discovered that there was already a town of Richland in Northern California, so the community was renamed Orange. Local legend says the new name was chosen in a poker game, but in fact, it was chosen for its promotional value. Oranges, and other semi-tropical crops, were becoming identified with Southern California, and there was already talk of forming a separate “Orange County.” What’s more, the Glassell family had once lived in Orange County, Virginia, on what they called the Richland plantation.

Pioneer Days (1870–1885). The first building in Orange was Captain W.T. Glassell’s home and tract office, which stood on the south side of Chapman Avenue, just west of the Plaza. As the 1870s moved on, a smattering of wooden store buildings went up, most of them along Glassell Street. The first two-story building downtown, the Beach Building, was completed in 1874. In 1254

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 7 1875, the Plaza Hotel was built of concrete and adobe. By 1885 a small business district had developed, with several general stores, livery stables, and even a newspaper office.

Boom & Bust (1885–1900). In 1886–88, following the arrival of the Santa Fe Railroad, Southern California experienced its most frantic real estate “boom,” and Orange came along for the ride. The first brick building downtown was built in 1885, and several more followed, including the two-story Bank of Orange building (1887), and the three-story Rochester Hotel.

Civic improvement was the order of the day. The Plaza was created in 1886, and the original fountain installed in 1887. The first streetlights went in downtown, and residents could ride streetcars to Santa Ana, Tustin, or El Modena. The railroad reached Orange in 1887 [one block west of the project area], and a year later the city incorporated. Many of the farm lots around downtown were subdivided for residential development, and many new streets were opened up. The names of some of Orange’s best known pioneers are preserved in the tract names— Shaffer, Grote, Harwood, Chubb, Lockwood, Gardner, Beach, Kogler, Cauldwell, and Culver.

But the “boom” was built on speculation, and it collapsed in 1888. Many of the residential lots sold during the boom were later sold for taxes, and most of the subdivisions reverted to agricultural land. About this same time, a mysterious disease (now known to be aphylloxera) destroyed most of the vineyards that had been the backbone of the local economy. More and more ranchers began to plant oranges, but it would be several years before the trees matured and the local economy revived.

Growing Up (1900–1920). Orange’s economy expanded rapidly in the early 20th century, and downtown grew with it. Most of the landmark buildings around the Plaza were built during this period, and residential construction increased, spreading further and further out from the center of town. Instead of single store buildings, downtown businessmen and investors built “blocks” of connected storefronts, with the upper floors often reserved for apartments or meeting rooms.

As downtown Orange grew up, residents no longer needed to go to Santa Ana or Anaheim for major shopping. Saturday nights, the streets around the Plaza would be crowded with people, doing their shopping for the week. By the end of the First World War, most of the land around downtown Orange was subdivided for residential neighborhoods.

Growing Out (1920–1950). After World War I, businesses began moving further and further west from downtown. State Highway 101 came down West Chapman as far as Main Street, before turning south toward Santa Ana [approximately one-half mile west of the project area]. A little business district developed at the corner. Since it was midway between Orange and Santa Ana, it was dubbed “Orana.”
Orange also began to develop an industrial strip along either side of the Santa Fe railroad tracks [one block west of the project area]. Local packing houses had always been close to the railroad, but now they were joined by several manufacturing plants, most notably Anaconda Wire & Cable [at 200 North Cypress Street one block north of the project area].

In the late 1920s, Orange’s first Planning Commission proposed that all of downtown should be done over in the then-popular Mission Revival style. The buildings on the south side of the first block of East Chapman Avenue were remodeled in that style in 1928, complete with red tile and stucco arches, but the coming of the Depression put an end to that project. 1255

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 8 Residential development continued in the downtown area. New homes were built, filling in the vacant lots on many blocks, and the last few downtown subdivisions were laid out in the 1920s.

Suburbanization and Decline (1950–1970). After World War II, Southern California began to grow rapidly, and Orange came along for the ride. New retail areas developed, most notably along Tustin Avenue. In the early 1970s, both the Mall of Orange (now called The Village at Orange) and The City Shopping Centre (now the site of The Outlets at Orange) opened. All of these developments drew businesses away from downtown.

In the 1950s, the idea of transforming the Plaza area into a pedestrian mall was first floated, and was widely debated on into the 1960s. In 1965 the City Council went so far as to authorize a feasibility study for a Plaza Mall plan. The idea was still being talked about in 1967, when two young architects proposed a 10-block “Super Plaza” with high-rise apartments all around downtown.

Residential development also moved out away from downtown, as many areas that had once been orange groves or farms were subdivided. By the mid-1950s, the first large-scale tract home developments were being built in Orange, and the City began annexing more and more of these outlying areas. Orange’s population grew from just 10,000 in 1950 to over 77,000 in 1970.

As the City’s boundaries and population grew, new civic and institutional buildings such as schools, libraries, fire stations, and churches were constructed and many of the older ones were enlarged. [In 1954, Chapman College, now Chapman University, moved to Orange taking over the site formerly occupied by Orange High School (Chapman University 2019).

Throughout its history in Orange, it has played a key role in the revitalization and success of the Old Towne area. There are university facilities, including the Hilbert Museum of California Art, the West Campus parking structure, and Dodge College, within one block of the project area.]
Rebirth (1970–Present). The Plaza mall idea had its last gasp in 1969. That same year, Mayor Don E. Smith proposed a “revitalization” of downtown. Not just the Plaza, but the surrounding streets as well. First on the agenda was the Plaza Square. In 1970 the old palm trees in the corners were removed, the streetlights replaced, and new brick sidewalks and planters installed. Phase Two called for moving out onto Chapman Avenue and Glassell Street, but the cost of the Plaza work was higher than expected, and the City Council voted not to spend any more money on the revitalization project.

Major retailers continued to abandon downtown in the early 1970s. In their place, antique stores began to fill in the old storefronts, and by the 1980s they were the major commercial force around the Plaza. In more recent years, they have been joined by more restaurants and cafés, and other businesses. During this same era, people began discovering the downtown residential neighborhoods. By the mid-1970s, historic homes began to rise in price as more and more young families abandoned tract housing to live in the bungalows and Mediterraneans of old downtown Orange.

In the late 1970s, the plaza idea was revived as a historic preservation project for the area, and in 1979 the City formed an Old Towne Steering Committee to develop a plan for the future of downtown Orange. It was decided to continue the brick sidewalks of 1970 out onto the 1256

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 9 spoke streets, adding specially designed street furniture. The work on the new streetscapes for North and South Glassell was done in 1983. Matching brickwork on East and West Chapman followed in 1985.

Revitalization of downtown Orange continues to the current date with the introduction of restaurants, commercial services and specialty retail uses, often rehabilitating and occupying historic structures (e.g., Urth Caffe at 100 W. Chapman Avenue). The proposed project is a continuation of that revitalization and includes a critical piece of a long-desired pedestrian connection between the Santa Fe Depot and the Plaza.
1257

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 10

METHODS

RECORDS SEARCH
On April 12, 2018, LSA Senior Archaeologist Virginia Austerman conducted a cultural resources records search for the project area at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University Fullerton. The SCCIC houses the pertinent archaeological site and survey information necessary to determine whether cultural resources are recorded within the project area boundaries and which specific areas have been previously surveyed. The research included a review of all recorded historic and prehistoric archaeological sites within one mile of the project, as well as a review of known cultural resource survey and excavation reports. In addition, LSA examined the California State Historic Property Data File (HPD), which includes the National Register of Historic Places (National Register), California Historical Landmarks (CHL), California Register of Historical Resources (California Register), and California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI), various local historic registers, and historic maps.

ARCHIVAL RESEARCH
LSA completed archival research between November 2017 and October 2021. Research methodology focused on the review of a variety of primary and secondary source materials relating to the history and development of the project area. Sources included, but were not limited to, building permits, online sources, published literature in local and regional history, news articles, city directories, historic aerial photographs, and historic maps, including Sanborn Fire Insurance maps (Sanborn). The City of Orange and the Orange County Archives were also contacted.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD SURVEY
On April 15, 2018, LSA Senior Archaeologist Virginia Austerman visited the project area. The purpose of this survey was to identify and document—prior to the beginning of ground-disturbing activities— any cultural resources and thus also to identify any area(s) that might be sensitive for buried cultural resources.

ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY
On October 31, 2017, LSA Architectural Historian Casey Tibbet conducted the intensive-level architectural survey of the project area. During the survey, Ms. Tibbet took numerous photographs of the exteriors of the buildings and their setting. In addition, she made detailed notations regarding the structural and architectural characteristics and current conditions of the buildings and associated features. The purpose of this survey was to attempt to obtain views of each side of the building. Ms.

Tibbet conducted a follow-up field survey on November 20, 2018. 1258

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 11

RESULTS

RECORDS SEARCH
Data from the SCCIC indicate that there have been 24 previous cultural resource studies conducted in the records search area, none of which included any portion of the project. Thirteen cultural resources have been mapped within the one-mile radius of the project, none of which is located within the project parcels. Of the 13 resources, two are historic districts (30-158679 and 30-159932), which consist of over 1,300 properties, many of which are listed in the National Register, one is a railroad alignment, and 10 are historic-period buildings, features, and transportation infrastructure. No prehistoric resources have been documented within one mile of the project.

The Old Towne Orange Historic District (30-159932) was added to the National Register in 1997 and encompasses a one-mile square area that contains over 1,300 homes and other types of buildings.

The structures within the District represent more than 50 different architectural styles and exemplify life in Orange between the years of 1888 and 1940. The Plaza Historic District (30-158679) includes 53 buildings, 35 of which are listed in the National Register.

Table A provides the list of cultural resources in the records search that are documented and mapped at the SCCIC.

Table A: Documented Resources Mapped at the SCCIC
Primary # Site Description
30-158658 172 N. Glassell Street; Pantages/Orange Theater 30-158679 The Plaza Historic District; 53 buildings, 35 of which are National Register listed 30-158680 Intersection of Chapman Avenue/Glassell Street; The Orange Plaza developed in 1886 30-158686 333 N. Glassell Street; Chapman College; built in 1913 30-158759 163 South Cypress Street; Parker House built in 1887 30-158935 185 South Center Street; St. John’s Lutheran Church built in 1913 30-159075 192 South Orange Street; First Baptist Church of Orange; built in 1893 and National Register listed 30-159124 205 E. Palmyra Avenue; C.Z. Culver House built in the 1880s and National Register listed 30-159820 414 East Chapman Avenue; Lewis Ainsworth House built in 1910 30-159886 370 North Glassell Street; Orange Intermediate School/Central Grammar School; National Register listed 30-159932 Old Town Orange Historic District; 1,300+ properties listed in the National Register 30-176535 189 South Water Street; Water Department Pump House Building 30-176663 Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway

ARCHIVAL RESEARCH
This section discusses the history of the project area and people associated with it and also provides a context for automotive dealerships, including related evaluation criteria, information about the Old Towne Orange Historic District (Historic District), the Historic Preservation Design Standards (HPDS), the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan (Specific Plan), and the Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study 1259

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 12 (Pedestrian Study). Information about previous documentation and/or evaluations of the buildings within the project area is also provided.

Project Area History
No original building permits were found for any of the buildings in the project area. In order to determine the history of the property, a variety of sources were reviewed including, but not limited to, Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, historic aerial photographs, newspapers, city directories, and building permits for later alterations.

Sanborn maps from 1909 do not show any of the existing buildings on the property (Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps 1909). In 1912, North Atchison Street on the west side of the project area was paved and research indicates that the small Mission Revival style building (now 135 North Atchison Street) extant in the project area was constructed about that time as a transformer house (Orange Daily News 1912; Brigandi 2017). This building is shown in the project area at 125 Atchison Street on the 1922 Sanborn maps (Figure 3; Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps 1922). At that time, there were eight other buildings in the project area, none extant, and surrounding properties were developed with lumber yards (north and south), packing houses and a railroad depot (west), and residences (Ibid.).

In 1920, Pease, Kolberg & Company, successor to Pease Seed and Grain Company, began operating a planing mill and lumber yard at its property on the southwest corner of West Chapman Avenue and South Cypress Avenue, across Chapman Avenue from the project area (Santa Ana Register 1920a). That same year, the company became the southern California and Arizona distributors for Clydesdale trucks (Santa Ana Register 1920a). News articles from 1923 announced that A.H. Pease of Pease, Kolberg & Company planned to build two buildings both on West Chapman Avenue near Cypress (Santa Ana Register 1923). The building planned for the Citrus Tire and Truck Company was proposed to be built on the site then occupied by the Pease, Kolberg, & Company planing mill (across Chapman Avenue from the project area) and a building planned for Harry D. Riley, automobile agent, would be at 401 West Chapman Avenue (in the project area; Ibid.). The building in the project area was to be “single story with a high ceiling adding an air of distinction to the place. The structure, which will be forty-six by eightytwo feet, will contain tile floors with marble base, mezzanine floor, offices, rest rooms and an attractive showroom rivaling anything of its kind in the county” (Ibid.). Work on the two projects was slated to start simultaneously as soon as the plans were accepted (Ibid.).

In January 1924, it was reported that, in 1923, a “block of six storerooms by the Pease-Kolberg Company, at a cost of $100,000” was constructed on West Chapman Avenue across the street from the project area (Los Angeles Times 1924a). In March 1924, another article indicated that PeaseKolberg was “erecting a beautiful building, which will be the home of the Studebaker people. The building will have a frontage of forty feet on Chapman and eighty-six feet on Cypress Street. There will be an upstairs where the offices and a luxurious woman’s rest room will be” (Los Angeles Times 1924b). This was the building at 401 West Chapman Avenue. When constructed, the building was actually a bit larger (50 feet by 100 feet) than the news articles had reported (LP3 Architecture, Inc. 2020).
1260

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 13 Figure 3: 1922 Sanborn Map
1261

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 14 The 1924 City Directory has a listing for Harry D. Riley Studebaker automobiles at 400 W. Chapman Avenue in Orange, but in 1925 his business is listed at 404 W. Chapman Avenue, and in 1928 news advertisements place the business at 401 W. Chapman Avenue (Ancestry.com var.; Santa Ana Register 1928a). News articles also mention Schwab Garage and a resident at 401 West Chapman Avenue in 1927 and Sackett and Doty Garage there in April 1928 (Santa Ana Register 1927a, 1927b, and 1928b).

A 1947 aerial photograph and a 1950 Sanborn map show that the project area included:
• An auto sales and repair building with concrete floors, wood truss roof, and skylight, which is the dealership building (401 and 405 West Chapman Avenue);
• An auto repair building with iron-on-frame construction and a concrete floor (attached to the west elevation of the dealership building);
• A patio cover (attached to the west elevation of the dealership and the south elevation of the repair building);
• A very small store in the middle of the used auto sales lot at the corner of Chapman Avenue and Atchison Street (411 West Chapman Avenue);
• An auto repair building (118 North Cypress Avenue) with iron-on-frame construction and a concrete floor (attached to the north end of the dealership building, constructed between 1938 and 1947);
• A shade structure for car washing (no address);
• A one-story iron-on-frame storage building that wraps around the west and north sides of the Mission Revival style transformer house, which is labeled as vacant (125 Atchison Street); and • An L-shaped machine shop with iron-on-frame construction and a concrete floor (136 North Cypress Avenue, no longer extant) (Figures 4 and 5; Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps 1950; Orange County Archives 2017).

The earliest building permits found for 401 West Chapman Avenue date to 1993 and are for exterior alterations and seismic retrofit (City of Orange var.). In 1999, permits were issued for a sign and to replace the existing brick façade with a similar product (Ibid.). In 2009, a permit was issued to “repair car damaged wall front corner of building facing Cypress. Like for like” (Ibid.). In 2011, a sign permit was issued (Ibid.).

Figure 6 and Table B provide dates of construction for the extant buildings.

People and Businesses
401 West Chapman Avenue
In 1919, Harry D. Riley of San Diego purchased the T.L. Longworth garage in Anaheim (Santa Ana Register 1919). Riley was going to be the northern Orange County agent for Studebaker and had been the Ford agent in San Diego for six-and-a-half years (Ibid.). By 1920, Riley was a member of the Board of Trade, a city advisory committee, and was advocating for advertising the City of Anaheim (Santa Ana Register 1920b). Riley was named the first president of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce and held the position 1262

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 15 Figure 4: 1947 Aerial Photograph (Orange County Archives 2017) 1263

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 16 Figure 5: 1950 Sanborn Map
1264
N
FIGURE 6
Estimated Dates of Construction
I:\LPR1702\G\Cultural\Dates of Construction.cdr (9/23/2020) Old Towne Gateway Project
Between
1938 - 1947 1924
Between
1947 - 1950
Between
1938 - 1947
Between
1950 - 1960
Between
1938 - 1947
circa
1912
1265

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 18 Table B: Extant Buildings’ Dates of Construction
Building Year Built Source
Mission Revival style building (135 N.

Atchison Street)
Circa 1912 Brigandi 2017
Orange Daily News 1912
L-shaped addition to the north and
west sides of the Mission Revival
style building
Between 1938 and 1947 Sanborn Maps (1922 and 1950)
Historic aerial photographs (1938 and 1947)
Dealership building (401 W. Chapman
Avenue)
1924 Los Angeles Times 1924b
Rectangular addition to the north
end of the dealership building
Between 1938 and 1947 Sanborn Maps (1922 and 1950)
Historic aerial photographs (1938 and 1947)
East/west-oriented addition to the
west side of the dealership building
Between 1938 and 1947
(1947 free-standing, 1950
attached to the dealership)
Sanborn Maps (1922 and 1950)
Historic aerial photographs (1938 and 1947)
Small addition attached to the west
side of the dealership
Between 1947 and 1950 Sanborn Map (1950)
Historic aerial photographs (1938 and 1947)
Free-standing building (107 N. Atchison
Street)
Between 1950 and 1960 Sanborn Map (1950)
Historic aerial photographs (1955 and 1960)
from 1920–1925; it was during this time he led the fight against the Ku Klux Klan in Anaheim (Brigandi 2017; Santa Ana Register 1920c). Research indicates that the petition circulated to recall the councilmen with ties to the Klan was actually sponsored by the U.S.A. Club, but the Chamber of Commerce led by Harry D. Riley did join in the fight (Los Angeles Times 1925a and 1925b). In January 1925, just weeks before the recall vote, the Anaheim Chamber published a resolution stating in part “Whereas, the present situation has developed beyond any political issue into a community crisis involving the entire future of our community … the facts are clear that the Ku Klux Klan has not only gained control of the political affairs of our city, but has become a menace alike to the peace and business prosperity of our city … and it is not only impossible to get industries to locate here under its domination, but it has become a question of holding several of our present leading industries … therefore, be it resolved by this board of directors that we and the entire Chamber of Commerce throw our influence and efforts into the campaign to rid the city of this Ku Klux Klan control … signed by Harry D. Riley, president” and others (Ibid.). After the February 3, 1925, vote, the councilmen were recalled and replaced with antiKlan candidates, as were their Klan-friendly appointees (Brigandi 2017; Los Angeles Times 1925c).

Although this did not end all Klan activity, it was a decisive blow to the organization in north Orange County (Brigandi 2017).

During the 1920s, Mr. Riley lived in Anaheim and had at least three dealerships in Orange County (Ancestry.com var.). In 1928, Riley built a new garage at 503 South Main Street in Santa Ana and, in summer 1929, it was announced that the Riley family had moved from Anaheim to Santa Ana (Santa Ana Register 1929a and 1929b). A subsequent article reported that Mr. Riley had plans to expand his Santa Ana facility and would be concentrating his businesses and civic interests in that city since the leases on his buildings in Anaheim and Orange had expired in January 1929 (Santa Ana Register 1929c).

After Riley’s departure at the end of 1928, the building at 401 West Chapman Avenue was occupied by various auto-related businesses until at least 1966 (Chattel 2005a; Los Angeles Times 1966). A 1266

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 19 combination of City Directory listings and news advertisements revealed the following historic-period occupants at 401 West Chapman Avenue: Schwab Chevrolet Co. (1928), Mansur Motor Co. (Ford dealer, 1937–1953), and Selman Chevrolet (early 1966) (Orange County Archives var.; Los Angeles Times 1966). In addition, previous documentation for the building lists Sackett-Doty Chevrolet and Doty Chevrolet as former occupants in the late 1920s and early 1930s (Chattel 2005a). In 1930, Doty bought out Schwab, but the 1932 City Directory lists Doty Chevrolet at 402 West Chapman Avenue as does a Los Angeles Times advertisement from 1934 (Orange County Archives var.; Santa Ana Register 1930). This location was repeated in numerous advertisements in 1934 and one in 1936.

Advertisements put Clift’s Marine Shop at 403 West Chapman Avenue (west addition to 401) in 1959 and Speed & Marine Associates at 401 West Chapman Avenue in 1966 through at least 1969 (Los Angeles Times 1959, 1966, and 1969).
107 North Atchison Street
This building was constructed sometime after 1950 and appears to have replaced a free-standing canopy that was used as an auto wash (Sanborn Fire Insurance Map var.). No information about the owners/occupants during the historic period was found. This address was not found in the available City Directories and an online newspaper search using the address did not find any matches. 135 North Atchison Street
In 1922 and 1950, this building’s address was 125 North Atchison Street. A search of City Directories using 125 and 135 North Atchison Street revealed three listings for the building between the early 1920s and mid-1960s. In 1924, the occupant was Orange County Renovators and in 1925 and 1965 it was listed as vacant (Orange County Archives var.). Online newspaper searches for both addresses did not return any matches. Previous documentation for this building indicates that in 1927–1928, the building was used as a repair shop for Schwab Chevrolet and that it continued to service subsequent dealerships at 401 and/or 403 West Chapman Avenue into the early 1990s (Chattel 2005a). No additional information regarding historic-period owners/occupants was found.

Automotive Dealerships
From 1897 through World War II, the proliferation of the automobile had a profound impact on American culture and the built environment. Automobiles “required major changes in the infrastructure such as the improvement of roads, the construction of bridges, and the development of the highway network. This new, improved, and automobile-oriented infrastructure transformed the landscape and facilitate the decentralization of cities … [and] reshaped the built environment by requiring modifications to existing structures and necessitating the development of new building types such as gas stations and automobile showrooms” (Historic Resources Group 1996:3).

Until the early 1920s, car sales and services were often incorporated into existing businesses, such as livery stables, blacksmith shops, or machine shops, but as cars became increasingly popular, the related businesses became more specialized. For example, in 1919, about 47 percent of the gas sold was by grocery stores, general stores, and hardware stores, but by the end of the 1920s these outlets had virtually disappeared, having been replaced by free standing gas stations (Margolies 1993:44). Similarly, while many auto dealers “continued to service cars they sold, the functions of shipping, storing and repairing cars were increasingly performed by other businesses specifically created to meet these needs. 1267

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 20 It was at this point that the automobile show and sales room came into its own” (Historic Resources Group 1996:8). Dealerships proliferated in the mid-1920s, but began to decline by the end of the 1920s as auto companies consolidated or folded due to competition (Ibid.). By the 1930s, car sales were falling and dealers added repair services to help make ends meet (Ibid.). During the war years, production came to a halt delivering another blow to the dealers (Ibid.).

This pattern does not seem to have played out in Orange, as research found that the number of dealerships held steady at five from 1922 to 1928 (Orange County Archives var.). Between 1932 and 1950, the numbers went up and down from a low of two (in 1932 and 1941) to high of five (in 1937 and 1950) (Orange County Archive var.; Sanborn Fire Insurance Map 1950). Reviews of the 1922 and 1950 Sanborn maps show similar results for automotive-related businesses. In 1922, a total of 20 businesses related to cars, trucks, and motorcycles were identified in the 20-block area bound by Parker, Maple, Shaffer, and Almond. The majority of the businesses were repair shops, but there were three auto sales businesses at 102–106 West Chapman Avenue, 149 North Glassell Street, and 123 South Orange Street (Sanborn Fire Insurance Map 1922). There was also one repair business at 114–120 West Chapman Avenue that included “20 cars” indicating that there may have been a sales component to the business (Sanborn Fire Insurance Map 1922).

By 1950, Sanborn maps show a total of 23 automotive businesses in the same 20-block area and five of those were auto sales businesses, all at different locations than the 1922 businesses. Four of the 1950s businesses were on the northwest and southwest corners of West Chapman Avenue and Cypress Street (this includes the project area) and the other was at 190 North Orange Street. Only the multi-unit building at the southwest corner of Chapman Avenue and Cypress Street (402–424 West Chapman Avenue) still houses an automotive-related business. Buildings in the 20-block area that retain some features, such as large showroom windows, from their former uses as dealerships include 118 West Chapman Avenue, 240 West Chapman Avenue, 401 West Chapman Avenue (project area), 402–424 West Chapman Avenue, and 149 North Glassell Street (Figures 7 through 10). All of these buildings appear to date to the 1920s and all have sustained alterations to facilitate new uses. With the exception of 240 West Chapman Avenue, all of the buildings are contributors to the Old Towne Orange Historic District.

In the post-WWII period, “cheap fuel, mass-produced automobiles, and urban expressways contributed to increasingly decentralized cities” (Historic Resources Groups 1996:17). It was during this period that the huge auto centers were developed. The first auto center in the nation was built in 1965 in Riverside, California when seven of the area’s most successful auto dealerships came together with the concept of showcasing their inventories in a common setting (Riverside Art Museum n.d.). This concept, which was revolutionary in 1958 when the Riverside dealers first conceived of it, is now the norm throughout the country (Ibid.). The City of Orange, however, continues to have several smaller dealerships scattered throughout the city rather than a large auto center.

Evaluation Criteria
As a property type, pre-WWII auto dealership showrooms were typically located on main thoroughfares and reflected the Period Revival styles popular at the time. They were usually one or two-stories of masonry construction with wood or steel truss roofs with showrooms in the front and 1268

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 21 Figure 7: 118 West Chapman Avenue (Google
December 2020).

Figure 8: 149 North Glassell Street (Google May
2019)
Figure 9: 402–424 West Chapman Avenue (Google
December 2020)
Figure 10: 240 West Chapman Avenue (Google
December 2020).
service facilities in the rear accessed by alleys or side streets (Historic Resources Group 1996). “Architectural styling and ornamentation was concentrated on the showroom portion, particularly around the formal entrances. Expansive plate glass windows were also a dominant feature of the primary façade. Exterior cladding such as concrete and stucco was often scored, carved or cast to create the appearance of stone. High ceilings, waiting rooms and decorative floors distinguished the interior showroom spaces. … The interiors of the service facilities were characterized by bare concrete floors, exposed roof trusses and skylights” (Historic Resources Group 1996:19).

Automobile showrooms may be individually significant if they retain a high degree of architectural integrity identified with the original use and they have a strong association with a particular dealership or automotive company (Criteria A/1); are associated with an individual who played a leadership role in the automotive sales business in Orange, operated their business at this location for a significant period of time, and for whom there are no other extant associated buildings (Criteria B/2); or is an excellent example of an architectural style or architect’s work with few or no alterations (Criteria C/3; Historic Resources Group 1996). This property type may also be significant as a contributor to a historic district if located along a historic auto row or within a cluster of showrooms, as long as sufficient integrity from the period of significance remains (Ibid.).

Old Towne Orange Historic District
The District (30-159932) was listed in the National Register in 1997 (California Office of Historic Preservation 2020).
1269

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 22 [The District] “includes more than 1,300 homes and other buildings. It is approximately one square mile in size. The district provides a feeling for life in Orange from 1888 to 1940, showcasing over 50 different architectural styles. The complete stock of buildings, which are a part of the Old Towne community, is complemented by the churches, schools, old Santa Fe Depot, Post Office, packing houses, industrial buildings, clubhouses, and parks, which still remain in active use since their establishment in the early part of the century.

To build upon the documentation of properties in the Old Towne Orange National Register District nomination, the City surveyed all pre-1940 buildings in 1982 (updated in 1992) and established expanded Local Historic District boundaries that include properties on the periphery of the National Register District in recognition of the fact that while these areas may not meet the National Park Service criteria for National Register designation, they bear a relationship to the National Register District and remain special areas of historic importance in Orange that warrant preservation and conservation” (SeeCalifornia.com n.d.).

The District is significant under National Register Criteria A and C and is associated with the themes of transportation, commerce, industry, agriculture, architecture, and exploration/settlement. The period of significance for the District is 1888 to 1940. The project area is within the boundaries of the National Register-listed District.

Historic Preservation Design Standards
The HPDS include standards for historic commercial buildings along spoke streets such as Chapman Avenue, additions to historic buildings, and new infill construction within the District. According to the HPDS, “the HPDS ensures that proposed new construction is compatible with existing historic features through a range of flexible design guidelines” (City of Orange 2018:1). The HPDS states that “successful infill construction takes cues from the surrounding historic neighborhood and its buildings” but does not replicate historic styles (City of Orange 2018:46). According to the HPDS, infill buildings should respond to their context within a historic neighborhood. They should be similar to the historic-period buildings in terms of setbacks, scale, massing, height, roof forms, materials, and patterns of windows and doors. New buildings do not necessarily have to meet all of the guidelines, but should incorporate enough of them to be compatible with the District while still clearly modern.

Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan
The project area is within the Specific Plan area, which is located at the crossroads of the Santa Fe Railroad tracks and Chapman Avenue just west of the project area (Arroyo Group 2012). Prior to the 1920s, the Specific Plan area was dominated by packing houses and industrial facilities, as well as modest houses located along Pixley, Cypress, and Lemon Streets that provided homes for the workers (Ibid.). After World War I, the area transitioned to commercial uses related to the automotive industry (Ibid.). New one-story buildings with large “display windows and glazed entrance doors set into a façade veneered with decorative brick and terracotta” went up along Chapman Avenue (Arroyo Group 2012:12). By World War II, the mixed-use character of the area had solidified with a mix of industrial, commercial, and residential structures (Ibid.). One of the stated objectives of the Specific Plan is to “Maintain and enhance the historic industrial character of the Santa Fe Depot area, as well as the remaining integrity of historic residential areas, through careful and coordinated planning that builds upon its key assets and reinforces its historic development patterns” (Arroyo Group 2012:23). Another 1270

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 23 purpose of the Specific Plan is to capitalize on pedestrian traffic by designing development “for pedestrians, with pedestrian linkages to the transportation center and connections to the Plaza, Chapman University, residential neighborhoods, and other destinations in the area. The intent is to bring new vitality to the Santa Fe Depot area, making it a vibrant part of Old Towne Orange” (Arroyo Group 2012:2).

Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
The Pedestrian Study was prepared for the purpose of “evaluating the potential development of pedestrian corridors to encourage connections between the historic Plaza and surrounding business district to the Metrolink and OCTA Transit Center at the Orange Depot” (RRM Design Group 2008:1).

The project area is within the boundaries of the study, which includes the area bounded by Maple Avenue, Glassell Street, Almond Avenue, and the railroad tracks. It is also in the “North Alley” pedestrian route area, which is between Chapman and Maple Avenues. The north alley is actually an “existing shortcut north of Chapman Avenue that runs east-west through spaces between buildings, alleys, and parking areas” (RRM Design Group 2008:16). Although pedestrians can cut through an existing alley north of Chapman Avenue between Lemon Street and Cypress Street, when they reach the project area, they have to travel either north to Maple Avenue or south to Chapman Avenue to connect to the depot (Ibid.). The Study recommends that redevelopment include “pedestrian-friendly paseos, plazas, and amenities” between Cypress Street and the depot (Ibid.). Several figures in the Pedestrian Study show that pedestrian connection through the subject project area.

The Pedestrian Study recommends that North Alley-area property owners be encouraged to “open a pedestrian pathway to complete the North Alley connection” and that outdoor dining and plaza areas be encouraged (RRM Design Group 2008:54).

Previous Documentation/Evaluations
401 West Chapman Avenue
The former car dealership building (30-159847, 401 West Chapman Avenue, APN 039-171-12) was documented in 1982, 1990, and 2005.

A Historic Resources Inventory form prepared by Heritage Orange County, Inc. in 1982, with an evaluation by AEGIS dated 1990, describes the building as a “brick commercial” style building dating to circa 1920 with no notable historical findings to date (AEGIS 1991:1 and 3). No information is provided regarding its potential historic significance.

In 2005, the building was documented on Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms as part of a reconnaissance survey. It was assigned a California Historical Resources (CHR) status code of 1D, indicating it is a contributor to a National Register-listed historic district (Chattel Architecture 2005a). The form describes it as a commercial building that is significant for its architecture, but assigned it the resource attribute code for an industrial building and listed “Industrial” as its architectural style (Ibid.). The period of significance is given as “Old Towne: Early Settlement (c. 1870– 1920)” (Chattel 2005a:2). There is no formal evaluation using State, federal, or local criteria. 1271

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 24 Also in 2005, the two additions to the dealership building were documented on separate DPR forms, possibly because, at that time, they had separate addresses: 112 North Cypress Street (north addition) and 403 West Chapman Avenue (west addition). The addition attached to the north elevation (112 North Cypress Street) was identified as a masonry building built circa 1920, but very little additional information was provided and it was not formally evaluated (Chattel Architecture 2005b). Despite the lack of information or justification, the addition was identified as a District contributor and assigned a CHR status code of 1D (Ibid.). The addition to the west elevation (403 West Chapman Avenue) was described as a small industrial building with no estimated date of construction and its architectural style is listed as Contemporary (Chattel Architecture 2005c). It was assigned a CHR status code of 6Z, indicating that it has no historical significance (Ibid.).

Based on research completed for the current study (Figure 6), it is known that the estimated construction dates in the previous evaluations are incorrect and, consequently, the periods of significance for the building and the northern addition are also incorrect.

The 401 West Chapman Avenue building is listed in the California Office of Historic Preservation’s Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD) with CHR status codes of 1D and 5D2, indicating it is a contributor to a historic district listed in the National Register, as well as a district that is eligible for local designation. Neither of the additions is listed in the BERD. 107 North Atchison Street
The free-standing building at 107 North Atchison Street (APN 039-171-12) was also documented by Chattel Architecture in 2005. No estimated date of construction is provided and its architectural style is listed as Industrial. It was assigned a CHR status code of 6Z, indicating it is not historically significant (Chattel Architecture 2005d). This address is not included in the BERD. 135 North Atchison Street
The former transformer house (135 North Atchison Street, APN 039-171-03) was previously documented in 1991 and 2005. According to the 1991 evaluation, the building was a “very nice Mission style building at 109 N. Atchison [that] has been hidden from the street by an addition” (AEGIS 1991:1). It also states that the building is a good example of the Mission style and “would be a contributor to a Historic District and should be considered for nomination as a Local Landmark” (AEGIS 1991:2). The 1991 form references a 1982 survey of the building, but no survey form from that year was found. The 2005 evaluation reiterated much of what was included in the 1991 survey, but recommended that the building be a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District and gave it the corresponding CHR status code of 3D (appears eligible for the National Register as a contributor to a National Register-eligible district through survey evaluation) (Chattel Architecture 2005e). A 2012 amendment to the 2005 DPR form that is based on the 2010 Historic Resources Inventory Update recommended that the status code be changed to 1D. The BERD does not list this address.

As part of this assessment, the DPR forms for 401 West Chapman Avenue (including its additions), 107 North Atchison Street, and 135 North Atchison Street have been updated and are included in Appendix A.
1272

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 25

ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD SURVEY
The field survey of the project area revealed that the ground surface is completely obscured by commercial development and associated concrete and asphalt paving. However, the likelihood of subsurface archaeological residue is moderate based on the 1910s to 1920s era of construction.

ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY
401 West Chapman Avenue
This roughly L-shaped building is located in the southern part of the project area and includes the former auto dealership and three additions (Figures 11 through 22). It is currently occupied by a retail store.

The original One-Part Commercial Block style dealership building is rectangular in plan and constructed of brick with soldier courses. It is surmounted by a low-pitched barrel roof with parapets and clerestory windows. The south-facing façade retains a high degree of integrity and features four decorative finials evenly spaced atop the parapet, a stringcourse, four wall-mounted medallions, and large, recessed storefront windows with transoms on either side of the main entrance (Figure 11). The recessed main entrance features three transom windows above a pair of wood-framed glass doors flanked by large sidelights. There are very narrow flat canopies above the windows and entrance. This elevation retains a high level of historic architectural integrity.

The east elevation, adjacent to Cypress Street, has two decorative finials atop the stepped parapet, a stringcourse, two wall-mounted medallions, and a group of three large storefront windows with transoms above a narrow, flat canopy (Figures 12 through 14). The southern section of the east elevation retains a high degree of integrity, but the remainder of the east elevation has been compromised by alterations, including an addition (discussed below). It includes an unadorned brick wall with a recessed modern pedestrian door below a wide lintel and two metal bay/overhead doors flanking two, large metal-framed, multi-paned windows all below a single, long lintel. The brick wall appears to have three brick patches where three large window openings have been filled in. The north end of the east elevation is an addition that makes up the north (rear) elevation of the building.

The north (rear) elevation has a stepped parapet visible above an addition (Figure 15). The woodframed addition (1938–1947) is rectangular in plan and extends the width of the original building. It has a shed and flat roof sheathed in composition sheets and a parapet on the east end. The east elevation of the addition (adjacent to Cypress Street) is covered with plaster and has a bay door and a wood-shingled pent roof above a modern pedestrian door. The north elevation has bay doors and is internally divided into at least two spaces. The west side of the addition has one pedestrian door and the north and west elevations are clad in non-original manufactured wood siding.

As previously noted, there are two additions that form an L-shape on the west side of the original building (Figures 19 through 22). The older and larger addition (1938–1947) extends west to Atchison 1273

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 26 Street and is addressed as 403 West Chapman Avenue. It is wood-framed, rectangular in plan, and surmounted by a low-pitched, gable roof with a parapet and sheathed with composition sheets. The north elevation of this addition has non-original manufactured wood siding, a pedestrian door, and two large garage doors. The west elevation of this addition has a stepped parapet and is covered with stucco. The south elevation, which is also covered with stucco, has modern aluminum-framed sliding windows and modern French doors. This addition connects to a newer (1947–1950) and smaller wood-framed addition that is open on the south side and connects to the original building.

All of the additions to the original dealership building are in fair to good condition, but all have sustained alterations. They are utilitarian structures that do not exhibit any particular architectural style or character.

Figure 11: 401 West Chapman Avenue, façade/south elevation. View to the north (11/20/18).

Figure 12: 401 West Chapman Avenue, façade and east elevation. View to the northwest (11/20/18). 1274

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 27 Figure 13: 401 West Chapman Avenue, east elevation detail. View to the west showing filled in windows (11/20/18).

Figure 14: 401 West Chapman Avenue, east elevation, including circa 1940 addition. View to the southwest (11/20/18).

Figure 15: 401 West Chapman Avenue, rear (north) elevation. View to the south showing the circa 1940 addition (11/20/18).
1275

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 28 Figure 16: 401 West Chapman Avenue, west elevation and partial north elevation. View to the east (11/20/18).

Figure 17: 403 West Chapman Avenue, north elevation. View to the southwest (11/20/18). 1276

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 29 Figure 18: 403 West Chapman Avenue, north and west elevations. View to the southeast (11/20/18).

Figure 19: 403 West Chapman Avenue, south elevation. View to the northwest showing alterations (windows and doors) to this addition (10/31/17).

Figure 20: 401–403 West Chapman Avenue, west and south elevations. View to the east (11/20/18). 1277

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 30 Figure 21: 401 West Chapman Avenue, portion of west elevation. View to the southeast (11/20/18).

Figure 22: 401–403 West Chapman Avenue, overview of west and south elevations. View to the northeast (11/20/18).
107 North Atchison Street
This vernacular free-standing garage is adjacent to North Atchison Street (Figures 23 and 24). It is rectangular in plan and surmounted by a catslide gable roof sheathed with corrugated metal. It has narrow eaves and the exterior walls are clad with non-original manufactured wood siding. Aside from small attic vents, there are no openings on the east or west sides. The south elevation has two large garage doors. The north elevation was obscured from view. The building is in good condition, but the non-original wood siding has compromised its integrity. 1278

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 31 Figure 23: 107 North Atchison Street, west elevation. View to the east (11/20/18).

Figure 24: 107 North Atchison Street, south and east elevations. View to the northwest (11/20/18). 135 North Atchison Street
This building is located in the northern part of the project area adjacent to North Atchison Street. It is a small Mission Revival style building with a corrugated metal addition (Figures 25 through 28). The one-story building is rectangular in plan and surmounted by a low-pitched, gable roof sheathed with corrugated metal and features Mission Revival style parapets on the east and west ends. The visible 1279

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 32 exterior walls are covered with stucco. The east elevation has a wood-framed, four-paned doublehung window and a wood and glass door, both of which appear to be original. The door and the window are each recessed in segmental arched openings accented with concrete “keystones.” The door also has wide concrete trim. The north and south elevations of the Mission Revival style building have windows identical to the one in the east elevation (the north one is visible from inside the metal addition). The visible parts of the building are in good condition and retain a high degree of integrity.

The L-shaped corrugated metal addition wraps around the west and north sides of the Mission Revival style building completely obscuring these elevations of the original building and compromising the building’s integrity. The addition appears to consist of two buildings, both with gable roofs with parapets sheathed with corrugated metal. There are openings on the south, west, and east sides. The addition is in poor condition and, judging from the patchwork of metal panels, has sustained various alterations. Based on what is visible within the addition and through the windows, it is possible that, if revealed, the original elevations may retain at least a moderate degree of integrity.

Figure 25: 135 North Atchison Street, façade. View to the east (11/20/18). 1280

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 33 Figure 26: 135 North Atchison Street, east and north elevations. View to the southwest (11/20/18).

Figure 27: 135 North Atchison Street, door in
east elevation (11/20/18).

Figure 28: 135 North Atchison Street, window in
north elevation (11/20/18).
1281

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 34

SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION
Based on the research and field survey results discussed above, the following sections present the historical significance evaluations for the historic-period buildings in the project area. Pursuant to the City’s requirements, the buildings are being evaluated under the criteria for the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) and the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register).

DEFINITIONS
CEQA (PRC Chapter 2.6, Section 21083.2 and CCR Title 145, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15064.5) calls for consideration of archaeological and historical resources in the environmental review process. The criteria for determining the significance of prehistoric and historic resources and potential project impacts to them are based on Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and Guidelines for the Nomination of Properties to the California Register. Properties eligible for listing in the California Register and subject to review under CEQA are those meeting the criteria for listing in the California Register, National Register, or designation under a local ordinance.

National Register of Historic Places (36 CFR Part 60.4) The National Register criteria for evaluation exclude properties that are less than 50 years old unless they are of exceptional importance. “Fifty years is a general estimate of the time needed to develop historical perspective and to evaluate significance. This consideration guards against the listing of properties of passing contemporary interest and ensures that the National Register is a list of truly historic places” (National Park Service 1995:41). In addition to meeting at least one of the National Register criteria, “historic properties must retain integrity. Within the concept of integrity, the National Register criteria recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, in various combinations, define integrity” (National Park Service 1995:44). These are: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association (discussed in more detail below). “To retain integrity a property will always possess several, and usually most, of the aspects” (Ibid.). Guidance for applying the National Register criteria is provided in National Register Bulletin 15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.

Pursuant to 36 CFR Part 60.4: The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
B. That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. 1282

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 35 “Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they” meet certain criteria considerations (National Park Service 1995:2).

None of the resources associated with this project fall into these categories, therefore, these criteria considerations are not discussed further.

Integrity
Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. The evaluation of integrity is sometimes a subjective judgment, but it must always be grounded in an understanding of a property’s physical features and how they relate to its significance. Historic properties either retain integrity (this is, convey their significance) or they do not. To retain historic integrity, a property will always possess several, and usually most, of the aspects. The retention of specific aspects of integrity is paramount for a property to convey its significance. Determining which of these aspects is most important to a particular property requires knowing why, where, and when the property is significant. National Register Bulletin 15 elaborates on the seven aspects of integrity as follows:
a) Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred.
b) Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property.
c) Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. d) Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. e) Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.
f) Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. g) Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property (National Park Service 1995:44 and 45).

California Register of Historical Resources (14 CCR 15064.5) The California Register criteria are based on National Register criteria and also typically require that a resource be 50 years of age or older in order to be considered for historical significance. The integrity of the resource, using the seven aspects of integrity discussed above, must also be taken into consideration. “It is possible that historical resources may not retain sufficient integrity to meet the criteria for listing in the National Register, but they may still be eligible for listing in the California Register” (California Office of Historic Preservation 1999).

Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, 1283

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 36 agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be an historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code, 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 14 CCR, Section 4852) including the following:

1. Is associated with the events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage;

2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;

3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or

4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

City of Orange
The City of Orange only has criteria for evaluating historic districts. Since the property is within the locally designated and National Register-listed Old Towne Orange Historic District, there is no need to consider the potential for a historic district. However, the following evaluations do address whether the buildings qualify as contributors to that District.

EVALUATION
In summary, the project area is developed with three historic-period buildings: a 1924 One-Part Commercial Block former car dealership with three additions built between 1938 and 1950 (401 West Chapman Avenue); a vernacular, freestanding garage built between 1950 and 1960 (107 North Atchison Street); and a circa 1912 Mission Revival style former transformer house with a large corrugated metal addition built between 1938 and 1947 (135 North Atchison Street). Research identified one person of note who was associated with the project area. Harry D. Riley, who was the first occupant of the dealership (1924 through 1927), is associated with the removal of the KKK from the Anaheim City Council in 1925. Mr. Riley lived in Anaheim and Santa Ana in the 1920s and 1930s and was very active in both of those communities. Research identified a few other extant former dealership buildings within a 20-block area around the subject property. These buildings appear to date to the 1920s and all have been altered to accommodate new uses. The buildings at 401 West Chapman Avenue and 135 North Atchison Street were previously documented as contributors to the National Register-listed Old Towne Orange Historic District, which has a period of significance of 1888 to 1940.

Because the National Register and California Register criteria are so similar, the criteria are addressed together to avoid redundancy.

National Register Criterion A: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

California Register Criterion 1: Associated with the events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage. 1284

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 37 According to National Register Bulletin 15, “to be considered for listing under Criterion A, a property must be associated with one or more events important in the defined historic context” (National Park Service n.d.:12). This may be a specific event or a pattern of events, but “mere association with historic events or trends is not enough, in and of itself … the property’s specific association must be considered important as well” (National Park Service n.d.:12).
401 West Chapman Avenue. The former dealership building is associated with two important patterns of events: development of the downtown area as a commercial center and early 20th century automotive culture. However, no evidence was found indicating that it played an important role in either event. Development of the downtown area began several decades earlier and, by 1922, included at least 20 automotive-related businesses, including at least three dealerships. While construction of this dealership was part of the trends of downtown commercial development and automotive-related development in particular, it did not initiate either trend or change either trend in any important ways.

In terms of the evaluation criteria in the automotive dealership context, the building does not have a strong association with a particular dealership or automotive company. Research found that it has housed Studebaker, Chevrolet, and Ford dealerships, but no strong connection to any of these brands was found.

The building at 401 West Chapman Avenue is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria A/1. However, the original part of the building (excluding all three additions) remains a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It was built within the District’s period of significance (1888–1940) and, under this criterion, is associated with the District’s themes of commerce and transportation.
107 North Atchison Street. This post-World War II garage building is associated with automotive car culture in the second half of the 20th century. However, no evidence was found that it is associated with any significant contributions to that theme. Furthermore, its nondescript, temporally ambiguous appearance does not convey its association with the period when it was built. It is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria A/1. It was built outside the period of significance (1888–1940) of the Old Towne Orange Historic District and does not contribute to the District’s significance.
135 North Atchison Street. This building was originally a transformer house and later an automotive repair shop. It is associated with the early industrial development of Orange and with early 20th century automotive culture. Because it has not functioned as a transformer house since at least the mid-1920s and all of the original equipment associated with its use as a transformer house has been removed, it does not convey its association with that function or early industrial development. As early as the mid-1920s, it was converted to an automotive repair shop and storage building. Sometime between 1938 and 1947, a large corrugated metal addition was added to the north and west elevations. The addition has obscured the original building and given it a nondescript, utilitarian appearance that does not convey an association with any particular function or period. Therefore, this building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria A/1 and does not contribute to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under these criteria. 1285

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 38 National Register Criterion B: Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

California Register Criterion 2: Associated with the lives of persons important in our past.

According to National Register Bulletin 15, “persons associated with the property must be individually significant within a historic context” (National Parks Service n.d.:15). “Properties eligible under Criterion B are usually those associated with a person’s productive life, reflecting the time period when he or she achieved significance” (Ibid.).
401 West Chapman Avenue. This building was occupied by Harry D. Riley’s Studebaker dealership from 1924 to 1928. Mr. Riley moved to Anaheim in 1919 and was active in civic matters there until he relocated to Santa Ana in 1929. In 1925, as leader of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, Riley helped successfully remove several members of the KKK from the Anaheim City Council and other government positions. Mr. Riley’s role in this important event in Anaheim’s history is not directly related to his dealership in Orange. His associations with Anaheim and later Santa Ana, are lengthier and stronger than his brief association with Orange.

In terms of the evaluation criteria in the automotive dealership context, there is no indication that Mr. Riley played a leadership role in the automotive sales business in Orange and he only leased the building at 401 West Chapman Avenue for three years before relocating to Santa Ana. He has longer associations with other cities and properties.

The building at 401 West Chapman Avenue is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under these criteria, nor does it qualify as a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under Criteria B/2.
107 North Atchison Street. No information about the owners/occupants during the historic period was found. This building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under these criteria, nor does it qualify as a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under Criteria B/2.
135 North Atchison Street. Very little information was found for owners/occupants of this building during the historic period and none appears to be historically important. This building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under these criteria, nor does it qualify as a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under Criteria B/2.

National Register Criterion C: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represents the work of a master, or that possesses high artistic values, or that represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction.

California Register Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.

Criterion C has four componentsto consider: 1) distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; 2) work of a master; 3) high artistic values; and 4) significant and distinguishable entity. Most often properties are eligible under the first component. This component requires the property to retain enough “distinctive characteristics” (i.e., physical features common to individual 1286

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 39 types, period, or methods) to be considered a true representative of a particular type, period, or method of construction (National Park Service n.d.:18). A property is not eligible simply because it has been identified as the only such property, it must be demonstrated to be significant as well (Ibid.).

Properties that are eligible under the second component must be the work of a person of recognized greatness in a field (National Park Service n.d.:19). In addition, the property must express a particular phase in the development of the master’s career, an aspect of his/her work, or a particular idea or theme in his/her craft (Ibid.). “A property is not eligible as the work of a master, however, simply because it was designed by a prominent architect” (Ibid.).

Under the third component, “a property is eligible for its high artistic values if it so fully articulates a particular concept of design that it expresses an aesthetic ideal” as long as it expresses those ideals more fully than other properties of its type (National Park Service n.d.:19).

The fourth component refers to historic districts (National Park Service n.d.:19). As previously discussed, the project area is within a National Register-listed historic district, therefore, this component does not need to be considered.
401 West Chapman Avenue. This building has not been identified as the work of a master and it does not possess high artistic values. The building retains characteristics of a 1920s One-Part Commercial block auto dealership, such as its brick construction and symmetrical façade with simple decorative elements (medallions, stringcourse, and finials) and large showroom windows, but it no longer has a rectangular plan, which is a key characteristic of the type. The façade retains a high degree of integrity, but there are additionsto the east, west, and north elevations. In addition, in the east elevation, three large windows have been removed/filled in and a modern door has been installed and, in the west elevation, a bay/overhead door has been partitioned to include a pedestrian door. Unlike many OnePart Commercial Block buildings, which front on one street and only have one or two visible elevations, this building is adjacent to three streets and each elevation and all of its additions and alterations is visible. Therefore, the compromised integrity of design, materials, and workmanship on the secondary elevations makes a greater negative impact than they normally might. Due to this lack of integrity, the building is not a true representative of a One-Part Commercial block auto dealership.

In terms of the evaluation criteria in the automotive dealership context, it is not an excellent example of an architectural style or architect’s work with few or no alterations.

The building at 401 West Chapman Avenue is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria C/3. However, the original building (excluding all three additions) remains a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It was constructed during the District’s period of significance (1888–1940) and contributes to the wide range of property types within the District.
107 North Atchison Street. This vernacular garage is nondescript and temporally ambiguous. There is no indication that it is the work of a master, it does not possess high artistic values, and it is not a true representative of a type, period, or method of construction. It is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under these criteria and does not contribute to the significance of the Old Towne Orange Historic District under Criteria C/3. 1287

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 40 135 North Atchison Street. No information was found indicating this altered Mission Revival style building is the work of a master. The building has Mission Revival style parapets and segmental arched openings, but is modest in size, character, and design and does not possess high artistic values. While the south and east elevations retain a high degree of integrity, the north and west (street-facing façade) elevations are hidden behind a large, corrugated metal addition. It is unknown what the integrity level of the north and west elevations is behind the addition. Because of the large addition, the building is not a true representative of the Mission Revival style.

The building at 135 North Atchison Street is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria C/3. However, largely due to the relative rarity of examples of the Mission Revival style in the Old Towne Orange Historic District, the original building (excluding the addition) remains a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It was constructed during the District’s period of significance (1888–1940) and contributes to the wide range of architectural styles within the District.

National Register Criterion D and California Register Criterion 4: Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
“The most common type of property nominated under this Criterion is the archeological site (or district comprised of archeological sites). Buildings, objects, and structures (or districts comprised of these property types), however, can also be eligible for their information potential” (National Park Service n.d.:21). To qualify under this criterion the property must be a source of data that has significant bearing on a research design that addresses issues such as data gaps, alternatives to existing theories, or priority areas identified under State or federal agency management plans (Ibid.). 401 West Chapman Avenue, 107 North Atchison Street, and 135 North Atchison Street. Each of these buildings and related additions was constructed in the 20th century using common construction materials and methods. There is no indication that they have any potential to yield information important in prehistory or history. No archaeological resources were identified in the project area.

None of the buildings is eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria D/4 and none contributes to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under these criteria. 1288

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 41

IMPACTS ASSESSMENT
As discussed in the previous section, the buildings (excluding all additions) at 401 West Chapman Avenue and 135 North Atchison Street are contributors to the National Register-listed Old Towne Orange Historic District. Therefore, they are historical resources under CEQA and the potential project impacts to them must be analyzed.

CEQA establishes that “a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment” (PRC §21084.1). “Substantial adverse change,” according to PRC §5020.1(q), “means demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impaired.” In order to determine whether the proposed project will result in substantial adverse changes to the historical resources, the character-defining features (CDFs) of each resource must be identified. The project components must then be analyzed to determine their potential impacts to the CDFs and the historical significance of the resources(401 West Chapman Avenue, 135 North Atchison Street, and the District).

The proposed project is analyzed below using the SOIS and the HPDS. In addition, the Specific Plan and Pedestrian Study objectives are also considered.

CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES
CDFs are the visual aspects and physical features that make up the appearance of the historic-period building and typically include the shape of the building, its materials, craftsmanship, decorative details, and other features that contribute to its character (Nelson 1988). The alteration or removal of CDFs could result in substantial adverse changes to the significance of the resource. To the extent feasible, each of the CDFs listed below should be preserved. • 401 West Chapman Avenue:
o The barrel roof, stepped parapets, and clerestory windows; o The brick walls (excluding modern brick patches);
o The parapet-mounted finials, wall-mounted medallions, and stringcourse all on the façade; o The storefront windows in the south and east elevations, including the transoms and narrow, flat canopies;
o The primary entrance in the south elevation, including the wood and glass doors, any original hardware, sidelights, transoms, and narrow, flat canopy; o The two bay openings (excluding any non-original doors), the two metal-framed, multi-paned windows, the lintels, and the Los Angeles Iron Works bumpers all in the east elevation; and o The bay opening and sliding bay door in the west elevation. o Features that are not CDFs include all of the additions and the pedestrian door and brick patches in the east elevation.
• 135 North Atchison Street:
o The Mission Revival style parapets;
1289

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 42 o The original openings including the segmental arches with concrete “keystones”; o The wood-framed, four-paned, segmental arch windows and brick sills; o The wood-and-glass door in the east elevation, including its concrete surround and “keystone,” as well as any original hardware; and
o Any extant original openings and/or materials in the west and north elevations. o The corrugated metal addition is not a CDF.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project proposes to rehabilitate the historic-period buildings (identified as Building 1 and Building 4 on the project plans) for reuse as restaurants and construct two one-story commercial buildings (Buildings 2 and 3 on the project plans) and a small accessory building (Building 5 on the project plans) (Appendix B, Project Plans). The project also includes landscaping, three trash enclosures, and an east/west paseo.

Building 1 (401 West Chapman Avenue) rehabilitation of this building will involve the following:
• Removal of all of the existing additions.
• Installation of a canvas awning above the pedestrian entrance in the east elevation. • Replacement of the southerly bay door in the east elevation with a large multi-paned window. No details for this window have been provided, but there does not appear to be any change to the size or configuration of the opening itself.
• Installation of a new pedestrian door (required emergency exit) in a portion of the northern bay/ overhead door in the east elevation.
• Construction of a 1,330-square foot, one-story, wood-frame and plaster addition with a flat roof and parapet on the west elevation 43 feet from West Chapman Avenue and 45 feet from North Atchison Street.
o The addition will be several feet lower than the historic-period building and will have smooth plaster walls.
o A projecting circular bar area is proposed at the southwest corner of the addition. The bar will have a stepped metal roof with a conical central form that mimics the shape of the decorative finials atop the Building 1 parapet. The conical feature, which is essentially a canopy above open air seating, has a height of 18 feet, which is taller than the rest of the addition, but significantly lower than Building 1.
o Based on the color elevations, the addition will be an off-white color. • A free-standing canvas (translucent fabric) shade element will overlap a portion of the parapet of the addition and cover the parking/delivery/overflow dining area. The slightly curved shade element has a maximum height of 13 feet, which is considerably lower than Building 1. 1290

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 43 • Outdoor dining areas will be located at the southwest corner of the property. They will be enclosed by 3-foot high smooth plaster walls topped by 3-foot high tempered glass panels with metal caps. Metal exit gates are proposed on West Chapman Avenue and North Atchison Street. • Steel pickets are proposed along the north elevation of the proposed addition to Building 1. The project architect has stated that the multi-colored pickets are intended to emphasize the offset between the addition and the original Building 1 and to be part of an art program featured within the project area.
• The brick walls will be cleaned and sealed. The project architect has indicated that the cleaning process will involve gently washing the brick with soapy water, rinsing it with clean water, allowing it to dry, and then sealing it with a clear sealer. The washing will be non-abrasive and the sealer will be transparent.

Building 2 is a proposed one-story, 22-foot high, 3,470-square foot commercial building with the following features:
• Rectangular plan with east/west orientation. Located adjacent to the sidewalk along North Cypress Street.
• Gable roof with parapet and equipment well that will screen roof-mounted mechanical equipment. Interior has natural wood ceiling and exposed steel trusses. • Canted skylights on the north elevation above a flat membrane roof with a metal fascia. • Shallow eyebrow roof with metal fascia across the east elevation. This connects to the wide flat roof that extends across the most of the north elevation. • Brick exterior walls on the south and west elevations. • The east elevation (facing North Cypress Street) is dominated by a large, metal-framed storefront window that references the shape of the gable roof. The exterior walls around the window are clad with brick, featuring a soldier course, and smooth plaster below the window. • The exterior of the north elevation is predominantly brick, but includes smooth plaster around a series of glass doors that open onto an outdoor dining area. • The primary entrance is located at the east end of the north elevation adjacent to North Cypress Street and a service entrance is located at the west end of the north elevation. • Based on the colored elevations and information stated by the project architect, the brick on this building will be different from, but complement the original brick on Building 1. The color of the plaster accents is not specified but, based on the colored elevations, appears to be slightly lighter than the brick and the eyebrow roof and flat membrane roof appear to be black.

Building 3 is a proposed one-story, 22-foot high, 4,140-square foot commercial building with the following features:
• Rectangular plan with east/west orientation. Located adjacent to the sidewalk along North Cypress Street.
1291

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 44 • Barrel roof with parapet and equipment well that will screen roof-mounted mechanical equipment. Interior has natural wood ceiling and exposed steel trusses. • Canted skylights on the south elevation above a flat membrane roof with a metal fascia. • Shallow eyebrow roof with metal fascia across the east elevation. This connects to the wide flat roof that extends across most of the south elevation.
• Brick exterior walls on the north and west elevations. • The east elevation (facing North Cypress Street) is dominated by a large, metal-framed, storefront window that references the shape of the barrel roof. The exterior walls around the window are clad with brick, featuring a soldier course, and smooth plaster below the window. • The exterior of the south elevation is predominantly brick, but includes smooth plaster around a series of glass doors that open onto an outdoor dining area. • The primary entrance is located at the east end of the south elevation adjacent to North Cypress Street and a service entrance is located at the west end of the south elevation. • Based on the colored elevations and information stated by the project architect, the brick on this building will be darker than what is proposed for Building 2 and will complement the original brick on Building 1. The color of the plaster accents is not specified but, based on the colored elevations, appears to be slightly lighter than the brick and the eyebrow roof and flat membrane roof appear to be black.

Building 4 (135 North Atchison Street) will be rehabilitated as follows:
• The addition will be removed.
• The existing, exposed sheet metal roof will be retained. • All original features and openings (i.e. windows and doors) will be preserved. Deteriorated or damaged features will be repaired or replaced in-kind.
• The exterior walls, which currently have a textured plaster (stucco) finish, will be maintained, patched, and repainted.
• Based on information provided on the plans, this building will remain a medium gray color with lighter trim.

Building 5 is a proposed one-story, 11.5-foot high, 416-square foot building with the following features:
• Rectangular plan with east/west orientation. Located adjacent to North Atchison Street. • Flat roof that matches the addition to Building 1.
• Sliding barn-style doors on the south elevation.
• Smooth plaster exterior walls. Based on the colored elevations, the exterior walls will be an offwhite color. 1292

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 45 Other project features include:
• An east/west paseo north of Buildings 1 and 5 and south of Buildings 2 and 4. • A small plaza with trees adjacent to North Atchison Street between Buildings 4 and 5. • A parking lot, trash enclosures, and one pole light in the northwest corner of the project area adjacent to North Atchison Street.
• Landscaping in the form of trees and shrubs throughout the project area. • A landscaped outdoor dining area between Buildings 2 and 3 that is enclosed by smooth plaster walls topped by metal pickets and divided with glass partitions between evenly spaced trees. • A water feature on the east side of Building 5, which the project architect has indicated will include a sculpture element.
• A water feature and wood benches adjacent to North Cypress Street east of the outdoor dining area between Buildings 2 and 3.
• Property line fencing will include a 6-foot-high block wall along the north property line, a 3-foot plaster wall topped by 3 feet of glass along portions of the south and west property lines, and 6- foot high steel pickets and a gate on the west property line. No fences/walls are proposed on the east property line.

For consistency with the proposed plans, the discussions below identify the historic-period buildings as Buildings 1 and 4 and the proposed new construction as Buildings 2, 3, and 5.

PROJECT ANALYSIS
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS) for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR Part 68) and the related Guidelines for applying the Standards are typically used to analyze potential project impacts to historical resources. The SOIS “are regulatory only for projects receiving Historic Preservation Fund grant assistance and other federally assisted projects. Otherwise, these Guidelines are intended to provide general guidance for work on any historic building” (Grimmer 2017:reverse title page). Projects that comply with the SOIS are considered to be mitigated to a level that is less than significant. The SOIS are divided into four treatment categories: preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. Pursuant to 36 CFR Part 68.2.b, “rehabilitation means the act or process of making possible an efficient compatible use for a property through repair, alterations and additions while preserving those portions or features that convey its historical, cultural or architectural values.” Because the proposed project involves the rehabilitation of the two historically significant buildings for adaptive reuse, the Standards for Rehabilitation are applicable.

Standards for Rehabilitation (36 CFR Part 68.3.b)

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships.

Building 1 (401 West Chapman Avenue). This building has historically housed commercial businesses. The proposed project will rehabilitate the building for continued use as a commercial business. The CDFs will be preserved with only minimal changes. A canvas canopy will be attached 1293

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 46 to the east elevation brick wall, one large, new window will be installed where there historically was a bay door (opening will remain the same), an emergency exit door will be installed in the existing overhead door at the north end of the east elevation, and an addition will be attached to the west elevation brick wall where there has historically been an addition. These minor changes will not change the use or impair the historic significance of the building or the District.

Building 4 (135 North Atchison Street). For most of its history, this building has been used for commercial purposes. The proposed project will rehabilitate the building for continued commercial use and will preserve the CDFs. This will not impair the historic significance of the building or the District.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

Historically, the project area has been developed with a variety of buildings and the proposed new construction will continue this pattern of development without overwhelming the two historic-period buildings. Removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize the property are not proposed, but could occur when the additions to the two historic-period buildings are removed. To ensure compliance with this Standard, the project plans include the following note: Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize the buildings shall be preserved and/or repaired/replaced inkind.

3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties will not be undertaken.

No elements that create a false sense of historical development, such as conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings are proposed.

4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

None of the alterations/additions to Buildings 1 and 4 have gained significance in their own right.

Removal of the additions will not diminish the ability of the buildings to contribute to the Historic District or impair the significance of the District.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

The distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize Buildings 1 and 4 are not proposed to be removed or otherwise altered. However, removal of the additions from Buildings 1 and 4 and construction of the new addition to Building 1 could inadvertently result in damage to the buildings. To ensure that care is taken and any damage is appropriately addressed, the project plans include a note stating: Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize the buildings shall be preserved and/or repaired/replaced in-kind.

6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in 1294

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 47 design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

No deteriorated historic features have been specifically identified; however, to ensure that these types of issues are addressed appropriately the project plans include the following note: Any deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a character-defining feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials.

Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

No chemical treatments are proposed. However, the architect has stated that the brick will be cleaned by gently washing it with soapy water, rinsing it, allowing it to dry, and then sealing it.

The washing will be non-abrasive and the sealer will be transparent. To ensure compliance with this Standard, a note on the plans states: Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. Heavily soiled brick will be gently cleaned using soapy water and natural bristle brushes and rinsed with clean water. After drying, the brick will be sealed with a transparent sealer that will protect it from graffiti, pollution, and weather.

8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

There were no archaeological resources identified within the project area. However, the entire project area has been developed and completely paved and surfaced as part of various commercial uses since the 1910s to 1920s, so there is some potential for intact subsurface cultural resources. Furthermore, the project is in an area that was previously identified by the City as potentially sensitive for archaeological resources. Therefore, it is automatically subject to the City’s regulatory process, which requires monitoring by a qualified archaeologist during demolition and earthmoving activities. In addition, a note on the project plans indicates that a qualified archaeologist will be retained prior to issuance of demolition and/or grading permits.

9. New additions, exterior alterations or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.

Building 1 (401 West Chapman Avenue). One new addition is proposed to the west elevation of this building. Proposed exterior alterations to this building include installation of a canvas awning over the entrance in the east elevation, replacement of one bay door in the east elevation with a large window (opening will not change), and installation of an emergency exit door in the existing bay door in the east elevation. Related new construction includes proposed Buildings 2, 3, and 5.

The proposed awning is a minor alteration that will be clearly modern and compatible with the historic-period building in size and scale. It will not destroy historic materials, features, or spatial relationships that characterize the building. However, it is conceivable that its installation could result in some damage to the brick. As stated above, the project plans include a note that clearly 1295

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 48 indicates that any damage would be repaired in a historically appropriate manner. Installation of the awning will not diminish the significance of the building or impair its ability to contribute to the District.

Alterations are proposed to both bay doors in the east elevation. The bay doors themselves are not CDFs, but the openings are and both openings will be maintained in the same size and configuration. No details have been provided for the proposed replacement of the southern bay door with a window or for the installation of an emergency door in the northern bay door; therefore, neither of these alterations can be fully analyzed. If completed in an appropriate manner, these alterations would be considered minor and easily reversible. They would not diminish the significance of the building or impair its ability to contribute to the District.

To ensure that the alterations to the bay doors are completed in a manner that is compatible with the historic character of Building 1 and the District, it is recommended that they be subject to review and approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. It is further recommended that both openings have doors/windows that are similar in appearance, design, and materials in order to maintain the current symmetry and maintain the visual character of the bay doors.

The proposed addition to the west elevation is compatible with Building 1 in terms of materials (smooth plaster), features (conical bar element), size (lower and smaller), scale and proportion (rectangular with a flat roof), and massing (boxy). The proposed smooth plaster exterior is complementary to and compatible with the exposed brick of Building 1. The nearby former packing house at 426 West Almond Street and its neighbor at the southwest corner of West Almond Street and South Cypress Street are both good examples of this combination of materials.

The conical bar element references the decorative finials on the parapet of Building 1, while its metal structure differentiates it as modern. The generally rectangular, boxy shape and flat roof of the addition are also compatible with the scale, proportion, and massing of Building 1; the smaller size and height of the addition ensure that it is subordinate. Since there has historically been an addition in the same general location, the proposed addition will not substantially alter the spatial relationships that have historically characterized the property. The addition will not impair the significance of the building or its ability to contribute to the District.

Buildings 2 and 3. The proposed new construction of Buildings 2 and 3 will not destroy historic materials, features, or spatial relationships that characterize the property. As previously stated, the property has historically been developed with multiple buildings and Buildings 2 and 3 represent a continuation of this development pattern. Proposed Buildings 2 and 3 are compatible with historic-period Buildings 1 and 4 and other buildings in the Historic District in the following ways:
• Materials. The proposed materials are brick, plaster, and glass. There are numerous historicperiod brick buildings in the immediate vicinity and throughout the District. Plaster, used as an accent or as the dominant wall surface, is also fairly widespread in the District, as are large metal-framed, multi-paned windows. Examples of buildings that incorporate one of more of these materials include Building 1 in the project area, the California Wire Company building a block north, the building on the southwest corner of West Chapman Avenue and South Cypress Street (south of Building 1), the Chase Bank building on the Plaza, and the buildings on the south side of West Almond Avenue between the railroad tracks and South Cypress Street.
1296

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 49 Buildings 2 and 3 also have shallow eyebrow roofs and flat membrane roofs with exposed metal fascia. These minor metal accents lend a slight industrial flavor to the buildings that is in keeping with the metal roof of Building 4 and the historic character of the immediate vicinity. Examples of nearby industrial buildings and features include the railroad, the buildings at 128 and 160 South Cypress Street, and the California Wire Company building. The industrial flavor is also consistent with the objectives of the Specific Plan (discussed below).

The proposed building materials are compatible with the historic character of the area and will not diminish the significance of the District or its contributors. • Features. Large windows dominate the east elevations (facing North Cypress Street) of Buildings 2 and 3. The shape of each window references the roof form of its building: the top of the Building 2 window is angled like a front gable and the top of the Building 3 window is curved like a barrel roof. While both roof forms as well as large, multi-paned, street-facing windows are common throughout the District, the shapes of the windows proposed for Buildings 2 and 3 are not common within the District. This minor design element serves as a subtle reminder that the buildings, while compatible with the historic character of the area, are modern.

The canted, glass skylights reference the clerestory windows on Building 1. Clerestory windows were fairly common on early 20th century industrial, manufacturing, and commercial buildings and are also present on Historic District contributors (128 and 210 South Cypress Street and 426 West Almond Avenue) within a block or two of the project area. The skylights are an updated design of a feature found in the District. They are compatible with the historic character of the area and will not diminish the significance of the District or its contributors.

Buildings 2 and 3 also include several glass doors along the interior elevations that open onto an outdoor dining area. These doors, which are a distinctly modern feature, are set back from and perpendicular to the right-of-way. They open onto a landscaped area enclosed by a low wall and metal pickets and will only be minimally visible from the right-of-way and the rest of the project area. This feature, like the skylights and the shape of the street-facing windows, helps identify Buildings 2 and 3 as modern construction, but does not diminish the historic character of the area or the significance of the District or its contributors.

Finally, as previously noted, there is an outdoor dining area between Buildings 2 and 3. This area is approximately 30 feet wide and creates a view corridor to Building 4 from North Cypress Street. Both buildings are approximately 20 feet east of Building 4 and offset from it so that they do not distract from, overshadow, or diminish the significance of Building 4. • Size, Scale, Proportion, and Massing. Buildings 2 and 3 have a boxy, rectangular plan and a zero setback that are similar to numerous historic-period buildings in the District, including Building 1. They smaller than Building 1 in terms of height and square footage and do not overshadow Building 1 in any way. The east/west orientation of Buildings 2 and 3 puts their narrowest elevations adjacent to the street giving them less frontage on North Cypress Street than Building 1 and further emphasizing their subordinate nature in relation to the historicperiod building. In terms of size, scale, proportion, and massing, Buildings 2 and 3 are compatible with the historic character of the area and will not diminish the significance of the District or its contributors.
1297

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 50 Building 4 (135 North Atchison Street). No additions to this building are proposed. Instead, the corrugated metal addition will be removed, which will reduce the size of the building and slightly change the spatial relationships within the property. However, this is a minor change that is more than offset by the prospect of revealing the Mission Revival style structure behind the addition.

The exposed sheet metal roof will be retained, as will the textured plaster (stucco) exterior, which will be patched and repainted. As noted on the project plans, if any of the CDFs are damaged, they will be repaired in a historically appropriate manner. The architect has also stated that all of the extant original openings (doors and windows) will be preserved. Because only the south and east elevations were visible during the field survey, it is recommended that when the addition is removed, the openings be verified and, if necessary, the project plans be revised to reflect all of the openings accurately. Proposed changes to Building 4 will not impair its significance or its ability to contribute to the significance of the Historic District.

Building 5. The proposed new construction of Building 5 will not destroy historic materials, features, or spatial relationships that characterize the property. As previously stated, the property has historically been developed with multiple buildings and Building 5 represent a continuation of this development pattern. Proposed Building 5 is compatible with historic-period Buildings 1 and 4 and other buildings in the Historic District in the following ways:
• Materials. The proposed material is smooth plaster. There are numerous historic-period buildings in the immediate vicinity and throughout the District that utilize plaster either as an accent or the primary wall surface. Examples include the former depot and post office. • Features. This small accessory building is utilitarian in character and does not incorporate any special architectural features.
• Size, Scale, Proportion, and Massing. This rectangular building will be 11.5 feet tall and 416 square feet and will have a flat roof. It is considerably smaller in size, scale, and massing than existing Building 1 and proposed Buildings 2 and 3. Although it is very slightly larger in area than Building 4 (minus the additions), due to the lack of architectural details, it has less scale and massing and will not overshadow Building 4 in any way. As an accessory building, its proportion to the other buildings is appropriate.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

Building 1 (401 West Chapman Avenue). A new addition is proposed to be constructed on the west elevation of Building 1. As part of this construction, the original exposed brick wall and sliding bay door will be preserved. The essential form and integrity of the original building will be unimpaired if the addition is removed in the future. Similarly, removal of the proposed new, freestanding construction (shade element, walls/fences, Buildings 2, 3, and 5) will not impair the essential form and integrity of Building 1 or the significance of the District.

Building 4 (135 North Atchison Street). No additions to Building 4 are proposed. Future removal of all proposed new construction (addition to Building 1 and new Buildings 2, 3, and 5) would not impair the essential form and integrity of Building 4 or the significance of the District. 1298

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 51 Historic Preservation Design Standards
The HPDS were written to be consistent with the SOIS, therefore, most projects that are consistent with one set of standards will be consistent with the other (City of Orange 2018:3). Based on the analysis under the SOIS above, the project is consistent with the SOIS. However, the HPDS do have specific standards for additions to historic-period buildings and infill construction, which City staff has indicated are worth addressing separately. Like the SOIS, the HPDS are intended to be flexible. Not all of the guidelines have to be met, but enough should be incorporated so that new construction is compatible with the District, while still clearly modern (City of Orange 2018).

The following paragraph relative to infill construction was taken from the HPDS pages 46 and 47.

Infill in historic districts may consist of constructing a new building on a vacant lot (primary building) or constructing additional buildings (secondary buildings) on a lot containing an existing building. Successful infill construction takes cues from the surrounding historic neighborhood and its buildings without creating an exact replica of a historic architectural style. New construction should be consistent with the mass, scale, materials, height, roof form, setbacks, and pattern of windows and doors of existing buildings on the street. The site design of an historic structure is an essential part of its character. The spacing and location of buildings on each lot within an historic neighborhood usually establishes a rhythm that is essential to the character of the neighborhood. The grouping of buildings, with uniform setbacks and street features, gives each neighborhood a strong sense of place. One of the first steps to designing an infill building is to look at other buildings on the block and determine what are the common design elements that create a consistent streetscape and neighborhood character. Contemporary interpretations of historic architectural styles are not discouraged, but the primary goal of infill construction should be to create a building that responds to its context within a historic neighborhood.

For purposes of identifying the common design elements that create a consistent streetscape and neighborhood character in the project vicinity, an area east of the railroad tracks that includes nine blocks where the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan and Old Towne Historic District (District) overlap was considered. The boundaries of this area are the railroad tracks on the west, Olive Street on the east, West Maple Avenue on the north, and Palmyra Avenue on the south. Within these nine blocks, there are 116 properties (excluding parking lots) and, of those, 67 properties are District contributors. These properties include a mix of residential and non-residential buildings, often within the same block.

Because of this mix of uses, the scale, massing, and setbacks of the buildings are not consistent.

Residential properties, whether single-family homes or apartment buildings, typically have landscaped front yards, while most of the non-residential buildings are either sidewalk-adjacent or separated from the sidewalk by parking lots. The right-of-way configurations also vary, having sections with landscaped parkways, sections without parkways, and an inconsistent pattern of street trees. In this nine-block area, there are also at least four different styles of streetlights, as well as a variety of parking lot light styles. Cumulatively, the mixes of uses, setbacks, sidewalk/parkway treatments, and street lighting in this nine-block area present an inconsistent streetscape with an indistinct neighborhood character that lacks rhythm. Focusing just on the immediate project vicinity reveals a similar lack of cohesive character. Of the 15 properties adjacent to North Cypress between West Chapman Avenue and West Maple Avenue, including the project area, there are six District 1299

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 52 contributors (three residential and three non-residential), seven non-contributors (all nonresidential), two parking lots, two segments of landscaped parkway, six unevenly spaced street trees, and historic-period and modern buildings. Within these nine blocks, the unifying theme seems to be diversity.

1. The location of new primary and secondary structures on a lot should be consistent with the historic pattern of front and side yard setbacks.

Buildings 2 and 3. These buildings have zero setback on North Cypress Street. This is consistent with Building 1, buildings to the north on the west side of North Cypress Street, and many other non-residential historic-period buildings in the area.

Building 5. This small storage building is situated 2.5 feet behind the property line adjacent to North Atchison Street. This is consistent with existing development in the project area and most non-residential development in the surrounding area.

2. New buildings should be similar in mass and scale to surrounding buildings. a. If a new building is larger than its neighbors, it should be modulated so that the appearance of the mass is located back from the street and is less visible.

Buildings 2 and 3. These proposed buildings are shorter and smaller than Building 1 and are compatible with other nearby historic-period buildings in size, scale, and massing. The exception to this is the diminutive Building 4 (374 square feet), which is smaller than most of the other buildings in the District. Buildings 2 and 3 are proposed to be set back more than 20 feet from this building and will not overshadow or distract from this small building.

Building 5. This proposed building is comparable in size to Building 4, but is shorter and significantly smaller than most of the other nearby buildings in the District. b. Properties with new construction are recommended to use the average Floor Area Ratio of historic properties on the surrounding street as a model for compatible new development.

Buildings 2 and 3. These buildings, at 22 feet in height and 3,470 square feet and 4,140 square feet in area, respectively, are comparable to other nearby buildings in mass and scale.

Building 5. This building, at 15 feet in height and 416 square feet, is smaller in mass and scale than most other buildings in the area.

3. The height and roof form of a new building should be compatible to surrounding historic buildings. a. Roofing materials and details should be similar to those found on historic properties.

Buildings 2 and 3. These buildings are each 22 feet high, which is lower than Building 1 and compatible with the heights of other nearby buildings. The roofs of each building include a brick parapet, which is similar to Building 1 as well as many other historic-period, nonresidential buildings in the District. Roof-mounted equipment will not be visible from the ground. The north elevation of Building 2 and the south elevation of Building 3 each have a series of canted skylights above a flat membrane roof with exposed metal fasciae. As previously discussed, both of these features reference elements on Building 1 and those found on other historic-period buildings in the District. 1300

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 53 Building 5. This small building has a flat roof that is similar to many of the non-residential, historic-period buildings in the District.
b. Dormers should be similar in size and style to historic properties.

Not applicable. No dormers are proposed.

4. A new primary building should have a main entrance and façade parallel to and facing the street.

Buildings 2 and 3. These buildings both have large storefront windows in the east elevations that face North Cypress Street and entrances that are just a few steps from the sidewalk in the north (Building 2) and south (Building 3) elevations. Although neither building opens directly onto the North Cypress Street right-of-way, the street-facing elevations clearly read as the primary elevations, which is the intent of this standard.

Building 5. This building is not a primary building.

5. The progression of public to private spaces from the street should be maintained. a. A sheltered building entrance or front porch may be appropriate to create a transitional space from the street to the interior of the building.

Buildings 2 and 3. The primary public entrance into each of these buildings maintains the progression of public to private spaces that is common for non-residential buildings throughout the District. Similar to many commercial buildings in the area, the entrances are a few feet back from the sidewalk and are sheltered, in this case by a wide, flat membrane roof.

Building 5. Not applicable. This is not a primary or public building.

6. New construction should have a similar pattern of windows and doors on elevations visible from the street to those found in surrounding historic buildings.

Buildings 2 and 3. The block as a whole does not have a consistent pattern of windows and doors since there is a mix of residential and non-residential buildings, as well as historic-period and modern buildings. In the larger nine-block area, some historic-period commercial buildings have a symmetrical pattern of façade doors and windows, such as Building 1 and 402–424 West Chapman Avenue. Others, including 201 and 324 W. Chapman Avenue, 220 Maple Avenue, and 412 West Almond Street, have an asymmetrical arrangement with the entrance located at or near one end of the façade. Most of the storefront windows have divided lights and are verticallyoriented. The pattern of windows and doors on the street-facing elevations of Buildings 2 and 3 is similar to and consistent with those found in the surrounding historic-period buildings. They are asymmetrical in their arrangements and have large, vertically-oriented storefront windows with divided lights.

Building 5. Not applicable. This is not a primary or public building.

7. The use of traditional building materials found on historic buildings in the Historic District is encouraged for new construction.
a. Exterior materials shall be compatible with the size, scale, design, texture, reflectivity, durability and color of historic materials used on comparable historic buildings in the Historic District.
1301

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 54 Buildings 2 and 3. The compatibility of the materials/textures, size, scale, and designs of these buildings was discussed in detail under SOIS Standard 9 and, therefore, is not repeated here.

Aside from glass, which is a traditional building material, no reflective materials are proposed as part of the new construction. Durability of the proposed materials is anticipated to meet or exceed the durability of the historic materials used throughout the District. Although exact colors have not been specified, based on the colored elevations and statements made by the project architect, the color of the brick on Building 2 will be different from, but complementary to, the original brick on Building 1. Similarly, the color of the brick on Building 3 will be darker than what is proposed for Building 2 and complement the original brick on Building 1. It is anticipated that the plaster accents on these buildings will be off-white, but that has not been specified. To ensure compatibility, it is recommended that City staff require approval of the colors for Buildings 2 and 3 prior to issuance of building permits.

Building 5. The compatibility of the material, size, scale, texture, and design of this building was discussed in detail under SOIS Standard 9 and, therefore, is not repeated here. No reflective materials are proposed for this building. Durability of the proposed materials is anticipated to meet or exceed the durability of the historic materials used throughout the District. Based on the colored elevations and information from the project architect, this building will be an off-white color that will be compatible with other buildings in the area. To ensure compatibility, City staff should approve the color of Building 5 prior to issuance of building permits.
b. Use of simplified versions of traditional architectural details is encouraged.

Buildings 2 and 3. The canted skylights on these buildings are a simplified version of the Building 1 clerestory windows and sawtooth roofs of other historic-period buildings in the District. The shallow eyebrow roof and flat membrane roofs reference similar forms found on Building 1 above the storefront windows and the horizontal line of the lintels in the east elevation. This horizontal element is also found in the form of awnings on a number of the commercial buildings in the District. Each building also includes a soldier course, which is found on many of the brick buildings in the District, including Building 1.

Building 5. Building 5 is utilitarian and has no decorative elements or details. It is typical of a secondary building of its type.
c. Alternates to traditional building materials may be considered, if the alternate material is compatible with the design and appearance of comparable historic features on similar contributing buildings in the Historic District.

Buildings 2 and 3. As previously stated, materials proposed for these buildings are brick, plaster, and glass, all of which are traditional building materials. In addition, the eyebrow roof and flat membrane roof will have metal fasciae. Metal is also a common material throughout the district (e.g., window frames, roofing material, bay doors, accents, and siding).

Building 5. Alternative materials are not proposed for this building.

8. The height, mass and scale of new secondary buildings should be minimized as much as possible. 1302

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 55 a. In general, secondary buildings should be no taller than the primary building. In limited areas, secondary buildings may be taller than primary buildings, if this condition is already typical of the streetscape of the surrounding blocks.

Building 5. This secondary building is not taller than Buildings 1 or 4. b. The design of secondary buildings should be subordinate to the primary building on the lot.

Building 5. The design of Building 5 is utilitarian and devoid of decorative elements. It is subordinate to Building 1 in every way. Although it is slightly larger than Building 4, by virtue of its nondescript design devoid of any decorative features, it is clearly subordinate to it. c. Historic accessory structures were typically utilitarian buildings with limited decorative elements. Basic rectangular building forms and simple roof configurations are appropriate.

Building 5. Building 5 is a small, rectangular building with a flat roof. It is utilitarian in design with no decorative elements.

9. Infill construction should adhere to the sections on Standards for Historic Residential Buildings – Setting or Standards for Historic Commercial Buildings – Setting.

Standard 9 requires infill (i.e., new) construction to adhere to Standards for historic-period buildingsin four key locations. Buildings 2 and 3, which front on North Cypress Street, and Building 5, which is adjacent to North Atchison Street, are not located in any of the four key areas where these Standards apply. In any case, the Standards (paraphrased below) were taken into consideration. To avoid redundancy, discussion is only provided where there are new issues or clarification is needed.
a. Historic sidewalks and streetlights should be preserved. The sidewalks will remain, but will be repaired and patched as necessary. No changes to the streetlights are proposed. b. Primary building entrances shall be oriented toward the street. c. Outdoor dining is encouraged in front of buildings in the Plaza District and Downtown Core.

Not applicable. The project area is not within these areas. d. Front yard landscaping of residences converted to commercial uses should be retained. Not applicable.
e. Exterior light fixtures shall be compatible with the architectural style of the building. Proposed lighting includes tree up lights, string lights in trees, in-ground up lights, low wall and landscape lights, building wall lights, soffit lights, and one pole light. With the exception of the pole light, the proposed light fixtures are small and unobtrusive. The 20-foot tall pole light, consisting of a concrete base, steel pole, and square arm mount, is proposed adjacent to the northern property line in the trash enclosure area. The light will be located approximately 25 feet east of the North Atchison Street right-of-way and will be at least partially screened from view from the right-of-way by a tree that is proposed at the northwest corner of the property.

This utilitarian and unobtrusive light is consistent with other parking lot lighting in the area. It will not detract from the historic character of the District. f. Trash enclosures shall be integrated into the building design and on secondary elevations.

Trash enclosures are proposed in the parking area at the northwest corner of the property. 1303

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 56 Although not integrated into the design of Buildings 2, 3, or 5, their location in the northwest corner of the property adjacent to the north property line is unobtrusive and far enough from the historic-period buildings that the trash enclosures do not distract from them in any way. g. New buildings and additions shall not exceed two stories, 30 feet, or the height of adjacent buildings, whichever is the lesser height.

Building 1 addition. The proposed addition to Building 1 is one story, approximately 16 feet in height, and lower than Building 1. The addition appears to be approximately the same height as Building 4, but is located about 40 feet to the southeast and will not overshadow Building 4 in any way.

Buildings 2 and 3. Buildings 2 and 3 are both 22-foot tall, one-story buildings that are lower than Building 1. According to the project architect, Building 4 is approximately 22 feet tall, although the color elevations make it look a little shorter than Buildings 2 and 3. If there is a small difference in height, it is offset by the location and orientation of the buildings. Buildings 2 and 3 are oriented toward North Cypress Street and are separated by an approximately 30- foot wide outdoor dining area. Building 4, which is located between and approximately 20 feet west of Buildings 2 and 3, is oriented toward North Atchison Street. Building 4 is clearly visible from North Cypress Street and North Atchison Street and is framed by Buildings 2 and 3 rather than silhouetted against or hidden by them. For these reasons, the intent of this standard is met, if indeed Building 4 is slightly shorter than Buildings 2 and 3.

Building 5. This building is shorter than Building 1 and Building 4. h. In the Plaza District new construction with exposed sloped roofs is prohibited. Not applicable.

The project area is not in this district; however, Buildings 2, 3, and 5 comply with this standard. i. In the Plaza District a consistent building street wall with zero setbacks shall be maintained by all new construction. Not applicable. The project area is not in this district; however, Buildings 2 and 3 comply with this standard and Building 5 is set back only a few feet from the sidewalk. j. In the Downtown Core and Spoke Streets, new construction shall be compatible with the prevailing pattern of setbacks on the same street. Not applicable. Buildings 2, 3 and 5 are not on spoke streets; however, they do comply with this standard. k. For new construction, a 15-foot landscape area is required between all parking areas and any public right-of-way. The proposed site plan shows a 10-foot landscaped setback adjacent to the parking area in the northwest corner of the property and an approximately 3-foot landscaped setback along the parking area south of Building 5. Both of these are less than what the standard specifies, but comparable with nearby conditions. For example, the landscaped setback provided between the Hilbert Museum parking lot and North Atchison Street just north of the project area appears to be 5 feet or less and there is almost no landscaping between the former depot’s parking lot and North Atchison Street, west of the project area. The landscaped setbacks at the northwest corner of West Chapman Avenue and Lemon Street (east of the project area), as well as the southwest corner of West Chapman Avenue and the railroad tracks (southwest of the project area) also appear to be deficient.

Although the proposed landscaped setbacks adjacent to the parking areas are less than what this standard specifies, they are comparable to or greater than those in the surrounding area and, therefore, compatible with the character of the District. 1304

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 57 l. For existing construction, landscape areas should be provided between all parking areas and any public right-of-way to the greatest extent feasible. Landscaping is proposed throughout the property, including between the parking lots and North Cypress Street.

The HPDS for additions to historic-period buildings are paraphrased below. To avoid redundancy, discussion is only provided where there are new issues or clarification is needed.

1. Compatible additions should be smaller in mass, scale, and volume than the historic building.

2. Additions should be located away from the street at the rear of the building. The intent of this standard is to minimize the visibility of additions from the public right-of-way. However, Building 1 is adjacent to three streets and the rear of the building (north elevation) is not necessarily the farthest away from a street or the least visible location for an addition. The proposed addition is located on the west side of the building, which is the farthest location from all three streets. It is set back 43 feet from West Chapman Avenue, 45 feet from North Atchison Street, and 50 feet from North Cypress Street, which is on the other side of Building 1. This location complies with the intent of this standard.

3. After construction, it should be clear what is new and what dates to the historic-period.

4. Traditional building materials shall be used, but may differ from the historic materials in size, scale, or profile.

5. Roof forms should be compatible with the existing building.

6. Window and door openings should be consistent with those in the historic building. The west elevation of the Building 1 addition has two openings. The southern opening has a single, solid core door and the northern opening has a pair of solid core doors. All of these doors are similar to the existing man door in the east elevation of Building 1. The south elevation of the addition has one opening consisting of two double automatic glass doors (electric sliding pocket). These are clearly modern, but compatible with Building 1 in that they have a similar appearance to the large storefront windows in the south elevation of Building 1.

7. The addition should result in no more than minimal loss of historic materials. CDFs of the historic building should not be obscured, damaged, or destroyed.

Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan
The stated purpose of the Specific Plan is to “build an environment around the Santa Fe Depot that supports and facilitates transit use by capitalizing on pedestrian traffic and encouraging a mix of employment, shopping and residential uses within easy walking distance of the Orange Transportation Center” (Arroyo Group 2012:2). To accomplish this, the Specific Plan calls for development that is “designed for pedestrians, with pedestrian linkages to the transportation center and connections to” other destinations within Old Towne Orange (Ibid.). The proposed project addresses this by providing a pedestrian-friendly, landscaped paseo through the middle of the project.

This feature complements Depot Park across Atchison Street and facilitates pedestrian traffic between the depot and the heart of Old Towne, a few blocks to the east. 1305

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 58 As discussed previously, one of the Specific Plan objectives is to maintain an industrial flavor in the vicinity of the depot. The proposed project achieves compliance with this objective through the use of brick as a primary building material and metal accents in the new construction (e.g., metal fascia and painted steel pipe screen).

Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
The Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study recommends that North Alley-area property owners be encouraged to “open a pedestrian pathway to complete the North Alley connection” and that outdoor dining and plaza areas be encouraged (RRM Design Group 2008:54). It also calls for “pedestrianfriendly paseos, plazas, and amenities” between Cypress Street and the depot (RRM Design Group 2008:16). The proposed project is consistent with all of these objectives. Outdoor dining areas are proposed adjacent to Building 1 and between Buildings 2 and 3. In addition, the site plan provides a pedestrian-friendly plaza area adjacent to Building 4 and a clear east/west paseo between North Cypress Street and North Atchison Street, completing that segment of the North Alley pedestrian connection.

PROJECT ANALYSIS SUMMARY
The proposed project has been analyzed using the SOIS, HPDS, Specific Plan, and Pedestrian Study and has been found consistent with all of them. It will not result in any substantial adverse changes to the historical resources (401 West Chapman Avenue, 135 North Atchison Street, and the District).

For additional detail and clarification, LSA recommends that prior to issuance of building permits the City require approval of exterior colors for the Building 1 addition and Buildings 2, 3, 4, and 5;.the alterations to the bay doors in the east elevation of Building 1; and verification of the Building 4 openings after removal of the addition.
1306

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 59

RECOMMENDATIONS
The foregoing report has provided background information on the project area, outlined the methods used in the current study, and presented the results of the various avenues of research. As a result of this study, Buildings 1 and 4 (401 West Chapman Avenue and 135 North Atchison Street), excluding all additions, were evaluated as contributors to the National Register-listed Old Towne Orange Historic District. Buildings 1 and 4, as well as the District, are “historical resources” as defined by CEQA.

Therefore, the proposed project was analyzed to determine whether it would result in any substantial adverse changes to the significance of these historical resources. The analysis included the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (SOIS) and the City’s Historic Preservation Design Standards (HPDS). The objectives and recommendations of the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan and the Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study were also considered. As a result of these analyses, it was determined that the proposed project is in compliance with the SOIS and the HPDS and meets the objectives of the Specific Plan and Pedestrian Study. However, to provide additional detail and clarity, LSA recommends that the City consider applying the following conditions:

Prior to issuance of building permits:

1. The exterior colors for the Building 1 addition and Buildings 2, 3, 4, and 5 are subject to approval by City staff.

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 60 complete the inspection within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD will have the opportunity to offer recommendations for the disposition of the remains. 1308

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 61

REFERENCES
AEGIS
1991 City of Orange Historic Resources Inventory, 109 North Atchison. Provided by the City of Orange.

Ancestry.com
Var. A variety of records were accessed online in November 2017 and April and May 2018 at:
http://home.ancestry.com/. These include city directories, voter registration records, and United States Census Data.

Arroyo Group, The
2012 Orange Santa Fe Deport Specific Plan. Accessed online in October 2020 at the City’s website: https://www.cityoforange.org/DocumentCenter/View/614/Santa-Fe-DepotSpecific-Plan-Update---Final-PDF.

Bean, Lowell John, and Charles R. Smith
1978 Gabrielino. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, pp. 538–549. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 8, W.C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Bean, Lowell John, and Florence C. Shipek
1978 Luiseño. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, pp. 550–563. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 8, W.C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Beck, Warren A., and Ynez D. Haase
1974 Historical Atlas of California. Oklahoma City: University of Oklahoma Press.

Blackburn, Thomas C.
1962–1963 Ethnohistoric Descriptions of Gabrielino Material Culture. Annual Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey 5: 1–50.

Brigandi, Phil
2011 City History – Old Towne. Originally accessed online via the Orange Public Library website in 2011. Accessed online in May 2018 in a slightly different format at:
http://www.cityoforange.org/938/Introduction.
2017 Email correspondence with Mr. Brigandi, noted local historian, regarding the history of the project area and Harry D. Riley.

California Geological Survey
2002 California Geomorphic Provinces. California Geologic Survey Note 36. California Department of Conservation.

California Office of Historic Preservation
1999 California Register and National Register: A Comparison (for purposes of determining eligibility for the California Register), OHP Technical Assistance Series #6. Available online 1309

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 62 at: https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/technical%20assistance%20bulletin%206% 202011%20update.pdf.
2020 Built Environment Resource Directory. Obtained from the State’s website in April 2020 at:
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30338.

Chapman University
2019 About Chapman. Our Story: Where We’ve Been, Where We’re Going. Accessed online in January 2019 at: https://www.chapman.edu/about/our-story/index.aspx.

Chattel Architecture
2005a Department of Parks and Recreation form for Chapman W. 401, APN 039-171-12. Provided by the City of Orange.
2005b Department of Parks and Recreation form for Cypress N. 112, APN 039-171-12. Provided by the City of Orange.
2005c Department of Parks and Recreation form for Chapman W. 403, APN 039-171-12. Provided by the City of Orange.
2005d Department of Parks and Recreation form for Atchison N. 107, APN 039-171-12. Provided by the City of Orange.
2005e Department of Parks and Recreation form for Atchison N. 135, APN 039-171-03. Provided by the City of Orange.

City of Orange
n.d. Old Towne District. Accessed online in November 2018 at: https://www.cityoforange.org/ 262/Old-Towne-District.
2018 Historic Preservation Design Standards. Accessed online at the City’s website in 2021:
https://www.cityoforange.org/DocumentCenter/View/5928/Historic-PreservationDesign-Standards-for-Old-Towne?bidId=.

Var. Building permits for 401 West Chapman Avenue. On file at the City of Orange, Building Division.

Grimmer, Anne E.
2017 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, & Reconstructing Historic Buildings.

Published by the United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Technical Preservation Services, Washington, D.C. Accessed online in February 2021 at https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/treatment-guidelines-2017.pdf.

Heizer, R.F. ed.
1968 The Indians of Los Angeles County. Hugo Reid’s Letters of 1852. Southwest Museum Papers

21. Los Angeles, California.
1978 Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 8: California. W.C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
1310

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 63 Historic Resources Group
1996 National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form for Early AutoRelated Properties in Pasadena, California. Accessed online in November 2018 at:
https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/GetAsset/NRHP/64500055_text.

Hudson, D. Travis
1971 Proto-Gabrielino Patterns of Territorial Organization in Southern Coastal California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 7(2):49–76.

Johnston, Bernice E.
1962 California’s Gabrielino Indians. (Frederick Webb Hodge Anniversary Publication Fund 8) Los Angeles: Southwest Museum.

Kroeber, Alfred L.
1976 Handbook of the Indians of California. Dover Publications, New York. Originally published 1925, Bulletin No. 78, Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

LP3 Architecture, Inc.
2020 Old Towne Gateway, 401 West Chapman Avenue, Orange, California. Plans prepared in December 2020.

Los Angeles Times
1924a Orange is Building Hub. January 27, page 109.
1924b Building in Orange on Up Grade. March 8, page 13. 1925a Four Secret Prisoners in Anaheim Klan War. January 27, pages 1 and 2. 1925b Klan Scoured in Resolution. January 13, page 10.
1925c Anti-Klan Forces Lead in Election at Anaheim. February 4, pages 1 and 3. 1959 Advertisement. Put a Boat in Your Budget. July 26, page 209 (third column). 1966 Advertisement. May 29, page 309.
1969 Advertisement. November 22, page 94.

Margolies, John
1993 Pump and Circumstance, Glory Days of the Gas Station. Bulfinch Press, Little, Brown and Company, Boston.

Moratto, Michael J.
2004 California Archaeology. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press. Originally published 1984.

National Park Service
1995 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resources.

Nelson, Lee H., FAIA
1988 Preservation Brief 17, Architectural Character-Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving their Character. Technical Preservation Series, National 1311

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 64 Park Service. Accessed online in January 2016 at: http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-topreserve/briefs/17-architectural-character.htm.

Norris, R.M., and R.W. Webb
1976 Geology of California, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Santa Barbara.

Orange County Archives
2017 Email correspondence in November 2017 that resulted in the Archives providing various information including 1938 and 1947 aerial photographs of the project area.

Var. Email correspondence in March 2021 that resulted in the Archives providing city directory information regarding various addresses in and around the project area.

Orange Daily News
1912 Application for Permit. October 17, page 1.

Riverside Art Museum
n.d. The First of Its Kind: Riverside Auto Center, 1965. Accessed online in November 2018 at:
http://www.riversideartmuseum.org/exhibits/exhibit-archive/first-its-kind-riverside-autocenter-1965/.

RRM Design Group
2008 City of Orange Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study. Accessed online in April 2021 at:
https://www.cityoforange.org/DocumentCenter/View/11761/Depot-Plaza-PedestrianConnection-Study-2008?bidId=.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps
1909 Accessed online in November 2017 and 2018 via the Los Angeles Public Library’s website at: https://www.lapl.org/.
1922 Accessed online in November 2017 and 2018 via the Los Angeles Public Library’s website at: https://www.lapl.org/.
1950 Accessed online in November 2017 and 2018 via the Los Angeles Public Library’s website at: https://www.lapl.org/.

Santa Ana Register
1919 Longworth Sells His Garage at Anaheim. August 9, page 9. 1920a A Greater Orange County Industry. August 21, page 7. 1920b Anaheim Board to Advertise Section. January 14, page 6. 1920c Anaheim Boost Clubs to Unite. June 15, page 6.
1923 Orange Firm to Put Up Building. October 11, page 17. 1927a Orange Citizens to Vote on Park Project June 21; Circular Law is Passed. May 21, page 17. 1927b Police News. July 5, page 11.
1928a Advertisement. August 4, page 19.
1928b No title. April 8, page 2.
1929a Year Seen as Banner Period for Building. January 3, page 7. 1929b You and Your Friends. July 22, page 11.
1312

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21) 65 1929c Harry D. Riley Announces Concentration of Business and Civic Interest in S. A. August 4, page 13.
1930 H. Doty Buys Interest in Car Company. July 20, page 10.

Schoenherr, Allan A.
1992 A Natural History of California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

SeeCalifornia.com
n.d. Orange, CA History. Accessed online in April 2021 at: http://www.seecalifornia.com/ history/orange-historic-district.html.

Sharp, Robert P.
1976 Southern California (K/H Geology Field Guide Series). Kendall/Hunt Publishing, Dubuque.

Wallace, William J.
1955 A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11(3):214–230.
1978 Post-Pleistocene Archaeology. In California, edited by R. Heizer, pp. 550–563. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8. W.C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Warren, Claude N.
1968 Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology 1(3). Portales. 1984 The Desert Region. In California Archaeology, by M. Moratto with contributions by D.A.

Fredrickson, C. Raven, and C. N. Warren, pp. 339–430. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

Warren, Claude N., and Robert H. Crabtree
1986 Prehistory of the Southwestern Area. In W.L. D’Azevedo ed., Handbook of the North American Indians, Vol. 11, Great Basin, pp. 183–193. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
1313

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21)

APPENDIX A
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION (DPR) 523 FORMS
1314
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # 30-159847 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 1D
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date

Page 1 of 6 ends

P1. Other Identifier: 401–403 West Chapman Avenue
*P2. Location:  Not for Publication  Unrestricted *a. County: Orange and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Orange, CA Date: 1981 T4S; R9W; S.B.B.M. c. Address: 401 West Chapman Avenue City: Orange Zip: 92866 d. UTM: Zone: 11; mE/ mN (G.P.S.)
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate): APN 039-171-12; northwest corner of West Chapman Avenue and North Cypress Street
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) This roughly L-shaped building has three additions and was previously documented in 1982/1990 and 2005. The original OnePart Commercial Block building is rectangular in plan and constructed of brick. It is surmounted by a low-pitched barrel roof with parapets and clerestory windows. The south-facing façade retains a high degree of integrity and features four decorative urns evenly spaced atop the parapet, a stringcourse, four wall-mounted medallions, and large, recessed storefront windows with transoms on either side of the main entrance. The recessed main entrance features three transom windows above a pair of woodframed glass doors flanked by large sidelights. There are very narrow flat canopies above the windows and entrance. This elevation retains a high level of historic architectural integrity.

The east elevation, adjacent to Cypress Street, has two decorative urns atop the stepped parapet, a stringcourse, two wallmounted medallions, and a group of three large storefront windows with transoms above a narrow, flat canopy. The southern section of the east elevation retains a high degree of integrity, but the remainder of the east elevation has been compromised by alterations. It includes an unadorned brick wall with a recessed modern pedestrian door below a wide lintel and two metal bay doors flanking two large metal-framed, multi-paned windows all below a single, long lintel. The brick wall appears to have three brick patches where three large window openings have been filled in. See Continuation Sheet *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP6 – 1-3 story commercial building *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View,
date, accession #) Façade, view to
the north (11/20/18)
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Sources: Historic
Prehistoric Both
1924 (Los Angeles Times 1924)
*P7. Owner and Address:

Leason F. Pomeroy, FAIA
LP3 Architecture, Inc.
158 North Glassell Street
Orange, California 92886
*P8. Recorded by: (Name,
affiliation, and address)
Casey Tibbet, M.A.

LSA Associates, Inc.
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200
Riverside, California 92507
*P9. Date Recorded:

November 2018
*P10. Survey Type: (Describe) Intensive-level CEQA compliance *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") Cultural Resources Assessment for the Old Towne Gateway Project, Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 039-171-12 and 039-171-03, City and County of Orange, California, 2021. Prepared by LSA Associates, Inc.
*Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record  Other (List):

P5a. Photo or Drawing (Photo required for buildings, structures, and objects.) See Continuation Sheet
1315
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # 30-159847 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD

Page 2 of 6 ends

*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 401 West Chapman Avenue B1. Historic Name:

B2. Common Name:

B3. Original Use: Auto dealership B4. Present Use: Commercial *B5. Architectural Style: One-Part Commercial Block
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) No original building permits were found for this building. In order to determine the history of the property, a variety of sources was reviewed including, but not limited to, Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, historic aerial photographs, newspapers, City Directories, and building permits.
1923 News articles announced that A.H. Pease of Pease, Kolberg & Company planned to build two buildings both on West Chapman Avenue near Cypress Street (Santa Ana Register 1923). The subject building was to be “single story with a high ceiling adding an air of distinction to the place. The structure, which will be forty-six by eighty-two feet, will contain tile floors with marble base, mezzanine floor, offices, rest rooms and an attractive showroom rivaling anything of its kind in the county” (Ibid.).
1924 News article indicated that Pease-Kolberg was “erecting a beautiful building, which will be the home of the Studebaker people. The building will have a frontage of forty feet on Chapman and eighty-six feet on Cypress Street. There will be an upstairs where the offices and a luxurious woman’s rest room will be” (Los Angeles Times 1924). 1950 Sanborn maps show an auto sales and repair building with concrete floors, wood truss roof, and skylight, which is the subject building (401 and 405 West Chapman Avenue), along with several additions (Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps 1950). The additions include an auto repair building with iron-on-frame construction and a concrete floor (attached to the west elevation of the dealership building); a patio cover (attached to the west elevation of the dealership and the south elevation of the repair building); a very small store in the middle of the used auto sales lot at the corner of Chapman Avenue and Atchison Street (411 West Chapman Avenue); and an auto repair building (118 North Cypress Avenue) with iron-on-frame construction and a concrete floor (attached to the north end of the dealership building, constructed between 1938 and 1948).
1993 The earliest permits found for 401 West Chapman Avenue are for exterior alterations and seismic retrofit. 1999 Permit indicates that a sign was added and the existing brick façade was replaced with a similar product. 2009 Permit issued to “repair car damaged wall front corner of building facing Cypress. Like for like.” 2011 Sign permit was issued.
*B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: This building shares the property with a circa 1955 garage/storage building (107 N. Atchison Street).

B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown
*B10. Significance: Themes: Commerce; Transportation Area: City of Orange Period of Significance: 1924 Property Type: Commercial Applicable Criteria: A and C (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) This 1924 One-Part Commercial Block building is not eligible for individual listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) or the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register). However, it continues to qualify as a contributor to the National Register-listed Old Towne Orange Historic District. It is a historical resource for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Historic Context. Refer to the related report (see P11 on page 1).

B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References: See Continuation Sheet
B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: Casey Tibbet, M.A., LSA Associates, Inc., 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92507
*Date of Evaluation: January 2019
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
Refer to Location Map
1316
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial

Page 3 of 6 ends

*Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: January 2019 X Continuation Update *P3a. Description: (continued from page 1)
The north (rear) elevation of the original building has a stepped parapet. The wood-framed addition (1938–1947) is rectangular in plan and extends the width of the original building. It has a shed and flat roof sheathed in composition sheets and a parapet on the east end. The east elevation of the addition (adjacent to Cypress Street) is covered with plaster and has a bay door and a wood-shingled pent roof above a modern pedestrian door. The north elevation has bay doors and is internally divided into at least two spaces. The west side of the addition has one pedestrian door and the north and west elevations are clad in non-original manufactured wood siding.

The west elevation of the original building is unadorned, painted brick and has one large bay door that has been partitioned to include a pedestrian door. A large L-shaped addition and the partitioned door have compromised the integrity of this elevation. There are two additions that form an L-shape on the west side of the original building. The older and larger addition (1938–1947) extends west to Atchison Street and is addressed as 403 West Chapman Avenue. It is wood-framed, rectangular in plan, and surmounted by a lowpitched, gable roof with a parapet and sheathed with composition sheets. The north elevation of this addition has non-original manufactured wood siding, a pedestrian door, and two large garage doors. The west elevation of this addition has a stepped parapet and is covered with stucco. The south elevation, which is also covered with stucco, has modern aluminum-framed sliding windows and modern French doors. This addition connects to a newer (1947–1950) and smaller wood-framed addition that is open on the south side and connects to the original building.

P5a. Photo or Drawing (continued from page 1). For additional photographs refer to the related report (see P11 above).

Façade and east elevation. View to the northwest (11/20/18).

East elevation, including circa 1940 addition. View to the southwest (11/20/18).

See Continuation Sheet
1317
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial

Page 4 of 6 ends

*Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: January 2019 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance: (continued from page 2)
People/Businesses Associated with this Building. In 1919, Harry D. Riley of San Diego purchased the T.L. Longworth garage in Anaheim (Santa Ana Register 1919). Riley was going to be the northern Orange County agent for Studebaker and had been the Ford agent in San Diego for six and a half years (Ibid.). By 1920, Riley was a member of the Board of Trade, a city advisory committee, and was advocating for advertising the city of Anaheim (Santa Ana Register 1920a). Riley was named the first president of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce and held the position from 1920–1925; it was during this time he led the fight against the Ku Klux Klan in Anaheim (Brigandi 2017; Santa Ana Register 1920b). Research indicates that the petition circulated to recall the councilmen with ties to the Klan was actually sponsored by the U.S.A. Club, but the Chamber of Commerce led by Harry D. Riley did join in the fight (Los Angeles Times 1925a, 1925b).

In January 1925, just weeks before the recall vote, the Anaheim Chamber published a resolution stating in part “Whereas, the present situation has developed beyond any political issue into a community crisis involving the entire future of our community … the facts are clear that the Ku Klux Klan has not only gained control of the political affairs of our city, but has become a menace alike to the peace and business prosperity of our city … and it is not only impossible to get industries to locate here under its domination, but it has become a question of holding several of our present leading industries … therefore, be it resolved by this board of directors that we and the entire Chamber of Commerce throw our influence and efforts into the campaign to rid the city of this Ku Klux Klan control … signed by Harry D.

Riley, president” and others (Ibid.). After the February 3, 1925 vote the councilmen were recalled and replaced with anti-Klan candidates, as were their Klan-friendly appointees (Brigandi 2017; Los Angeles Times 1925c). Although this did not end all Klan activity, it was a decisive blow to the organization in north Orange County (Brigandi 2017).

During the 1920s, Mr. Riley lived in Anaheim and had at least three dealerships in Orange County (Ancestry.com var.). In 1928, Riley built a new garage at 503 South Main Street in Santa Ana and, in summer 1929, it was announced that the Riley family had moved from Anaheim to Santa Ana (Santa Ana Register 1929a, 1929b). A subsequent article reported that Mr. Riley had plans to expand his Santa Ana facility and would be concentrating his businesses and civic interests in that city since the leases on his buildings in Anaheim and Orange had expired in January 1929 (Santa Ana Register 1929c).

After Riley’s departure at the end of 1928, the building at 401 West Chapman Avenue was occupied by various auto-related businesses until at least 1966 (Chattel 2005; Los Angeles Times 1966). A combination of city directory listings and news advertisements revealed the following historic-period occupants at 401 West Chapman Avenue: Schwab Chevrolet Co. (1928), Mansur Motor Co. (Ford dealer, 1937–1953), and Selman Chevrolet (early 1966) (Orange County Archives var.; Los Angeles Times 1966). In addition, previous documentation for the building lists Sackett-Doty Chevrolet and Doty Chevrolet as former occupants in the late 1920s and early 1930s (Chattel 2005). In 1930, Doty bought out Schwab, but the 1932 City Directory lists Doty Chevrolet at 402 West Chapman Avenue as does a Los Angeles Times advertisement from 1934 (Orange County Archives var.; Santa Ana Register 1930).

This location was repeated in numerous advertisements in 1934 and one in 1936. Advertisements put Clift’s Marine Shop at 403 West Chapman Avenue (west addition to 401) in 1959 and Speed & Marine Associates at 401 West Chapman Avenue in 1966 through at least 1969 (Los Angeles Times 1959, 1966, and 1969).

Significance Evaluation. This building is being evaluated under the National Register and California Register criteria. There are no local criteria for individual resources.

Under Criteria A/1, the former dealership building is associated with two important patterns of events: development of the downtown area as a commercial center and early 20th century automotive culture. However, no evidence was found indicating that it played an important role in either event. Development of the downtown area began several decades earlier and by 1922 included at least 20 automotive-related businesses, including at least three dealerships. While construction of this dealership was part of the trends of downtown commercial development and automotive-related development in particular, it did not initiate either trend or change either trend in any important ways.

The building does not have a strong association with a particular dealership or automotive company. Research found that it has housed Studebaker, Chevrolet, and Ford dealerships, but no strong connection to any of these brands was found.

This building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria A/1. However, the original part of the building (excluding all three additions) remains a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It was built within the District’s period of significance (1888–1940) and, under this criterion, is associated with the District’s themes of commerce and transportation.

Under Criteria B/2, this building was occupied by Harry D. Riley’s Studebaker dealership from 1924 to 1928. Mr. Riley moved to Anaheim in 1919 and was active in civic matters there until he relocated to Santa Ana in 1929. In 1925, as leader of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, Riley helped successfully remove several members of the KKK from the Anaheim City Council and other government positions. Mr. Riley’s role in this important event in Anaheim’s history is not directly related to his dealership in Orange. His associations with Anaheim and later Santa Ana, are lengthier and stronger than his brief association with Orange. There is no indication that Mr. Riley played a leadership role in the automotive sales business in Orange and he only leased the building at 401 West Chapman Avenue for three years before relocating to Santa Ana. He has longer associations with other cities and properties. (see Continuation Sheet)
1318
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial

Page 5 of 6 ends

*Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: January 2019 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance: (continued from page 4)
This building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under these criteria, nor does it qualify as a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under Criteria B/2.

Under Criteria C/3, this building has not been identified as the work of a master and it does not possess high artistic values. The building retains characteristics of a 1920s One-Part Commercial block auto dealership, such as its brick construction and symmetrical façade with simple decorative elements (medallions, stringcourse, and urns) and large showroom windows, but it no longer has a rectangular plan, which is a key characteristic of the type. The façade retains a high degree of integrity, but there are additions to the east, west, and north elevations. In addition, in the east elevation three large windows have been removed/filled in and a modern door has been installed and in the west elevation a bay door has been partitioned to include a pedestrian door. Unlike many One-Part Commercial Block buildings, which front on one street and only have one or two visible elevations, this building is adjacent to three streets and each elevation and all of its additions and alterations is visible. Therefore, the compromised integrity of design, materials, and workmanship on the secondary elevations makes a greater negative impact than they normally might. Due to this lack of integrity, the building is not a true representative of a One-Part Commercial block auto dealership. It is not an excellent example of an architectural style or architect’s work with few or no alterations.

This building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria C/3. However, the original building (excluding all three additions) remains a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It was constructed during the District’s period of significance (1888–1940) and contributes to the wide range of property types within the District.

Under Criteria D/4, the building and related additions were constructed in the 20th century using common construction materials and methods. There is no indication that they have any potential to yield information important in prehistory or history. No archaeological resources were identified in the project area. The building is not eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under criteria D/4 and does not contribute to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under these criteria. *B12. References: (continued from page 2)
Ancestry.com
Var. A variety of records were accessed online in November 2017 and April and May 2018 at: http://home.ancestry.com/. These include city directories, voter registration records, and United States Census Data.

Brigandi, Phil
2017 Email correspondence with Mr. Brigandi, noted local historian, regarding the history of the project area and Harry D. Riley.

Chattel Architecture
2005 Department of Parks and Recreation form for Chapman W. 401, APN 039-171-12. Provided by the City of Orange.

City of Orange
Var. Building permits for 305 South Main Street. On file at the City of Orange, Building Division.

Los Angeles Times
1924 Building in Orange on Up Grade. March 8, page 13.
1925a Four Secret Prisoners in Anaheim Klan War. January 27, pages 1 and 2. 1925b Klan Scoured in Resolution. January 13, page 10.
1925c Anti-Klan Forces Lead in Election at Anaheim. February 4, pages 1 and 3. 1959 Advertisement. Put a Boat in Your Budget. July 26, page 209 (third column). 1966 Advertisement. May 29, page 309.
1969 Advertisement. November 22, page 94.

Orange County Archives
Var. Email correspondence in March 2021 that resulted in the Archives providing city directory information regarding various addresses in and around the project area.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps
1950 Accessed online in November 2017 and 2018 via the Los Angeles Public Library’s website at: https://www.lapl.org/.

Santa Ana Register
1919 Longworth Sells His Garage at Anaheim. August 9, page 9. 1920a Anaheim Board to Advertise Section. January 14, page 6. 1920b Anaheim Boost Clubs to Unite. June 15, page 6.
1923 Orange Firm to Put Up Building. October 11, page 17. 1929a Year Seen as Banner Period for Building. January 3, page 7. 1929b You and Your Friends. July 22, page 11.
1929c Harry D. Riley Announces Concentration of Business and Civic Interest in S. A. August 4, page 13. 1930 H. Doty Buys Interest in Car Company. July 20, page 10. 1319
ÄÆ22
§¨¦5
ÄÆ57

ALMOND AVENUE

CHAPMAN AVENUE

MAIN STREET

LA VETA AVENUE

GLASSELL STREET
I:\LPR1702\Reports\Cultural\DPRlocation_039-171-12.mxd (2/1/2019) DPR 523J (1/95) *Required Information
*Map Name: *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of Map: 1981; 2018

Page 6 of 6 ends

Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial
State of California - Resource Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

LOCATION MAP

CHAPMAN AVENUE ATCHISON STREET CYPRESS STREET
APN: 039-171-12
401 West Chapman Avenue
USGS 7.5' Quad, Anaheim & Orange; Google Earth
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date

Page 1 of 4 ends

P1. Other Identifier:
*P2. Location:  Not for Publication  Unrestricted *a. County: Orange and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Orange, CA Date: 1981 T 4S; R 9W; S.B.B.M. c. Address: 107 North Atchison Street City: Orange Zip: 92886 d. UTM: Zone: 11; mE/ mN (G.P.S.)
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate): APN 039-171-12; building is located approximately 125 feet north of West Chapman Avenue, adjacent to the right-of-way on the east side of N. Atchison Street *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) This vernacular free-standing garage was previously documented in 2005 and was assigned a California Historical Resources status code of 6Z. It is rectangular in plan and surmounted by a catslide gable roof sheathed with corrugated metal. It has narrow eaves and the exterior walls are clad with non-original manufactured wood siding. Aside from small attic vents, there are no openings on the east or west sides. The south elevation has two large garage doors. The north elevation was obscured from view.

The building is in good condition, but the non-original wood siding has compromised its integrity. *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP6-1-3 story commercial building *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View,
date, accession #) West elevation,
view to the east (11/20/18)
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Sources: Historic
Prehistoric Both
Circa 1955 (Sanborn Fire
Insurance Map 1950; Orange
County Archives 2017)
*P7. Owner and Address:

Leason F. Pomeroy, FAIA
LP3 Architecture, Inc.
158 North Glassell Street
Orange, California 92886
*P8. Recorded by: (Name,
affiliation, and address)
Casey Tibbet, M.A.

LSA Associates, Inc.
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200
Riverside, California 92507
*P9. Date Recorded: November 2018
*P10. Survey Type: (Describe) Intensive-level CEQA compliance *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") Cultural Resource Assessment for the Old Towne Gateway Project, Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 039-171-12 and 039-171-03, City and County of Orange, California, 2021. Prepared by LSA Associates, Inc.
*Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record  Other (List):

P5a. Photo or Drawing (Photo required for buildings, structures, and objects.) See Continuation Sheet
1333
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD

Page 2 of 4 ends

*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 107 North Atchison Street B1. Historic Name:

B2. Common Name:

B3. Original Use: garage/storage B4. Present Use: garage/storage *B5. Architectural Style: vernacular
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) No building permits were found for this building. Based on an examination of Sanborn Fire Insurance maps and historic aerial photographs, it was built sometime between 1950 and 1960.

*B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: This building shares the property with a 1924 commercial building (401 W. Chapman Avenue).

B9a. Architect: Not found b. Builder: Not found
*B10. Significance: Theme: Post-World War II Development Area: City of Orange Period of Significance: circa 1955 Property Type: Commercial Applicable Criteria: NA (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) This circa 1955 vernacular building is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) or California Register of Historical Resources (California Register). The local ordinance does not include criteria for individual properties. The property is within the National Register-listed Old Towne Orange Historic District, but was built outside the District’s period of significance and is not a contributor to it. It is not a historical resource for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). See Continuation Sheet
Historic Context. Refer to the related report (see P11 on page 1).

B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References:

Orange County Archives
2017 Email correspondence in November 2017 that resulted in the Archives providing various information including 1938 and 1947 aerial photographs of the project area.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps
1950 Accessed online in November 2017 and 2018 via the Los Angeles Public Library’s website at: https://www.lapl.org/.

B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: Casey Tibbet, M.A., LSA Associates, Inc., 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92507 *Date of Evaluation: November 2018
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
Refer to Location Map
1334
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial

Page 3 of 4 ends

*Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: November 2018 X Continuation Update P5a. Photo or Drawing (continued from page 1)
South and east elevations, view to the northwest (11/20/18).

B10. Significance: (continued from page 2)
People/Businesses Associated with this Building. This building was constructed sometime after 1950 and appears to have replaced a free-standing canopy that was used as an auto wash. No information about the owners/occupants during the historic period was found. This address was not found in the available City Directories and an online newspaper search using the address did not find any matches.

Significance Evaluation. This building is being evaluated under the National Register and California Register criteria. Because the two sets of criteria are so similar, they are addressed together to avoid redundancy.

Under Criteria A/1, this post-World War II garage building is associated with automotive car culture in the second half of the 20th century. However, no evidence was found that it is associated with any significant contributions to that theme. Furthermore, its nondescript, temporally ambiguous appearance does not convey its association with the period when it was built. It is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria A/1. It was built outside the period of significance (1888– 1940) of the Old Towne Orange Historic District and does not contribute to the District’s significance.

Under Criteria B/2, no information about the owners/occupants during the historic period was found. This building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under these criteria, nor does it qualify as a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under Criteria B/2.

Under Criteria C/3, this vernacular garage is nondescript and temporally ambiguous. There is no indication that it is the work of a master, it does not possess high artistic values, and it is not a true representative of a type, period, or method of construction. It is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under these criteria and does not contribute to the significance of the Old Towne Orange Historic District under Criteria C/3.

Under Criteria D/4, the building was constructed circa 1955 using modern methods and materials and does not have the potential to yield important information. It is not eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria D/4. 1335
ÄÆ22
§¨¦5
ÄÆ57

ALMOND AVENUE

CHAPMAN AVENUE

MAIN STREET

LA VETA AVENUE

GLASSELL STREET
I:\LPR1702\Reports\Cultural\DPRlocation_039-171-12.mxd (2/1/2019) DPR 523J (1/95) *Required Information
*Map Name: *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of Map: 1981; 2018

Page 4 of 4 ends

Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial
State of California - Resource Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

LOCATION MAP

CHAPMAN AVENUE ATCHISON STREET CYPRESS STREET
APN: 039-171-12
107 North Atchison Street
USGS 7.5' Quad, Anaheim & Orange; Google Earth
1336
1337
1338
1339
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 1D
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date

Page 1 of 5 ends

P1. Other Identifier: 125 Atchison Street (1950 and earlier) *P2. Location:  Not for Publication  Unrestricted *a. County: Orange and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Orange, CA Date: 1981 T4S; R9W; S.B.B.M. c. Address: 135 North Atchison Street City: Orange Zip: 92866 d. UTM: Zone: 11; mE/ mN (G.P.S.)
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate): APN 039-171-03; located on the east side of North Atchison Street just north of West Chapman Avenue. *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) This building was previously documented in 1991 and 2005. In 2005, it was assigned a California Historical Resources (CHR) status code of 3D (appears eligible for National Register of Historic Places [National Register] as a contributor to a National Register-eligible district through survey evaluation) (Chattel 2005). Based on the City’s 2010 Historic Resources Inventory Update in 2012, the 2005 DPR form was amended to change the status code to 1D (contributor to a district or multiple resource property listed in the National Register by the Keeper). Listed in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register).

This one-story Mission Revival style building is rectangular in plan and surmounted by a low-pitched, gable roof sheathed with corrugated metal and features Mission Revival style parapets on the east and west ends. The visible exterior walls are covered with stucco. The east elevation has a wood-framed, four-paned double-hung window and a wood-and-glass door, both of which appear to be original. The door and the window are each recessed in segmental arched openings accented with concrete “keystones.” The door also has wide concrete trim. The north and south elevations of the Mission Revival style building have windows identical to the one in the east elevation (the north one is visible from inside the metal addition). The visible parts of the building are in good condition and retain a high degree of integrity. (See Continuation Sheet) *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP9-Public utility building *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View,
date, accession #) Façade, view to
the northeast (11/20/18)
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Sources: Historic
Prehistoric Both
circa 1912 (Brigandi 2017)
*P7. Owner and Address:

Leason F. Pomeroy, FAIA
LP3 Architecture, Inc.
158 North Glassell Street
Orange, California 92886
*P8. Recorded by: (Name,
affiliation, and address)
Casey Tibbet, M.A.

LSA Associates, Inc.
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200
Riverside, California 92507
*P9. Date Recorded:

P5a. Photo or Drawing (Photo required for buildings, structures, and objects.) See Continuation Sheet
1340
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD

Page 2 of 5 ends

*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 North Atchison Street B1. Historic Name:

B2. Common Name:

B3. Original Use: transformer house B4. Present Use: storage *B5. Architectural Style: Mission Revival (altered)
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) No original building permits were found for this building. In order to determine the history of the building, a variety of sources was reviewed including, but not limited to, Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, historic aerial photographs, newspapers, City Directories, and building permits. Sanborn maps from 1909 do not show this building on the property (Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps 1909). North Atchison Street was paved in 1912 and research indicates that the small Mission Revival style building was constructed about that time as a transformer house (Orange Daily News 1912; Brigandi 2017). The building is shown at 125 Atchison Street on the 1922 Sanborn maps (Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps 1922). The 1950 Sanborn map shows a onestory iron-on-frame storage building that wraps around the west and north sides of the original building, which was labeled as vacant at that time (Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps 1950). *B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown
*B10. Significance: Theme: Architecture Area: City of Orange Period of Significance: circa 1912 Property Type: Industrial building Applicable Criteria: A and C (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) This altered circa 1912 Mission Revival style building does not retain enough integrity to be eligible for individual listing in the National Register or the California Register. However, largely due to the relative rarity of examples of the Mission Revival style in the Old Towne Orange Historic District, the original building (excluding the addition) remains a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It is a historical resource as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Historic Context. Refer to the related report (see P11 on page 1).

B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References:

Brigandi, Phil
2017 Email correspondence with Mr. Brigandi, noted local historian, regarding the history of the project area and Harry D.

Riley.

Chattel Architecture
2005 Department of Parks and Recreation form for Chapman W. 401, APN 039-171-12. Provided by the City of Orange.

Orange County Archives
Var. Email correspondence in March 2021 that resulted in the Archives providing city directory information regarding various addresses in and around the project area.

Orange Daily News
1912 Application for Permit. October 17, page 1.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps
1909 Accessed online in November 2017 and 2018 via the Los Angeles Public Library’s website at: https://www.lapl.org/. 1922 Accessed online in November 2017 and 2018 via the Los Angeles Public Library’s website at: https://www.lapl.org/. 1950 Accessed online in November 2017 and 2018 via the Los Angeles Public Library’s website at: https://www.lapl.org/.

B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: Casey Tibbet, M.A., LSA Associates, Inc., 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92507
*Date of Evaluation: January 2019
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
Refer to Location Map
1341
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial

Page 3 of 5 ends

*Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: January 2019 X Continuation Update *P3a. Description (continued from page 1)
The L-shaped corrugated metal addition wraps around the west (façade) and north sides of the Mission Revival style building completely obscuring these elevations of the original building. The addition appears to consist of two buildings, both with gable roofs with parapets sheathed with corrugated metal. There are openings on the south, west, and east sides. The addition is in poor condition and, judging from the patchwork of metal panels, has sustained various alterations. Based on what is visible of the original building through the windows, it is possible, that if revealed, the original elevations may retain at least a moderate degree of integrity.

P5a. Photo or Drawing (continued from page 1)
East and north elevations, view to the southwest (11/20/18) *B10. Significance (continued from page 2)
People/Businesses Associated with this Building. In 1922 and 1950, this building’s address was 125 North Atchison Street. A search of City Directories using 125 and 135 North Atchison Street revealed three listings for the building between the early 1920s and mid-1960s. In 1924, the occupant was Orange County Renovators and in 1925 and 1965 it was listed as vacant (Orange County Archives var.). Online newspaper searches for both addresses did not return any matches. Previous documentation for this building indicates that in 1927–1928, the building was used as a repair shop for Schwab Chevrolet and that it continued to service subsequent dealerships at 401 and/or 403 West Chapman Avenue into the early 1990s (Chattel 2005). No additional information regarding historicperiod owners/occupants was found.

Significance Evaluation. In compliance with City requirements, this building is being evaluated for significance under the National Register and California Register criteria. It is also being evaluated within the context of the Old Towne Orange Historic District.

Under Criteria A/1, this building was originally a transformer house and later an automotive repair shop. It is associated with the early industrial development of Orange and with early 20th century automotive culture. Because it has not functioned as a transformer house since at least the mid-1920s and all of the original equipment associated with its use as a transformer house has been removed, it does not convey its association with that function or early industrial development. As early as the mid-1920s, it was converted to an automotive repair shop and storage building. Sometime between 1938 and 1947, a large corrugated metal addition was added to the north and west elevations. The addition has obscured the original building and given it a nondescript, utilitarian appearance that does not convey an association with any particular function or period. Therefore, this building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria A/1 and does not contribute to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under these criteria.

Under Criteria B/2, very little information was found for owners/occupants of this building during the historic period and none appears to be historically important. This building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under these criteria, nor does it qualify as a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District under Criteria B/2.

See Continuation Sheet
1342
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial

Page 4 of 5 ends

*Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: January 2019 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance (continued from page 3)
Under Criteria C/3, no information was found indicating this altered Mission Revival style building is the work of a master. The building has Mission Revival style parapets and segmental arched openings, but is modest in size, character, and design and does not possess high artistic values. While the south and east elevations retain a high degree of integrity, the north and west (street-facing façade) elevations are hidden behind a large, corrugated metal addition. It is unknown what the integrity level of the north and west elevations is behind the addition. Because of the large addition, the building is not a true representative of the Mission Revival style.

The building is not individually eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under Criteria C/3. However, largely due to the relative rarity of examples of the Mission Revival style in the Old Towne Orange Historic District, the original building (excluding the addition) remains a contributor to the Old Towne Orange Historic District. It was constructed during the District’s period of significance (1888–1940) and contributes to the wide range of architectural styles within the District.

Under Criteria D/4, the building is not an archaeological site and there is no indication that it has the potential to yield information important in prehistory or history. It was constructed circa 1912 using common methods and materials. The building is not eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register under these criteria and is not a contributor to the Historic District under these criteria.
1343
ÄÆ22
§¨¦5
ÄÆ57

ALMOND AVENUE

CHAPMAN AVENUE

MAIN STREET

LA VETA AVENUE

GLASSELL STREET
I:\LPR1702\Reports\Cultural\DPRlocation_039-171-03.mxd (2/1/2019) DPR 523J (1/95) *Required Information

Page 5 of 5 ends

*Map Name: *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of Map: 1981; 2018
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 North Atchison Street Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial
State of California - Resource Agency

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

LOCATION MAP

CHAPMAN AVENUE ATCHISON STREET CYPRESS STREET
APN: 039-171-03
135 North Atchison Street
USGS 7.5' Quad, Anaheim & Orange; Google Earth
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355

C ULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
DECEMBER 2021

OLD T OWNE GATEWAY P ROJECT

ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
R:\LPR1702\Cultural\Report\LPR1702 CRA Dec 2021.docx (12/10/21)

APPENDIX B

PROJECT PLANS
1356
1357
Streetscape Patterns
Existing Building 1 at P.L. where entry activity occurs Proposed Buildings 2 & 3 at P.L. where entry activity occurs Parking Area
Accessible access routes
Plan provides open access to all public areas
from handicapped stall -see Site Plan
Drive Aisles
Drive Aisle two way per City Std 17.34 Figu re

17.34.110.A standard 25 foot back-up space/drive aisle
Driveways
Driveways per City Standard (Type 1) Plan No. 115
two new driveways (curb cuts). Plan indicates removing and rebuilding sidewalk and curb at all nine (9) existing driveways Driveways across street
Same Standard
Driveways adjacent to site
Same Standard
Drop-off Areas
No Drop-off area proposed at this time
Loading Zones
Standard 10 x 40 ft. loading zone proposed off of Atechison in onsite parking area
Location and Dimension Driveways, Streets
See Dimensioned Site Plan for this information
Parking Spaces
7 public parking +1 handicapped parking space = 8 spaces Pedestrian Walkways
Throughout the project to include major ea st - west paseo Street Dimensions
See Site Plan for this information
Utility Meters/Transformers
Existing - all to be upgraded with new transformer location Proposed - see Site Plan for new transformer
Parking Information
Existing Building Area - :10;117 sf
Proposed Building Area - 15,105 sf
Added (N) Building Area -- 4,988 sf
Proposed/Provided Parking -
Parking Spaces Short
Options to make-up_l.2>t}prt parking spaces
Parking Provided
Par�ing Required

1.) Pay parking fee to City Parking Fund

2.) Trade for permanent ''paseo" easement
0 20
�
12 3.) Provide spaces with shared parking agreement within required walking distance
Property Lines
See Site/First Floor Plan for Lot Lines (may requ re consolidation) Proposed Density
See question above - "Density'' FAR -.50
Public ROW Improvements
Driveways - Close (E) and add (N) per City Stds. See Site Plan Sidewalks -To remain (remove/replace and patch as required) Water Meters -All water meters to be new
Utility Boxes -AH utility boxes to be new
Fire Hydrants - Existing Hydrants to remain see Fire Master Plan no additional fire hydrants are anticipated
Street Lights - All Street Lights to remain
Traffic Control Devices - No (N) devices proposed
Public Transportation Stops - No Transportation Stops proposed Site Information
Address -
Assessor's Parcel Number -
Existing Entitlements -
401 West Chapman Avenue
Parcel 1:APN 039-071-03
Parcel 2:APN 039-171-12
none to my knowledge
Lot Number- Lot 8 and the North 45 feet of Lotg and Lots 10, 11, and 12 and the South 5 feet of Lo 9 all in Block B
Tract Number - Halladay Tract, City of Orange
Trash Enclosures
Three covered trash enclosures are proposed with three 6 yard bins in each (one trash enclosure per Commercial/Retail building) Zoning Designation
Existing- see Question "General Plan and LandUse Designation" Proposed - same designation OTM U - 15
PROJECT INFORMATION (from "Plan Submittal Requirements") Building Core Information
Construction Type
Occupancy Type
VB
A-2 and S-2
Existing to remain (E)
New (N)
un-reinforced masonry and wood
wood frame
Contact Information
Name Leason F Pomeroy I ti
150 N. Glassell St. , suite 201
Orange, CA 92866
(714) 771-8400
[email protected]
Mailing Address
Telephone Number
E�Mail Address
Density
Existing
Proposed
10,117 sf /30,300 sf =
15,105 sf/30,300 sf =
33%
50%
Easements
Existing
Proposed
To my knowledge there are none
To my knowledge there are none
Fences and Walts
Proposed north P.L. - six feet CMU fence / one hr. bldg. waU east P.L. - none
south P.L. - six (6) feet 3 feet plaster / 3 feet glass west P.L. - six (6) feet 3 feet plaster / 3 feet glass
and six (6) feet steel pickets and gate
Fire Department
Sprinkled Buildings
{E) Building 1 and (N) Buildings 2 & 3 - {NFPA -13) yes (E) Building 4 (374 sf) and (N) Building S (416 sf) - no Floor Area
Proposed
Building 1 (Hist) First Floor
Addition {restrooms)
Mezzanine {new)
S,000 sf
1,330 sf
6,330 sf
375 sf
6,705 sf
Building 2 (New) First Floor (Commercial/Retail) 3,470 sf Building 3 (New) First Floor (Commercial/Retail) 4,140 sf Building 4 (Hist) First Floor {Commercial/Retail) 374 sf Building 5 {New) First Floor (Storage) 416 sf
Total Floor Area all Proposed Buildings
Existing
Buildings to remain and be rehabilitated
Building 1 (Hist) First Floor
Building 4 (Hist) First Floor
Buildings to be demolished
Building 1 (Hist) Mezzanine
Additions and Shed structures
Total Floor Area all Existing Buildings
15,105 sf
5,000 sf
374 sf
5,374 sf
191 sf
4,552 sf
4,743 sf
10,117 sf
I
General Land Use Designation
Existing OTMIX - lS
Proposed OTMIX -lS
Label type of construction, size, use, height, and roof See Site/Floor Plans and Sections tor this information
Landscape Areas including hardscape and paving
Landscaped areas {softscape)
Hardscape areas (walks and courtyards)
Paving (vehicle drive and parking areas)
Proposed building Total First Floor Areas
Total Site Area
2,727 sf- 9%
8,484 sf - 28%
4,242 sf - 14%
14,730 sf- 49%
30,300 sf - 100%
Land Use
Existing
Proposed {Mixed Use)
Commercial/Storage
Commercial Retail/Storage
Lot Size
Existing
Proposed {same)
30,300 sf
30,300 sf
Old Towne Projects
Architectural Style
Existing Historic Buildings - 1921 Brick Commercial
Proposed New Buildings -2021 similar to (E) Historic
Building Alignment
Existing and New on P.L. - align {same �no setbacks)
Bulk and Mass
New references Existing in height, width and mass
Number of Stories
New -1 story / Existing - one story with mezzanine
Roof Form and Height
New Buildings 2 & 3 have roofs similar to Hist. Building 1 with exposed truss roof structures
New Building 5 has flat roof matching Addition to Bldg 1 "
\
FREE-STANDING NON-CONTRIBUTING SHEDS OF S, 189 SF PROPOSED TO BE DEMOLISHED.
• THE USE -THE SITE IS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY A MIX OF USES TO

INCLUDE ANTIQUE SALES AND STORAGE OF CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS.
• ARCHITECTURE -THERE ARE TWO (2) EXISTING ARCHITECTURAL STYLES (BUILDINGS TO BE REHABILATED) ON THE SITE. HISTORIC BUILDING 115 A SIMPLE BOX SHAPE, FLAT WALLS WITH LARGE CLASS FA<;ADE ON THE FRONTAGE AND SOLID MASS ON THE OTHER WALLS

WITH A PARATET (FLAT APPEARING) ROOF CONTAINING A GLASS CLEARSTORY. HISTORIC BUILDING 2 IS A VERY SMALL SIMPLE
PLASTER BOX WITH A "MISSION INFLUENCED" FA<;ADE - RELATING

DIRECTLY TO THE DEPOT ACROSS ATCHESON STREET- WITH AN
EXPOSED SLOPING SHEET METAL ROOF. THE BALANCE OF THE

STRUCTURES ON THE SITE COM PRIZE ADDITIONS AND SHEDS OF PLASTER AND WOOD WITH "UTILITY" CHARACTER OF NO
REDEEMING ARCHITECTURAL STYLE.
• MATERIALS -THE EXISTING BUILDINGS HAVE A VARIETY OF EXPOSED

MATERIALS INCLUDING FACE BRICK, COMMON RED BRICK, PLASTER, WOOD, GLASS, PRE-CAST CONCRETE, AND SHEET METAL. THE
PAVING IS A MIX OF ASPHALT\C MATERIALS AND CONCRETE.
• COLORS - HISTORIC BUILOING 1 HAS A MAJORITY OF LIGHT

GRAY/WHITE FACE BRICK, RED COMMON BRICK, WITH BLACK
PAINTED SHEET METAL AND WOOD TRIM. HISTORIC BUILDING 2 IS A

MEDIUM GRAY PLASTER AND EXPOSED MEDIUM GRAY SHEET
METTAL ROOF.
• TOPOGRAPHY -THE SITE IS BASICALLY FLAT.
• SCENIC VIEWS -THE SITE HAS NO SCENIC VIEWS OTHER THAN VIEWS OF MEMORIAL PARK LANDSCAPE TO THE WEST.
• SOILS -THE SOIL IS SANDY WITH COBBLES HAVING A PRECULATION RATE OF 0.33 INCHES PER HOUR AT A DEPTH OF 39 FEET.
• NATIVE LANDSCAPING/TREES -THE SITE CONTAINS LITTLE OR NO

EXISTING LANDSCAPING TO BE RETAINED OTHER THAN A LARGE PINE

TREE LOCATED AT THE EXTREME NORTH-EAST CORNER OF THE SITT

WHICH SUFFERED FROM A FIRE IN THE PAST, HAS BEEN POORLY

MAINTAINED AND TRIMMED, AND IS PLANNED TO BE REMOVED

ALONG WITH THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES
3_ DESCRIBE THE SURROUNOING PROPERTIES, INCLUDING THE TYPE OF LANO USE, INTENSITY OF LAND USE, AND SCALE OF DEVELOPMENT.
• NEIGHBORING LAND USES -THE NEIGHBORING LAND USES ARE A

MIX AND ARE IN THE TRANSITION FROM INSUSTRIAL/AUTO USES TO

A MIX OF USES INCLUDING COMMERCIAL (RESTAURANTS/RETAIL), RESIDENTIAL, AND INSTIRUTIONAL (UNIVERSITY USES).
• INTENSITY -THERE IS NO INTENSITY OF USE ON THE PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTIES. THE ONLY INTENSE USE OF LAND IN THE

NEIGHBORHOOO IS AFFORDED BY THE UNIVERSITY WHICH SEEMS TO BE INCREASING.
• SCALE - IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE EXISTING

NEIGHBORHOOD USES OF THE PRIVATE LAND ARE UNDER
DEVELOPED REGARDING SCALE_ MOST BUILDINGS ARE ONE STORY

AND ZONING ALLOWS TWO STORIES THUS MORE SCALE MAY BE
COMING IN THE FUTURE.

4. EXPLAIN ANY UNIQUE CONDITIONS ON THE SITE SUCH AS LOCATION, SHAPE AND/OR TOPOGRAPHY.
• UNIQUE CONDITIONS -THE SITE IS UNIQUE IN THAT IT CONTAINS TWO (2) HISTORIC BUILDINGS (TO BE REHABILITATED) AND ITS'

LOCATION BEING ACROSS ATCHESON STREET FROM MEMORIAL

PARK AND THE MULTI-MOOAL STATION (TRAIN STATION) AND IS

NEAR THE NEW PUBLIC PARKING STRUCTURE AND THE PLAZA
DISTRICT.

5. EXPLAIN ANY PHASING OF THE PROJECT
• PROJECT PHASING - IT IS NOT ANTICIPATED AT THIS TIME THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT WOULD BE PHASED.
6_ ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL (ABC)
• APPLICATION -AN (ABC) APPLICATION IS NOT PART OF THIS APPLICATION, BUT EVENTUALLY WILL BE REQUIRED.

REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ITEMS (FROM "Plan Submittal Requirements")

PROJECT SCOPE AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONCEPT

1. SCOPE - TH E PROPOSED PROJECT INCLUDES THE REHABILITATION OF TWO (2) HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND THE REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING ADDITION TO HISTORIC BUILDING 1. THE NEW ADDITION IS IN ARCHITECTURAL CONTRAST TO HISTORIC BUI LOI NG 1. IT ALSO INCLUDES THE DEMOLITION OF ALL EXISTING AODITIONS AND FREE-STANDING NONCONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO (2) NEW

INDUSTRIAL APPEARING (COMMERCIAL/RETAIL) BUILDINGS AND A NEW STORAGE BUILDING MATCHING THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING 1
ADDITION ..

2. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONCEPT-THE TWO (2) EXISTING HISTORIC

BUILDINGS ARE TO BE REHABILATED PER THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR (SOI) STANDARDS FOR THE REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS. THE TWO (2) NEW PROPOSED BUILDINGS ARE DESIGNED TO RESPONO TO THE

SCALE AND MASS OF THE EXISTING HISTORIC BUILDINGS AS WELL AS

REFERENCING MATERIALS AND DESIGN ELEMENTS FOUND IN THE HISTORIC

BUILDINGS WHILE PROVIDING A DIFFERENTIATION IN STYLE PER SOI STANDARD NO. 3. THE TWO NEW BUILDINGS ARE DESIGNED WITH THE

INTENTION OF THEIR ARCHITECTURAL STYLE BEING OF THE PRESENT TIME WHILE REFEREENCING THE HISTORIC BUILDING 1. THE TWO NEW

BUILDINGS USE THEIR SYMETRICAL NEGATIVE SPACE TO FOCUS ON THE

UNIQUE SMALLER HISTORIC BUILDING OF A COMPLETELY OIFFERENT STYLE (MEDITERRANEAN REVIVAL) WHICH IS RELATED TO THE MOST RECENT DEPOT BUILDING DESIGN. Per Douglas Westfall

IT IS THE PRIMARY INTENT OF THE DESIGN TO CELEBRATE THE REHABILITATED HISTORIC BUILDINGS (1920c) WITH THE OESIGN OF THE

NEW BUILDINGS USING RELATED HISTORIC MATERIALS, SCALE AND MASS, WHILE BEING OF THEIR OWN TIME (2021c). THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE NEW BUILDINGS RELATES TO THE "INOUSTRIAL" BOX FORMS OF HISTORIC BUILDING 1 AS WELL AS TO MANY OF THE EXISTING HISTORIC BUILDLINGS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

LITTER OF EXPLANATION/JUSTIFICATION

1. TYPE OF BUSIINESS, USES, HOURS OF OPERATION, VEHICLES OWNED,

NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES, TYPE OF MATERIALS HANDLED, HISTORY OF BUSINESS.
• TYPE OF BUSINESS -THE TWO (2) HISTORIC BUILDINGS WILL HOUSE FOOD SERVICE USES. THE LARGER BUILDING (HISTORIC BUILDING 1)

WILL HOUSE A LARGE SIT-DOWN RESTAURANT AND BAR TO INCLUOE OUTDOOR DINING_ THE SMALLER HISTORIC BUILOING (HISTORIC BUILDING 4) WILL PROVIDE QUICK "GRAB AND GO" FOOD FOR

PERSONS USING THE VARIOUS MODES OF TRAVEL AT THE NEARBY TRANSPORTATION CENTER.
• USES - IN ADDITION TO THE TWO HISTORIC BUILDINGS, THE PLAN INCLUDES TWO ADDITIONAL NEW BUILDINGS (BUILDINGS 2 AND 3) DESIGNED TO HOUSE COMMERCIAL/RETAIL USES. A NEW BUILDING 5 WILL BE STRICTLY STORAGE IN SUPPORT OF HISTORIC BUILDING 1. • HOURS OF OPERATION THE RESTAURANT USES WILL BE OPEN FOR LUNCH AND DINNER (SAY 10:00 AM - 10:00 PM). THE

COMMERCIAL/RETAIL USES WILL OPERATE DURING NORMAL
BUSINESS HOURS (SAY 9:00 AM -7:00 PM).
• VEHICLES OWNED - IT IS NOT ANTICIPATED THAT COMPANY OWNED VEHICLES WILL BE PARKED ON THE SITE.
• NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES -IT IS ANTICIPATED THATTHE LARGE
RESTAURANT (HISTORIC BUILDING 1) WOULD HAVE APPROXIMATELY TWENTY (20) EMPLOYEES OURING NORMAL OPERATING HOURS.

HISTORIC BUILDING 2 WOULD HAVE TWO (2) EMPLOYEES AND
DEPENOING ON THE ACTUAL USES IN THE TWO (2)
COMMERCIAL/RETAIL SPACES IN THE NEW BUILDING 2 AND 3, EACH WOULD HAVE THREE (3) TO SAY TEN (10) EMPLOYEES DEPENDING ON THE USE.
• TYPES OF MATERIALS HANDLED THE RESTAURANT USES WOULD
HANDLE FROZEN AND FRESH/DRY FOOD PRODUCTS. IT IS NOT

KNOWN AT THIS TIME WHAT THE ACTUAL USES WILL BE IN THE TWO (2) NEW BUILDINGS, THEREFORE THE MATERIALS HANDLED IN EACH ARE NOT KNOWN UNTIL LEASES ARE SIGNED_
• HISTORY OF BUSINESS A RESTAURANT TENANT HAS BEEN
IDENTIFIED FOR HISTORIC BUILDING 1. THE TENANT HAS BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR APPROXIMATELY TWENTY (20) YEARS ANO HAS TWO

OTHER VERY SUCCESSFUL LOCATIONS IN PROPERTIES OWNED BY THE APPLICANT.

2. DESCRIBE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY INCLUDING ANY

EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THE SITE, THE USE, THE ARCHITECTURE,

MATERIALS, COLORS, TOPOGRAPHY, SCENIC VISTAS, SOILS, MATURE LANDSCAPING/TREES.
• PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE THE SITE IS CURRENTLY

OCCUPIED BY A MIX OF LARGE LOW-END ANTIQUE ARTICLE SALES LOCATED IN THE HISTORIC BUILDING 1 AND THE ADJACENT FENCED YARD ALONG CHAPMAN AVENUE FRONTAGE. THE BALANCE OF THE

SITE IS A MIX OF OPEN YARD STORAGE (CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS)

AND ODD SHED STRUCTURES ALL ENCLOSED WITHIN AN OPAQUE

CHAIN LINK FENCE-
• EXISTING STRUCTURES- THE SITE CONTAINS TWO (2) HISTORIC BUILDINGS. HISTORIC BUILSING 1 IS A 5,000 SF ONE STORY BRICK BUILDING (POORLY REINFORCED) WITH A 191 SF MEZZAAINE. PER Douglas Westfall's "ATOUR OF OLD TOWNE ORANGE" THIS
BUILDING IS LISTED AS "1920c brick commercia/-". THE SECOND HISTORIC BUILDING, HISTORIC BUILDING 2, IS A SMALL 374 SF ONE STORY BUILDING, "1924c mission influenced" ALSO LISTED.· THE

BALANCE OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES INCLUDE ADOITIONS
'
'
Members of the Design Review Committee
City of Orange
300 East Chapman Aven ue
Orange, California 92866
Re: "Old Towne Gateway" 401 West Chapman Avenue
Dear Committee Members:

The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a more thorough response to your comments at the "Preliminary" DRC meeting held on October 20, 2020, where a face to face presentation over a scale model ofthe project was not possible due to COVID 19.

In recounting your comments, found in the recordings of the October 20 meeting, it is apparent that much of the proposed project is preliminarily acceptable to you with several additional design suggestions. Howeve r, the comments clearly state that the proposed new Building 4 design is unaccepta ble to you. Some members thought that the design was good and responsible, but that even if good, it is not appropriate to be built on this site. I believe that a comment was made something like "we like the design but that building will not be built on this site".

Our recent experience with the DRC on a much smaller project has resulted in our inability to achieve our development goals causing a reduction ofscale and change in use at the host site of a small historic building. That result and the clear message we received from our committee on this project through the "Preliminary" review has caused us to re-evaluate our development program for this project. 1t is clear that the design of Building 4, which we felt most appropriate for the site and the City with the interjection of a contrasting contemporary element in the historic fabric, cannot be approved by the committee. If we continue to pursue the design that satisfies our development program and which we feel most appropriate, this project would end up with a similar result as that ofthe recent smaller one.

Therefore we have revised the program and thus the site design to eliminate the two story mixed-use office/commercial building (Building 4) and add in its place two small brick industrial appearing buildings of similar design to that of the adjacent historic building. Our interpretation of your comments made at the October 20, "Preliminary" meeting have led us to this compromise.

This revised site design does satisfy ·one of the issues brought up by the Planning staff which suggested that the Building 4 infringed on the second small historic building leaving it hidden on the site. This plan celebrates the second small historic building by organizing the two new small brick buildings around the small historic building, making it a focal point in the plan.

We trust that these changes to the program and the plan will meet with your approval.

Sincerely,
LP3 architecture, Inc.

Leason F Pomroy Ill, FAIA
OLD TOWN GATEWAY Letter of explanation/justification 08-16-21 This description of the "Old Towne Gateway'' project is based on a redesign of the project following the Preliminary Design Review Committee meeting of October 21, 202D and two (2) separate submittals to the SMART committee, This 30,300 square foot site is built out with two contributing historic Buildings 1 and 4, and four noncontributing shed structures to be demolished including a plaster box addition to Building 1.

The site is within the Depot District Plan. This proposal will bring commercial/retail uses to the site which has historically been commercial/retail and industrial.

We propose to demolish the non-contributing structures, rehabilitate the contributing historic Buildings 1 and 4 and construct a new addition to Building 1 (similar to that which is to be demolished). Build two new Buildings 2 and 3 to house commercial/retail uses, (most likely food serv\ce) and build a simple storage building to support Historic Building 1, and a shade element at the overflow outdoor dining area
The site is surrounded by commercial/industrial uses and buildings, and is in the proximity of the rail depot. The surrounding buildings are primarily tilt-up concrete, plaster, and brick which"are all simple box forms with the exception of Historic Building 4 which relates in style to the nearby train depot .

There are no significant negative sunlight or privacy impacts on a ny neighbor property posed by this project.

The design concept (image) is proPosed to preserve the existing contributing historic buildings with commercial/retail uses while contrasting the addition to Historic Building 1 and its supporting storage building 5. The other new buildings, 2 and 3 shall provide an image much like that of the Historic Building l. ln an attempt to satisfy the historic guidelines and the DRC, f have proposed to utilize similar box forms in brick for the two new structures and relate directly with brick walls and truss roofs to Historic Building 1. This concept will provide a commonality in buitding materials and form as suggested in the Preliminary DRC meeting. The concept will also focus and bring attention to the very small Historic Building 4 with its contrasting style.

The unique characteristics of this project's location - adjacent to "Memorial Park" and the depot, being located on Chapman Avenue a main spoke to the Old Town Plan and having two contributing Historic buildings on the site, provide the opportunity to create a true gateway project to Historic Orange. And by being basically within just a few feet of the new parking structure convenient parking will be provided for customers while a ''paseo" or direct path through the slte will provide pedestrians a direct access from the Depot and the site to the Plaza area.

Leason F Pomeroy Ill, FAIA
Architect/Owner

REVISIONS
NO. DATE
w
z
s
0 I0
_J
0 SCALE:

DRAWN:

DATE:
0 N
w
=i
z
w
>
<(
CD
CD
CX)
N
m
<( z
<( z
0::::
20 Q_ LL <( -
I _J
u <(
u
f--
(J)
w
5 w
(_')
z
<(
0::::
0 owe: LETTER TO DRC

LETTER OF INTRO

PROJECT INFO
SHEET NO.

Cl
Preservation Notes
Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize the buildings shall be preserved and/or repaired/ replaced in-kind.

Any deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a character-defining feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.

Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. Heavily soiled brick will be gently cleaned using soapy water and natural bristle brushes and rinsed with clean water. After drying, the brick will be sealed with a transparent sealer that will protect it from graffiti, pollution, and weather.

1. All glass windows and glass doors at street level shall be glazed with “clear” glass.

2. Height of new buildings 2, 3, and 5 shall not exceed the height of 28 feet. 5% of the roof area can exceed 28 feet in height.

3. Provide London Plane street trees at 30 to 40 feet on center in 5 foot square tree grates.

4. Elevator shall be of a size to satisfy “gurney” requirements.

5. All habitable public spaces on the first level shall be and are accessible.

6. No public restrooms shall be provided.

7. The location of the Fire Department Connection and related valves is with the final location approved by the Fire Department.

8. Street frontages for new Buildings 2 and 3 shall be retail uses at the first level. Ground level retail spaces shall have a minimum of 25 foot depth and an average of 14 feet in clear ceiling height. Store front walls shall be a minimum of 75% clear glass for the length of the wall.

9. The proposed project is within the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan area.

Eight (8) parking spaces are provided.

10. All new trees shall be a minimum of 24 inch square boxes.

11. Planters between parking areas and the street should have plant material maintained to screen vehicles at approximately 36 inches high.

12. Key boxes and key switches (Knox devices) shall be provided where necessary to ensure that immediate access for firefighting, rescue and other emergency purposes is possible.

13. All existing lots are required to be combined.

14. A Tentative Parcel Map application is required.

15. A dedication is required at the northeast corner of Chapman and Atchison to accommodate a standard ADA compliant access ramp.

16. Ground immediately adjacent to foundations shall have a minimum slope of 2% for impervious and 5% for pervious surfaces.

17. Unused driveways shall be removed and reconstructed with full height curb.

18. An addressing plan is required.

19. A Sewer Capacity Analysis is required.

20. A Drainage Assessment Letter is required.

21. Transportation System Improvement Program fees will be required.

22. A dedicated fire service with backflow prevention is required. 1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372

BATAVIA ST

OLIVE ST

PALM AVE

WALNUT AVE

ALMOND AVE

ORANGE ST

PALMYRA AVE

GLASSELL ST

CHAPMAN AVE

MAPLE AVE

CLARK ST

SYCAMORE AVE

PARKER ST

FOLEY PL

ATCHISON ST

WASHINGTON AVE

CHAPMAN AVE

OLIVE ST

CLARK ST

PIXLEY ST

GLASSELL ST

PARKER ST

MAPLE AVE

PARKER ST

WALNUT AVE

PALM AVE

CYPRESS ST

OLIVE ST

ORANGE ST

PALMYRA AVE

LEMON ST

BATAVIA ST

OLIVE ST

PALM AVE

WALNUT AVE

ALMOND AVE

ORANGE ST

PALMYRA AVE

GLASSELL ST

CHAPMAN AVE

MAPLE AVE

CLARK ST

SYCAMORE AVE

PARKER ST

FOLEY PL

ATCHISON ST

WASHINGTON AVE

CHAPMAN AVE

OLIVE ST

CLARK ST

PIXLEY ST

GLASSELL ST

PARKER ST

MAPLE AVE

PARKER ST

WALNUT AVE

PALM AVE

CYPRESS ST

OLIVE ST

ORANGE ST

PALMYRA AVE

LEMON ST
PLAZA

CHAPMAN

UNIVERSITY
MAIN
CAMPUS

CYPRESS BARRIO
ST JOSEPH’S

HOSPITAL
CITY
HALL
Dodge
College
of Film
& Media
Arts
Existing
Residential
Existing
Residential
Depot
Walk Bus Transfer Station
Depot
Park
Santa Fe
Depot
Depot
Courtyard
Senior
Center
Metrolink
Parking Lemon St
Parking
Structure
Pedestrian UndercrossingRail Track CrossingsBus RoutesBicycle Routes (per City’s Bicycle Plan)Streetscape ImprovementsPrimary Pedestrian PathSecondary Pedestrian Path Active Retail Frontage - Retail Streets
FIGURE 5-1URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK
Depot Courtyard (Conceptual)Santa Fe DepotExpanded Depot Park Specific Plan BoundaryMetrolink/Rail CorridorNot a part of Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan Mid Block Crossing
Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan
° 0’ 200’ 400’ 800’ 1,200’ 1,600’
1373
May 7, 2008
City of Orange
Depot-Plaza
Pedestrian
Connection Study
1374
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
I
I. Introduction
A. Purpose
The purpose of the project is to prepare a Pedestrian Connection Study that evaluates the potential development of pedestrian corridors to encourage connections between the historic Plaza and surrounding business district to the Metrolink and OCTA Transit Center at the Orange Depot. This document is composed of five chapters. The Introduction details the study area boundary and provides background information on the study process. The Existing Conditions chapter presents a discussion of current conditions within the study area. The Opportunities and Constraints analysis chapter builds off of the existing conditions to evaluate a series of potential alternative pedestrian corridors to connect the Plaza business district and adjacent neighborhoods with the Orange Depot. The
Pedestrian Connections chapter details all of the recommended improvements to each of the proposed pedestrian connections while the Implementation chapter discusses actions needed for realizing the study recommendations and provides a discussion of funding opportunities.

B. Study Area Boundary
The study area is roughly bounded by Maple Avenue on the north, Glassell Street on the east, Almond Avenue on the south, and the railroad tracks on the west. Chapman Avenue runs east to west through the center of the project area and, along with Glassell Street, forms a major axis of the City. Olive Street, Lemon Street, and Cypress Street extend north to south from Maple Avenue to Almond Avenue and Atchison Street runs
north to south between Maple Avenue and Chapman Avenue.

The Orange Depot is located in the northwestern portion of the study area while the Plaza is positioned in the middle of the eastern boundary. Figure 1 on the following page depicts the study area boundary.

The Orange Depot hosts both Metrolink train service and Orange County Transit Authority bus service and generates high amounts of pedestrian traffic in the western portion of Old Towne Orange.

The Plaza and surrounding business district is a significant area of pedestrian traffic in the center of Old Towne Orange. 1375
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
I
Figure 1 Study Area Boundary
1376
Depot
-PlazaPedestrian ConnectionStudy
Chapter I
D. Relationship toOtherPlanningEfforts
City of Orange General Plan Update
The City is currently in the process of updating the General Plan. The General Plan Update is expected to be adopted in 2008. The General Plan establishes a vision for the City’s future growth and change and provides the basic guidelines for development within the City. The General Plan Update proposes an alternative land use scenario that changes the existing industrial land use designation on properties surrounding the Depot to a mixed-use designation to support the evolution of the area into a pedestrian and transit-oriented district. The proposed General Plan Circulation Element also emphasizes the multimodal circulation opportunities that exist in the area around the Depot and Plaza with the existing bus, rail, and sidewalk network. The recommendations of this study support and reinforce the goals and policies of the General Plan.

Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan
The Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan is a document that provides more specific development regulations and guidelines for a particular geographic location within the City. Properties within the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan area are subject to the provisions of that plan. The boundaries of the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan overlap the boundaries of this study. Also, the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan identifies portions of this study area as a potential redevelopment area. Similar to the General Plan Update, this study supports the transformation of the Depot area to a mixed-use pedestrian and transit-oriented district and offers recommendations for pedestrian connection improvements as property reinvestment or redevelopment
occurs in the area. Recommendations from both this study and the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan can be implemented without conflict.
1377
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
II
II. Existing Conditions
The City of Orange contains the largest concentration of historic buildings in the State of California. The Old Towne area in the City of Orange contains two historic districts listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Created in 1886, the Plaza marks the center of the historic business district in Orange. The historic business district radiates out from the Plaza along Chapman Avenue and Glassell Street. Specialty retail uses, art galleries, restaurants, and service commercial businesses continue to line these corridors. The Plaza offers a quaint setting, with retail shops, antique stores, and a relaxed atmosphere of outdoor cafes surrounded by an historic park.

The Depot was originally constructed in 1888 to serve the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad line. Today, two lines of commuter train service operated by Metrolink utilize the Depot. A 2007 survey indicated that mean daily boardings of Metrolink at the Orange Depot were 830 per day and mean daily alightings were 827 per day, with those numbers expected to increase in the coming years.

The Plaza and the Depot are two major activity generators in Old Towne Orange. However, though the Depot and the
Plaza are only approximately one-third of a mile apart, few pedestrians make the walk between the two areas. Plaza visitors tend to not venture further than the few shops and restaurants close-in to the Plaza while the Depot users often do not stray farther than the parking areas surrounding the train station.

North Alley between Lemon Street and Cypress Street.

Maple Avenue looking east to Glassell Street.
1378
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
II
Other activity generators include the Veteran’s Memorial at Depot Park, the Post Office, the Orange Senior Citizens Community Center, and the Chapman University Marion
Knott Film School (Chapman Film School) and Chapman
University Partridge Dance Center (Chapman Dance Center), and multiple parking areas throughout Old Towne. The
Veteran’s Memorial at Depot Park at the southern end of the Depot on the corner of Atchison Street and Chapman Avenue was constructed in 1891 and is the oldest park in Orange County. The Orange Post Office sits on the southwest corner of the Chapman Avenue and Lemon Street intersection. The Orange Senior Citizens Community Center is located on the western side of Olive Street between Chapman Avenue and Almond Avenue. Orange City Hall and the Orange Public
Library and History Center are also activity generators located on Chapman Avenue near Grand Street, just to the east of the study area.

Local neighborhoods outside of the study area also contribute to pedestrian activity in the Old Towne area. Residents of the surrounding neighborhoods walk through the study area to reach a variety of the destinations listed above, as well as local shops and transit opportunities.

Chapman University, the oldest university in Orange County, is located to the northeast of the study area along Glassell Avenue.

In recent years, the University has expanded by acquiring various properties to the west of the main campus core. Chapman’s Partridge Dance Center is located on the south side of Maple Avenue between Atchison Street and Cypress Street and the Chapman Film School is located on the north side of Maple Avenue between Cypress Street and Lemon Street.

South Alley from parking lot off of Olive Street looking east towards Glassell Street.

Almond Avenue and Lemon Street intersection. 10
1379
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
II
Existing circulation in the study area includes pedestrian routes, vehicular streets, bus routes, and bicycle routes. Figure 2 shows the existing circulation in the study area. The highest level of pedestrian activity in the study area is along Glassell Street and around the Plaza, on Chapman Avenue between the Plaza and Olive Street, and surrounding the Orange Depot. Commercial retail activities and the location of the public transportation facilities at the Orange Depot result in a high number of pedestrians in these areas.

Medium pedestrian activity is found along Lemon Street
between Maple Avenue and Chapman Avenue and along
Olive Street between Maple Avenue and Almond Avenue.

The proximity to commercial retail activities, restaurants, and parking areas contributes to the pedestrian activity in these areas. All other street segments within the study area currently experience low pedestrian activity due to the presence of fewer commercial retail uses and other attractions.

Currently, there is an at-grade railroad crossing at Chapman Avenue and at Almond Avenue. The railroad crossings have warning gates for vehicular traffic but not for pedestrian traffic.

A bicycle route along Almond Avenue, indicated by signs only, connects to the larger bikeways system of the City and contributes to non-vehicular traffic along that corridor. The City of Orange Bikeways Master Plan Update (2001) proposed an additional Class III bike route, with signs only, along Lemon Street within the study area.

High levels of pedestrian and vehicular activity occur at the Plaza.

Outdoor dining and retail uses contribute to pedestrian activity around the Plaza.
11 1380
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
III. Opportunities and Constraints
A. Overview of Pedestrian Routes
Four alternative east-west pedestrian routes between the Orange Depot on Atchison Street and the Plaza at the intersection of Glassell Street and Chapman Avenue are being studied to create and reinforce connectivity. Maple Avenue and the “North Alley” are located north of Chapman Avenue; the “South Alley” and Almond Avenue are located south of Chapman Avenue.

Each of these east-west corridors are linked north and south by Cypress Street, Lemon Street, and Olive Street.

Looking east to Glassell Street from midblock shortcut south of Chapman Avenue.

Looking west along Maple Avenue adjacent to the Lemon Street parking lot. 15 1381
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
III
Opportunities and Constraints for the northern routes of Maple Avenue and “North Alley” are illustrated in Figure 3.

Of the study corridors, the most direct route from the Orange Depot to the Plaza is along Maple Avenue east to Glassell Street and then south to the Plaza. This route is entirely along existing sidewalks within the public right-of-way and passes both residential and commercial frontages.

The “North Alley” is the term for the existing shortcut north of Chapman Avenue that runs east-west through spaces between buildings, alleys, and parking areas. There is an existing, privately-owned access point used by locals at the northwest corner of the Plaza between 60 Plaza Square (Bagel Me) and 71 Plaza Square (Masonic Temple). From there, the route follows through an alley to Olive Street between 119 North Olive Street (Tony’s Architectural Salvage) and 123 North Olive Street (The Architecture Gallery). The North Alley corridor is interrupted with private parking and is obstructed by fences between Olive Street and Lemon Street; this section would need guaranteed pedestrian access to become a viable paseo opportunity. Pedestrians can also cross through an existing alleyway just north of Chapman Avenue between Lemon Street and Cypress Street from the Lemon Street municipal parking lot. Currently pedestrians have to travel along one of the cross streets to Maple Avenue or Chapman Avenue to connect to the Depot; as redevelopment occurs between Cypress Street and the Depot, pedestrian passageways should be included to complete the North Alley link to the Depot.

North Alley from Olive Street towards the Plaza.

Maple Avenue looking east to intersection with Lemon Street. 16 1382
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
Figure 3 Opportunities and Constraints North of Chapman Avenue 17 1383
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
III
Opportunities and Constraints for the southern routes of the “South Alley” and Almond Avenue are exhibited in Figure 4.

The “South Alley” is a term for a connection south of Chapman Avenue through existing paseos and parking areas from Glassell Street to Lemon Street. This route makes use of an existing 12-foot wide one-way alley between 126 South Glassell Street (Rambling Rose Estate Jewelry in the Orange Circle Antique Mall) and 132 South Glassell Street (SINS) and continues through a parking area to Olive Street. Parking in this area allows businesses and visitors to have a direct connection through the narrow alley to the retail shops on Glassell Street.

The connection then resumes across Olive Street, in the parking area where the Orange Farmer’s Market is currently held, along the north side of the American Legion building to Lemon Street.

The South Alley connection will lead pedestrians north along Lemon Street to the signalized crossing at Chapman Avenue.

Pedestrians can then choose to utilize Chapman Avenue or any of the routes within the northern segment of the study area to reach the Depot.

The Almond Avenue pedestrian corridor runs east to west from Glassell Street to Cypress Street along sidewalks within the public right-of-way.

Parking area on the north side of the American Legion Building where the Farmers’ Market is held along the potential South Alley pedestrian corridor.

Almond Avenue looking east across Olive Street. 18
1384
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
Figure 4 Opportunities and Constraints South of Chapman Avenue 19 1385
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
III
Due to the routes’ locations, the corridors to the north offer a closer link between the Orange Depot and the Plaza than the southern routes. The southern routes will more likely utilize a combination of the alternative pedestrian routes, existing cross streets, and ultimately portions of Chapman Avenue to forge connections between neighborhoods south of Almond Avenue and the Old Towne Plaza area to the Orange Depot.

Existing alleys and passageways offer an opportunity for the study area to continue to serve as pedestrian connections.

Capitalizing on the existing openings and connections may be more viable and feasible than establishing new connections through existing developed properties.

Additionally, in all of the proposed pedestrian routes, the north-south cross streets are important elements for pedestrian enhancements. Pedestrians utilizing any of the pedestrian corridors may depart from the east-west pattern of the proposed routes at any of the side streets and continue north or south along any of the cross streets in the study area. These cross streets will carry portions of the pedestrian traffic as individuals meander between the Depot and Plaza areas. The public rightsof-way of these streets should be enhanced along with the other identified pedestrian routes in order to create an inviting pedestrian experience throughout Old Towne Orange.

Pedestrian improvements need to be made to cross streets as well as existing alleyways within the study area as these passages become important parts of the pedestrian system.

The existing alleyway between Glassell Street and Olive Street in the northern part of the study area can be enhanced and continue to serve as a pedestrian connection.
20 1386
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
B. Historic District
The historic nature of Old Towne Orange provides a rich setting for an enhanced pedestrian environment. Historic properties in the study area are shown in Figure 5. The concentration of historic buildings is significant, with continued efforts by the City and property owners to preserve and restore historic elements. The local vernacular architecture of these historic structures gives a view into Orange’s past and provides interest along the streetscape. All of the pedestrian passageways between Glassell Street and Olive Street are surrounded by older historic buildings; the shortcuts between the historic buildings are illustrated by arrows in Figure 5. The historic buildings tend to feature more detailed architectural elements than the newer structures and add a human-scale and quaint atmosphere to the Old Towne area that is welcoming to pedestrians.

The preservation and restoration of historic buildings will continue to increase the value of the neighborhoods and commercial district within the study area. Improvements to historic structures should be made in coordination with the Design Review Committee. Any improvements in the study
area should build upon the existing historic features of the area.

For example, new features should utilize traditional materials that are compatible with the area. Existing landscape palettes could also be considered for continuation, where appropriate, to enhance the streetscape.

Restoring historic building features to an original state, such as removing the non-original metal siding to reveal the historic arched parapet, can contribute to an inviting pedestrian experience.

Well preserved and restored historic structures are a key attraction to Old Towne Orange.

The structure at the northwest corner of Maple Avenue and Cypress Street could be restored to its historic state, as shown here. 21 1387
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
III
Figure 5 Historic Properties
22 1388
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
C. Land Uses and Pedestrian Traffic
Generation
The study area experiences benefits and limitations due to the mix of land uses found in the area. A general map of existing land uses is shown in Figure 6. Active retail frontage usually generates an active pedestrian atmosphere. A diverse mix of commercial and residential buildings could offer a significant pedestrian draw to an area from local residents patronizing the commercial uses. However, portions of the historic business district incorporate service uses that are more industrial in character, such as auto repair and restoration shops. These uses do not tend to create a large pedestrian draw in an area but can be modified and enhanced in a manner that is more appealing to pedestrian traffic. Special attention should be paid to all uses to ensure the creation of a friendly pedestrian environment.

An opportunity for connectivity in the pedestrian corridors is the potential for redevelopment in the northern part of the study area. The Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan Update Analysis of Potential Adaptive Reuse Sites identifies several parcels north of Chapman Avenue between Cypress Street and Lemon Street as having a potential for redevelopment. As these sites redevelop, pedestrian-friendly paseos, plazas, and amenities could be included to create pedestrian links to the Orange Depot area.

Retail frontage along Glassell Street is a significant attraction for the Maple Avenue route; as pedestrian reach Glassell Street the retail activity can help draw the pedestrians south into the Plaza area.

Some uses in the northwest are not inviting to pedestrian activity; the property shown above could be part of a potential pedestrian connection if redeveloped or otherwise modified to accommodate pedestrian access to complement existing uses.

There are a mix of commercial and residential uses in the study area that can contribute to increased pedestrian activity between the Depot and the Plaza. 23 1389
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
III
Figure 6 Existing Land Use
24 1390
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
Maple Avenue collects a large amount of Chapman University pedestrian traffic. Pedestrian surveys show that students often utilize Maple Avenue east to Glassell Street and then north to the University. Recent introduction of several University facilities along Maple Avenue, such as the Chapman Dance Center and Chapman Film School, also contribute to pedestrian traffic in this area.

Another opportunity along the Maple Avenue route is offering a connection from the Cypress Barrio north of Maple Street to the Depot and Plaza corridors. This traditional neighborhood area is experiencing reinvestment and greater recognition for its role in the history of the City. Grassroots efforts are currently underway towards returning the area to more of an activity center for the community.

The North Alley and South Alley corridors are near existing retail uses. These uses can be encouraged to capitalize on the increased pedestrian traffic along paseos and alleyways.

Developing double-fronting entrances to the businesses and encouraging other pedestrian uses, such as outdoor dining within pedestrian passageways or opening up building frontages to the rear of the buildings facing the parking areas off of Olive Street, will increase the pedestrian traffic in these areas.

The presence of the Orange Farmers’ Market represents an existing pedestrian draw to the South Alley system and it would be to the City’s benefit to capitalize on this pedestrian atmosphere by continuing and enhancing this use.

Opening storefronts to alleyways creates an inviting pedestrian atmosphere as in this passageway between Glassell Street and Olive Street.

The Chapman Dance Center draws pedestrian traffic along Maple Avenue. 25 1391
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
III
The Post Office located on the southwest corner of Chapman Avenue and Lemon Street is another activity generator that can contribute to the future success of the South Alley and Almond Avenue pedestrian routes, as is the Orange Senior Citizens Community Center.

The Orange Senior Citizens Community Center is located on Olive Street between the proposed South Alley and Almond Avenue. This use may generate pedestrian activity in the southern part of the study area. Updated accessibility facilities should be considered throughout paseo and streetscape
improvements.

Due to the residential and industrial make-up of the area south of Chapman Avenue and west of Lemon Street, this portion of the southern part of the study area is not as conducive to through pedestrian connections to the Orange Depot. A constraint for the Almond Avenue pedestrian route west of Lemon Street is the lack of retail activity along this section of street and the absence of a safe pedestrian crossing once reaching Chapman Avenue.

Most of the sidewalk along Almond Avenue borders residential uses. Pedestrian activity usually requires a type of destination activity along the route. Enhancement of commercial or
other activity generating uses to the south of the Plaza would benefit this connection. Upgraded streetscape amenities, such as enhanced lighting, additional street trees, well maintained landscaped parkways, and sidewalk repairs, would also make this corridor more enticing for residents.

Active retail frontages encourage pedestrian traffic.

The Orange Senior Citizens Community Center is a destination for pedestrians within the study area.
26 1392
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
E. Direct Connection
Maple Avenue provides the most straightforward connection between the Orange Depot and the Plaza area, with pedestrians only needing to make one turn from Maple Avenue onto
Glassell Street to reach the Plaza from the Depot. This route also offers a more direct connection for pedestrians associated with the Chapman University campus. Pedestrians may also utilize Maple Avenue for only a portion of their journey from the Depot to the Plaza, splitting off from Maple Avenue down one of the side streets and continuing to the Plaza along Chapman Avenue.

Cross streets along Maple Avenue (shown above) and Almond Avenue should be improved with traffic-calming measures to facilitate pedestrian use.

Pedestrians may split off from Maple Avenue down a side street to reach retail activity along Chapman Avenue. 29
1393
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
III
The short distance between Chapman Avenue and the North Alley may not offer enough incentive for some pedestrians to leave the commercial activity of Chapman Avenue. However, on busy traffic days along Chapman Avenue, others may
be inclined to take this route, and many individuals can be encouraged by the idea of a “short-cut” even if only a few feet are shaved off of a route.

The South Alley offers more of an indirect link from the Plaza uses to the Orange Depot but may provide an opportunity to better connect businesses south of the Plaza with the remainder of the study area. A key gateway to connecting the South Alley north to the Depot is the use of the signalized intersection at Chapman Avenue and Lemon Street. Also, a reconfiguration of the existing parking between Glassell Street and Olive Street will provide better access to Lemon Street. In some areas, the North Alley is only approximately 100 feet off of Chapman Avenue.

From the existing alley off of Glassell Street, the South Alley would connect west through a parking lot to Olive Street. The existing parking lot should be reconfigured to incorporate dedicated pedestrian corridors.

N
N
30 1394
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
The Almond Avenue route would offer a pleasant connection to the Orange Depot for those in the southernmost reaches of the study area and adjacent Old Towne neighborhoods
and may be especially key for the larger number of residential uses in this part of the study area. The main drawback to this pedestrian route is its location farther away from the Orange Depot than any of the other proposed routes in the study area.

However, the bicycle route along Almond Avenue may provide opportunity for alternative modes of transport to the Orange Depot.

Providing amenities for bicycle users encourages bicycle usage and contributes to the pedestrian environment.

Almond Avenue offers the southernmost pedestrian route from the Old Towne Plaza commercial area to the Orange Depot.
31 1395
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
III
F. Transit Links
The local and regional transit service available at the Orange Depot provide a significant opportunity for the City of Orange and OCTA to better link the public to bus and rail service. It is important to capture the pedestrian traffic of both the bus and train passengers. As transit service and ridership increases over the next few years, there will be a greater opportunity and desire to connect pedestrians to the Plaza. Conversely, as Old Towne maintains its popularity and portions of the study area experience changes in use and property reinvestment, more opportunities for pedestrian amenities and building design elements will be created and the pedestrian nature of the study area will be enhanced.

As pleasing pedestrian features become more prevalent, the Plaza business district as a whole will be an even stronger attraction for pedestrians than it is today. The historic downtown has the potential to attract day-trippers throughout Orange County and the Los Angeles region who may take advantage of the Metrolink and bus links for a day of shopping, dining, and activities in Orange. For these visitors to the study area, clear pedestrian pathways and wayfinding information will be
especially important.

To enhance the streetscape in pedestrian corridors, adjacent buildings with blank walls should enhance the space with a mural or other public art amenities, by re-establishing historic windows and other openings, or through the installation of architectural features such as gooseneck building lighting.

Transit ridership may increase with the development of a more inviting pedestrian atmosphere as activity generator in the historic downtown. 32 1396
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
OCTA operates all Metrolink train service in Orange County.

The Metrolink Orange Station services the Orange County Line and the Inland Empire-Orange County line. A 2007
survey indicated that mean daily boardings of Metrolink at the Orange Depot were 830 per day and mean daily alightings were 827 per day. As train service expands and pedestrian amenities are integrated into the area surrounding the station, train ridership and pedestrian activity is expected to increase.

OCTA also operates five bus routes to the Orange Transportation Center at the Orange Depot; the routes utilizing the bus depot are the 54, 56, 59, 453, and 454. Bus routes run along Maple Avenue, Lemon Street, Glassell Street, and Chapman Avenue, linking the Depot to the major employment hubs in Orange and destinations throughout the City and County. These routes should contribute to pedestrian traffic along these corridors and within all of the pedestrian study routes as the bus riders walk from the Depot to their Old Towne destination.

The Orange Station is utilized by approximately 830 Metrolink patrons each day.

The OCTA bus depot is a major connection point for transit riders. 33 1397
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
III
G. Pedestrian Crossings
A planned pedestrian undercrossing at the railroad tracks and Maple Avenue will provide a focal point for pedestrians crossing from the western side of the tracks to both the Depot and the Plaza. This undercrossing will provide a unique opportunity to safely connect commuters and local residents to the Depot and Plaza area. The undercrossing will open new and improved access to the Depot from the Metrolink parking and Old Towne neighborhoods that currently experience limited pedestrian options. More connections will also mean more opportunities to attract pedestrians and transit riders.

Along Maple Avenue and Almond Avenue, particular attention should be given to each of the intersections with the north-south cross streets between the railroad tracks and Glassell Street.

There are four intersections along Maple Street, at Atchison Street, Cypress Street, Lemon Street, and Olive Street, and three intersections along Almond Avenue, at Cypress Street, Lemon Street, and Olive Street. If these routes are strongly developed as pedestrian corridors, each intersection should give particular attention to the pedestrian. Opportunities exist for crosswalks, paving, and traffic calming enhancements at each intersection to ensure the safety of the pedestrian route.

Intersection improvements should promote a consistent route that clearly marks the pedestrian way.

A constraint for the North Alley may be the route’s proximity to Chapman Avenue. In some areas, the existing passageways are approximately 100 feet away from Chapman Avenue. Inserting mid-block crossings this close to Chapman Avenue may create traffic hazards between vehicles and pedestrians. Current traffic counts show lower vehicle traffic and low pedestrian traffic in this area; as traffic increases, attention to pedestrian safety will grow in importance. Clear sight lines should be maintained around pedestrian access points to prevent conflicts.

Crosswalks and other pedestrian improvements are needed along Maple Avenue and Almond Avenue.

Pedestrian intersection improvements, such as special paving along Chapman Avenue, should be applied to pedestrian crossings in the study area. 34 1398
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
III
Conversely, the link across Olive Street between the two portions of the South Alley is a prime location for a midblock crossing, as this area is about halfway between Chapman Avenue and Almond Avenue. Pedestrians could easily cross in this location without interfering with any turn movements off of Chapman Avenue or Almond Avenue. Current traffic counts recorded along Olive Street, Lemon Street, and Cypress Street show low automobile traffic volumes, which is a favorable condition for mid-block crossings. To create a successful midblock crossing, at a minimum, specialty paving and adequate pedestrian awareness signs would be necessary. Four mid-block crossings are proposed for the study area and are discussed in more detail with the recommendations provided in Chapter 4 - Pedestrian Connections; a total of six on-street parking spaces will need to be removed to implement the recommended midblock crossings.

Ending the South Alley on Lemon Street provides an
opportunity to take advantage of the signalized crossing at Lemon Street and Chapman Avenue. Enhancement of Lemon
Street south of Chapman Avenue is an important part of the pedestrian route in the South Alley alignment. This section of street will carry much of the pedestrian traffic as it transitions north and south across Chapman Avenue. While the Almond Avenue route will continue across to Cypress Street, there is no traffic signal at Cypress Street and Chapman Avenue; therefore the safer pedestrian route would be from Almond Avenue
along Lemon Street to the existing signalized intersection with Chapman Avenue.

The signalized intersection at Chapman Avenue and Lemon Street is offers a safe pedestrian crossing.

A mid-block crossing of Olive Street is proposed for the South Alley. 35 1399
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
IV
IV. Pedestrian Connections
A. Introduction
There are four major pedestrian connection routes through the study area between the Orange Depot on Atchison Street and the Old Towne Plaza at the intersection of Glassell Street and Chapman Avenue. Maple Avenue and the “North Alley”
are located north of Chapman Avenue; the “South Alley” and Almond Avenue are located south of Chapman Avenue. These four connections, along with recommendations for overall improvements to the study area, are illustrated in Figure 9 on the following page.

This section describes these four routes and the aesthetic improvements and enhancements necessary to create viable and vibrant pedestrian connections. This section offers overall recommendations that apply to improvements throughout the study area, such as increased landscaping and the addition of attractive pedestrian level lighting elements. This section also provides a block-by-block discussion of each of the proposed pedestrian connections. The specific existing conditions of each block are addressed and recommendations for achieving appropriate and viable pedestrian connections are presented for each individual segment. Recommended improvements
for other spaces within the study area, such as the connecting side streets, are also discussed. This section concludes with recommendations for street furniture and sign concepts that apply to the entire study area as a way to unify the connections from the Depot to the Plaza.

Shortcut with no business openings and no pedestrian-friendly features, such as benches or outdoor dining.

Paseo with doors and windows open to the public and outdoor displays. 41 1400
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
IV
Figure 9 Pedestrian Connection Alignments

CHAPMAN
DANCE
CENTER
BUS

TRANSFER

STATION
THE
GARDEN

GALLERY
107

ATCHISON
BLACK’S

FURNITURE
OMEGA
BURGER
UNITED
CUSTOM

UPHOLSTERY

FCE AUTO
REPAIR
AMANA

COOLING &

HEATING

THE ARCHITECTURE

GALLERY
TONY’S

ARCHITECTURAL

SALVAGE

BAGEL ME
TACO
ADOBE

SPIC-N-SPAN

CLEANERS

BLAKE & NATION

BODY SHOP

RASPBERRY

COTTAGE

COBA ACADEMY

THE VAULT

MASONIC TEMPLE
PLAZA

MUFFLER &
BRAKES

THE DISTRICT
LOUNGE
PAUL’S

COCKTAILS

ROCKWELLS

CREATIVE
CAKES
CRYSTAL’S HAIR
STUDIO
CASK ‘N

CLEAVER

PARKING

PARKING PARKING

PARKING

PARKING
VETERAN’S

MEMORIAL

AT DEPOT
PARK

MARION KNOTT

FILM SCHOOL

RESIDENTIAL
Apartments
POST
OFFICE
FARMER’S MARKET
ORANGE
SENIOR

CITIZENS

COMMUNITY
CENTER
PLAZA
BIBLE

CHURCH HURWITZ

BUILDING
FELIX
CAFE

WILL HARE

PHOTOGRAPHY
PBC
YOUTH

THE AMERICAN
LEGION

FRIEDEMANN

BUILDING
BLUE
FROG

STARBUCKS

RED CLOUD
ORANGE

ANTIQUE
MALL

ANTIQUE STATION

THE FOURSQUARE
CHURCH

CREATIVE

EVOLUTION

REBELLE
SALON

PARKING

RESIDENTIAL

RESIDENTIAL
SNOW’S
AUTO ROD’S
LIQUOR
SIR
WICKET
JENSEN

PARKING BUILDING

RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL
W
N
N
N
N

S CYPRESS STREETS LEMON STREET

S OLIVE STREETS GLASSELL STREET
W
W
N

PROPOSED

UNDERCROSSING
Accent Tree Canopy Tree Concrete Paving Accent Paving Bulbout Mid-block Crossing 0 100’ 200’ 400’ 42 1401
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
IV
C. North Paseos
Greater pedestrian activity is expected in the northern half of the study area, as this area has more commercial activity than the southern portion of the study area and is located closer to the Orange Depot. Figure 10 illustrates the northern pedestrian connection alignments while Figure 11 lists overall recommendations for improvements to Maple Avenue and the North Alley.

Figure 10 Pedestrian Connection Alignments - North Paseo Plan Accent Tree Canopy Tree Concrete Paving Accent Paving Bulbout Mid-block Crossing

CHAPMAN
DANCE
CENTER
BUS

TRANSFER

STATION
THE
GARDEN

GALLERY
107

ATCHISON
BLACK’S

FURNITURE
OMEGA
BURGER
UNITED
CUSTOM

UPHOLSTERY

FCE AUTO
REPAIR
AMANA

COOLING &

HEATING

THE ARCHITECTURE

GALLERY
TONY’S

ARCHITECTURAL

SALVAGE

BAGEL ME
TACO
ADOBE

SPIC-N-SPAN

CLEANERS

BLAKE & NATION

BODY SHOP

RASPBERRY

COTTAGE

COBA ACADEMY

THE VAULT

MASONIC TEMPLE
PLAZA

MUFFLER &
BRAKES

THE DISTRICT
LOUNGE
PAUL’S

COCKTAILS

ROCKWELLS

CREATIVE
CAKES
CRYSTAL’S HAIR
STUDIO
CASK ‘N

CLEAVER

PARKING

PARKING PARKING

PARKING

PARKING
VETERAN’S

MEMORIAL

AT DEPOT
PARK

MARION KNOTT

FILM SCHOOL

RESIDENTIAL
Apartments
W
N
N
N
N
W
N

PROPOSED

UNDERCROSSING
0 100’ 200’ 400’
46 1402
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
IV
The Maple Avenue connection extends four blocks from the Orange Depot to Glassell Street. The North Alley connection is currently viable for the three blocks between Cypress Street and Glassell Street. There is potential for a future direct connection to the Depot between Atchison Street and Cypress Street that could occur with the adaptive reuse, reinvestment, or redevelopment of the existing property to complete the alley system between the Depot and the Plaza.

Walkway
Conditions Landscaping Lighting Utilities Street Furniture Retail Frontage Maintain sidewalk
in good condition
Increase
landscaping
between Atchison
Street and
Cypress Street
and between Olive
Street and Glassell
Street
Continue and add
to existing
pedestrian pole
lighting and
existing street
lights
Underground
utilities
Add occasional
street furniture as
appropriate
Any future retail
operations between
Olive Street and
Glassell Street should
have public openings
such as windows and
doors
Maple Avenue
Walkway
Conditions Landscaping Lighting Utilities Street Furniture Retail Frontage Maintain pavement
in good condition
Landscape new
pedestrian
connections
Utilize gooseneck
building lighting or
catenary lighting
through
connections
Underground
utilities as property
improvements
occur
Add occasional
street furniture as
appropriate
Any retail operations
should have public
openings to the alley;
outdoor dining is
encouraged
North Alley
Figure 11 Recommendations for Overall Improvements to Maple Avenue and North Alley 47 1403
Depot-Plaza Pedestrian Connection Study
Chapter
IV
North Alley between Atchison Street and
Cypress Street
Existing Conditions
There is currently no available pedestrian route between Atchison Street and Cypress Street. The potential pedestrian route is currently blocked by existing structures and fences.

Property in this section is privately owned.

Recommendations
Encourage property owners to open a pedestrian
pathway to complete the North Alley connection
as property reinvestment occurs. Until property
reinvestment occurs, pedestrians would use Cypress
Street to connect to Maple Avenue for Depot access.

Encourage outdoor dining and plaza areas.

Encourage the property owner to enhance building
facades through quality architectural features such as
pedestrian-scaled windows and decorative parapets that
are compatible with the historic fabric of the area.

Create a striped, accessible mid-block crossing with
distinctive paving and tactile warning strips to connect this segment to the east side of Cypress Street. One
on-street parking space would need to be removed to
provide the mid-block crossing.

Consider installing a bench at the end of the alleyway
on Cypress Street.
•
•
•
•
•
THE
GARDEN

GALLERY
107

ATCHISON
BLACK’S

FURNITURE
UNITED
CUSTOM

UPHOLSTERY
VETERAN’S

MEMORIAL

AT DEPOT
PARK
N
N

W CHAPMAN AVE
As property reinvestment occurs, buildings along Atchison Street could be improved and reconfigured to create a pedestrian connection. When possible, historic buildings should be restored to their original historic state.

New pedestrian corridor
could be included with future
improvements to properties
within reinvestment areas
54 1404
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
V
Figure 14 Priority Implementation Map
85 1405
May 7, 2008 City of Orange
Chapter
Private Ownership APNs V
Figure 18 shows Assessor Parcel Numbers for all private properties traversed by the paseo alignments, where easements or other agreements with the property owners will be necessary for project implementation. The City of Orange will need to negotiate easements for public use of the paseos as well as other agreements for the installation of paseo amenities, such as the installation of gooseneck lighting, building facades improvements, etc. All of the private properties lie within Priority 2 and Priority 4 areas.

Figure 18 Priority 4 Private Properties Adjacent to Corridor 99 1406
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 8.4. 11/15/2022 File #: 22-0637
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Jeff Adams, Interim Community Development Director

1. SUBJECT
Public Hearing to consider Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 10-22 creating the Neighborhood Preservation Overlay Zone; providing development standards to regulate the addition of bedrooms or bathrooms to a primary residence within specified boundaries; revising or adding definitions pertaining to residential additions and student housing; and updating provisions for reviewing body approval of specified matters.

2. SUMMARY
The proposed ordinance establishes a Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District to provide regulations crafted to control surges in construction of new additions and interior renovations to single-family dwellings in neighborhoods that have experienced a high volume of construction activity that has resulted in adverse impacts to their single-family character, and to allow orderly home additions and renovations.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Introduce and conduct First Reading of Ordinance No. 10-22. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange creating the Neighborhood Preservation Overlay Zone; providing development standards to regulate the addition of bedrooms or bathrooms to a primary residence within specified boundaries; revising or adding definitions pertaining to residential additions and student housing; and updating provisions for reviewing body approval of specified matters.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community c: Support and enhance attractive, diverse living environments.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
Over the course of 2019 and 2020, the City saw numerous applications for additions or interior renovations to single-family dwellings (primary residences) in which several bedrooms and bathrooms were added, many with exterior doors and wet bars in each bedroom, in some cases transforming two or three bedroom homes into seven or eight bedroom and bathroom structures. In response, on February 16, 2021, the City Council adopted interim Ordinance No. 02-21, which prohibited the addition of three or more bedrooms or three or more bathrooms to the primary residence on lots less than 12,000 square feet and refined definitions of Dormitory and Student Housing. On March 23, 2021, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21-A until City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 11/10/2022
powered by Legistar™1407
Item #: 8.4. 11/15/2022 File #: 22-0637
Housing. On March 23, 2021, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21-A until February 15, 2022; and on February 8, 2022, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21- B until February 15, 2023. Since February 2021, staff has developed regulations for allowing bedroom and bathroom additions in that area of the City most affected by the types of projects causing the adverse impacts, resulting in the proposed Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District Ordinance.

Staff has identified the geographic area within the City where applications for multiple bedroom and bathroom additions were most concentrated and contributed to the negative impacts discussed in the interim ordinance staff report (Attachment 7). Based on the general location of those applications, the proposed permanent ordinance (Attachments 1 and 2) would be applicable to the area bounded by Katella Avenue to the north, Main Street to the west, SR-55 to the east, and SR-22 to the south (Attachment 5 - Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District Zoning Map Excerpt).

The proposed ordinance does not prohibit the addition of bedrooms or bathrooms, but certain additional space requirements apply. Projects adding bedrooms will generally require:
· additional usable open space (100 square feet per bedroom), · additional indoor common living area (100 square feet per bedroom), and · additional 50 cubic feet of unified indoor storage area per bedroom.

Furthermore, the maximum floor area ratio for a lot is reduced by five percent for each bedroom added, up to two bedrooms in order to keep the scale of homes with bedroom additions compatible with the surrounding neighborhood context.

The Community Development Director may ministerially approve the addition of one or two bedrooms and/or bathrooms meeting the ordinance criteria. Zoning Administrator approval is required for the addition of more than two bedrooms and/or bathrooms, or for ordinance development standard deviations, subject to neighborhood preservation findings. The Design Review Committee remains responsible for the review of all projects in the Historic Overlay Districts that add square feet or propose exterior modifications.

The Planning Commission reviewed proposed Ordinance No. 10-22 at their November 7, 2022 meeting and recommended by a vote of 5-0, that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 10-22.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 - Ordinance No. 10-22
· Attachment 2 - Ordinance No. 10-22, Redlined Version
· Attachment 3 - Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 29-22 · Attachment 4 - November 7, 2022 Planning Commission Staff Report · Attachment 5 - Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District Zoning Map Excerpt · Attachment 6 - Citywide Zoning Map with Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District (digital attachment only)
· Attachment 7 - February 8, 2022, City Council Urgency Ordinance No. 02-21 City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 11/10/2022
powered by Legistar™1408
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 8.4. 11/15/2022 File #: 22-0637
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Jeff Adams, Interim Community Development Director

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community c: Support and enhance attractive, diverse living environments.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
Over the course of 2019 and 2020, the City saw numerous applications for additions or interior renovations to single-family dwellings (primary residences) in which several bedrooms and bathrooms were added, many with exterior doors and wet bars in each bedroom, in some cases transforming two or three bedroom homes into seven or eight bedroom and bathroom structures. In response, on February 16, 2021, the City Council adopted interim Ordinance No. 02-21, which prohibited the addition of three or more bedrooms or three or more bathrooms to the primary residence on lots less than 12,000 square feet and refined definitions of Dormitory and Student Housing. On March 23, 2021, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21-A until City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 11/10/2022
powered by Legistar™1409
Item #: 8.4. 11/15/2022 File #: 22-0637
Housing. On March 23, 2021, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21-A until February 15, 2022; and on February 8, 2022, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21- B until February 15, 2023. Since February 2021, staff has developed regulations for allowing bedroom and bathroom additions in that area of the City most affected by the types of projects causing the adverse impacts, resulting in the proposed Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District Ordinance.

The Planning Commission reviewed proposed Ordinance No. 10-22 at their November 7, 2022 meeting and recommended by a vote of 5-0, that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 10-22.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ORANGE CREATING THE

NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION OVERLAY
ZONE; PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

TO REGULATE THE ADDITION OF BEDROOMS

OR BATHROOMS TO A PRIMARY RESIDENCE
WITHIN SPECIFIED BOUNDARIES; REVISING OR

ADDING DEFINITIONS PERTAINING TO

RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS AND STUDENT
HOUSING; AND UPDATING PROVISIONS FOR

REVIEWING BODY APPROVAL OF SPECIFIED
MATTERS.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orange, pursuant to its police powers afforded under the California Constitution, Article XI, Section 7, California Government Code 37100, et seq., may adopt regulations to protect the peace, health, safety and welfare of the community, and may declare that certain uses and conditions constitute a public nuisance; and WHEREAS, California Government Code 38771 authorizes the City, through its legislative body, to declare actions and activities that constitute a public nuisance in its community; and
WHEREAS, the City in general, and the neighborhoods in proximity to Chapman University in particular, have experienced a surge of construction activity and new applications for additions to and/or interior renovations to single-family dwellings (primary residences) in which numerous bedrooms and bathrooms are added, many with exterior doors and wet bars in each bedroom, in some cases transforming two or three bedroom homes into seven or eight bedroom and bathroom structures; and
WHEREAS, the mansionization of former single-family dwellings has in many cases been promoted as “student housing properties,” with the goal of “creating a student housing assemblage” on specific streets; and
WHEREAS, those mansionized single-family dwellings already constructed have caused numerous deleterious effects on the families residing nearby, including parking on front lawns, illegal street parking, unsafe vehicle speed demonstrations, trampled landscaping, loud music, unruly parties, congregation of crowds from outside the neighborhoods in the front yards over and above the number of occupants, confrontational interactions with neighbors, public drinking, late night disturbances, litter including bottles and cups visible to the neighborhood, overflowing trash cans, police responses to resident complaints, party call prosecutions, and what has been described by neighbors as a “fraternity” atmosphere, all of which effects constitute a public nuisance to the community; and
1411
Ord. No. 10-22 2 MEB
WHEREAS, on February 16, 2021, the City Council adopted interim Ordinance No. 02- 21, prohibiting the addition of three or more bedrooms or three or more bathrooms to a primary residence use on lots less than 12,000 square feet, and adding or revising certain related definitions; on March 23, 2021, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21-A until February 15, 2022; and on February 8, 2022, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21-B until February 15, 2023; and
WHEREAS, since adoption of the interim Ordinance, the City has reviewed and studied the development standards contained in its Zoning Code to examine under what circumstances and to what extent primary residences may be expanded in the number of bedrooms and number of bathrooms, along with other remodeling development standards, in a manner that does not deteriorate the neighborhood character; and
WHEREAS, the City has also studied the required procedure for evaluating applications for the expansion of single-family dwellings to determine the proper level of review required to protect the peace, health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood and the public at large and mitigate the specific adverse impacts; and
WHEREAS, the City has also studied the definitions of bedroom, dormitory and student housing to achieve a fair balance between accommodation of property owners’ rights and the negative effects of unregulated increases in bedrooms and bathrooms in single-family residential neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the City has examined the areas within the City where the additional bedrooms and bathrooms have been most prevalent and contributed most of the detrimental effects; and
WHEREAS, City staff has determined that an overlay zone applicable to that area of the City most prone to home expansions, and containing specific requirements for the addition of bedrooms and bathrooms, will provide clear and reasonable regulations allowing property owners to expand their residences while ensuring orderly growth and elimination of the known detrimental effects from mansionization; and
WHEREAS, at a public hearing held on November 7, 2022, the City of Orange Planning Commission considered proposed Ordinance No. 10-22 and recommended approval of said Ordinance to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 10-22 is necessary to achieve the goals and policies of the General Plan Land Use Element for balancing economic gains from new development while preserving the character and densities of residential neighborhoods, minimizing effects of new development on the privacy and character of surrounding neighborhoods, preserving historic resources, both individual and cumulatively in neighborhoods, and ensuring contextually appropriate infill development that contributes positively to the quality of the surrounding neighborhood.
1412
Ord. No. 10-22 3 MEB

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORANGE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION I:

This Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to (1) Section 15061(b)(3) of the state CEQA Guidelines (Common Sense Exemption) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that it would have a significant effect on the environment; and (2) Guideline Section 15378 because it will not have a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on the environment and is not a "project." For this reason, no further CEQA documentation is required.

SECTION II:

The definition of “BATHROOM” is hereby added to Section 17.04.021 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “B” Definitions,” to read as follows:

BATHROOM, FULL and HALF - A full bathroom contains one bathtub, tub or shower compartment; one water closet or lavatory or other similar approved facilities, and up to two sinks. It includes a compartmented bathroom in which the fixtures are distributed among interconnected rooms. A half-bathroom omits a bathtub, tub, or shower compartment.

SECTION III:

The definition of “BEDROOM” in Section 17.04.021 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “B” Definitions,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

SECTION IV:

The definition of “DORMITORY” in Section 17.04.023 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “D” Definitions,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

DORMITORY, DORMITORY-STYLE HOUSING, See also STUDENT
HOUSING – A structure used for group accommodations, containing a number of private or semiprivate bedrooms with or without a private bathroom, usually with common recreation and kitchen areas, primarily advertised to and exclusively occupied by students of a provider of higher education. A dormitory may be owned or operated by a university, college, or private owner. 1413
Ord. No. 10-22 4 MEB
SECTION V:

The definition of “LIVING AREA, COMMON” is hereby added to Section 17.04.031 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “L” Definitions,” to read as follows:

LIVING AREA, COMMON - The interior habitable area of a dwelling unit, other than the kitchen, bedrooms, bathrooms, utility rooms, garage, and basement, that is of sufficient size to be shared by all occupants of the dwelling unit with no other specific purpose other than shared gathering area.

SECTION VI :

The definition of “OPEN SPACE, USABLE” in Section 17.04.034 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “O” Definitions,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

OPEN SPACE, USABLE - Any space on a lot not enclosed by buildings and intended for recreation and leisure uses. Usable open space includes yards, courtyards, balconies, decks, porches, and patios but does not include front yard setbacks, driveways, parking spaces or side yards less than eight feet in width. In multiple-family developments, indoor recreation areas may count toward the usable open space requirement.

SECTION VII:

The definition of “STUDENT HOUSING” in Section 17.04.038 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “S” Definitions,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

STUDENT HOUSING, See also DORMITORY, DORMITORY-STYLE
HOUSING -- A structure designed, primarily advertised to and exclusively used for long-term stay by students of an educational facility for group accommodations usually with common recreation and kitchen areas, primarily advertised to and exclusively occupied by students of a provider of higher education. This may include a dormitory or fraternity/sorority house or apartment. Student housing may be owned or operated by a university, college, or private owner.

SECTION VIII:

Table 17.06.020 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Zoning Districts and Map – Districts Established,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

Table 17.06.020
Use
District
Symbol Use Classification Chapter
R1-R Single Family Residential District 17.14
R1-40 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
1414
Ord. No. 10-22 5 MEB
R1-20 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-15 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-12 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-10 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-8 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-7 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-6 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-5 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R2-8 Duplex Residential District 17.14
R2-7 Duplex Residential District 17.14
R2-6 Duplex Residential District 17.14
R-3 Multiple-Family Residential District 17.14
R-4 Multiple-Family Residential District 17.14
MH Mobile Home Residential District 17.14
OP Office Professional District 17.18
CP Commercial Professional District 17.18
C1 Limited Business District 17.18
C-TR Limited Business District—Tustin Redevelopment Project Area 17.18 C2 General Business District 17.18
C3 Commercial District 17.18
OTMU-15S Old Towne Mixed Use District - 15S 17.19
OTMU-15 Old Towne Mixed Use District - 15 DU/AC 17.19
OTMU-24 Old Towne Mixed Use District - 24 DU/AC 17.19
NMU-24 Neighborhood Mixed Use District - 24 DU/AC 17.19 UMU Urban Mixed Use District 17.19
M1 Light Industrial District 17.20
M2 Industrial Manufacturing District 17.20
SG Sand and Gravel Extraction District 17.32
A-1 Agricultural District 17.22
RO Recreation Open Space District 17.22
SH Slope Hazard District 17.22
PI Public Institution District 17.24
PC Planned Community District 17.26
FP Flood Plain Overlay District 17.28
A Single-Story Overlay District 17.28
E Equestrian Overlay District 17.28
P Parking Overlay District 17.28
NP Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District 17.28
PUD Planned Unit Development District 17.16
1415
Ord. No. 10-22 6 MEB
SECTION IX:

Table 17.08.020 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – General Administrative Procedures – Reviewing Bodies,” is hereby revised to add the following:

Table 17.08.020
Type of Procedure, Permit or Hearing CDD DRC ZA PC CC
Neighborhood Preservation Overlay
Applications
A/X(1) X(1)
SECTION X:

Subsections 17.08.020.D.2(f) and (g) are hereby added to Section 17.08.020 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – General Administrative Procedures – Reviewing Bodies – Design Review Committee – Powers and Duties,” to read as follows:
f. Make final determination on design review of applications for additional bedrooms or bathrooms in a historic district pursuant to Section 17.28.080.D.1.a. g. Review and make recommendations to the Zoning Administrator on applications for additional bedrooms or bathrooms in a historic district pursuant to Section

17.28.080.D.1.b.

SECTION XI:

Subsections 17.08.020.E.1 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – General Administrative Procedures – Reviewing Bodies – Community Development Director – Powers and Duties,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

1. Powers and Duties. The Community Development Director, after consultation with appropriate staff as determined by the Director, shall have the authority to:

SECTION XII:

Subsections 17.08.020.E.1(i) through (m) are hereby added to Section 17.08.020 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – General Administrative Procedures – Reviewing Bodies – Community Development Director – Powers and Duties,” to read as follows:
i. Decide upon the conformity of unlisted uses to the zoning district and similar uses pursuant to Section 17.13.070.
j. Decide upon applications to install walls and fences within 5 feet of one another pursuant to Section 17.12.070.A.1.a.
k. Decide upon Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District applications pursuant to Section 17.28.080.C.
1416
Ord. No. 10-22 7 MEB
l. Decide upon deviations from required number of parking spaces for nonresidential land uses pursuant to Section 17.34.060. m. Decide upon parking requirements for uses not specified pursuant to Section 17.34.070.

SECTION XIII:

Section 17.14.280 is hereby added to the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Residential Districts – Bedrooms,” to read as follows:

17.14.280 Bedrooms
A bedroom may not contain facilities for a sink, refrigerator or microwave, a kitchenette, or infrastructure that can be easily converted to a kitchenette, e.g., GFCI outlets. Unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Director or designee, a bedroom may not have a door directly to the outside or contain a wet bar.

SECTION XIV:

The chart in Section 17.28.030 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Overlay Districts – Denotation of Overlay Districts,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

District Symbol
Flood Plain 1 FP-1
Flood Plain 2 FP-2
Single Story A
Equestrian E
Parking P
Neighborhood Preservation NP
SECTION XV:

Section 17.28.080 is hereby added to the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Overlay Districts – Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District,” to read as follows:

17.28.080 Neighborhood Preservation Overlay
A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the Neighborhood Preservation (NP) Overlay District is to provide regulations to control surges in construction of new additions and interior 1417
Ord. No. 10-22 8 MEB
renovations to primary residences concentrated in the overlay district that become multiple tenant rental properties and that result in adverse impacts to single-family neighborhoods.

B. Application. The Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District is the area bounded by Katella Avenue to the north, Main Street to the west, the SR-55 Freeway to the east, and the City’s boundaries along the SR-22 Freeway to the south. The overlay district is established on the City of Orange Zoning Map.

C. Overlay Development Standards – Ministerial Approval. Project applications from existing primary residences in the overlay district that add bedrooms or bathrooms in compliance with the City of Orange Infill Residential Design Guidelines and the following overlay development standards, shall be approved ministerially by the Community Development Director or designee.

1. A maximum of two bedrooms may be constructed onto and/or and added within a primary residence by reconfiguring existing space. For purposes of calculating allowable additional bedrooms, the number of bedrooms existing as of January 1, 2023, shall be considered the baseline.

2. A maximum of two bathrooms, including half-bathrooms, may be constructed onto and/or added to a primary residence by reconfiguring existing space. For purposes of calculating allowable additional bathrooms, the number of bathrooms existing as of January 1, 2023, shall be considered the baseline.

3. A minimum of 100 square feet of additional usable open space must be provided for each additional bedroom being proposed to the existing primary residence.

4. A minimum of 100 square feet of additional common living area must be provided for each additional bedroom being proposed to the existing primary residence. Dwelling units that maintain a minimum of 800 square feet of common living area are exempt from the requirement.

5. A minimum of 50 cubic feet of additional unified indoor storage area must be provided for each additional bedroom being proposed to the existing primary residence. Such storage area must be in addition to cabinets and closets typically found within a dwelling unit such as bedroom closets, linen closets, or kitchen cabinets.

6. In any single-family residential district, the addition of one or two new bedrooms must comply with the following floor area ratio (FAR) standards.

Lot Area (sf) Max FAR Max FAR for One Max FAR for Two
New Bedroom New Bedrooms
<10,000 0.60 0.55 0.50
10,000-12,000 0.50 0.45 0.40
1418
Ord. No. 10-22 9 MEB

7. Project applications involving exterior modifications to primary residences located in a historic district shall also be subject to design review by the Design Review Committee.

D. Approval Process. Applications from existing primary residences in the overlay district that add bedrooms or bathrooms not in compliance with the overlay development standards set forth in Subsection C, and/or that are located in a historic district shall be subject to the following approval procedures:

1. Historic District Approval. An application for additional bedrooms, bathrooms and other related improvements that involves new square footage or exterior modifications (other than roof vents), shall be subject to the design review process as follows:
a. When the property is located in a historic district but the application is otherwise in compliance with the overlay development standards contained in subsection C, the Design Review Committee shall have the final authority to review and approve the project.
b. When the property is located in a historic district but the application is not in compliance with the overlay development standards contained in subsection C, the Design Review Committee shall have the authority to review and make a recommendation to the Zoning Administrator on the design of the proposed project. The Zoning Administrator shall have the final authority to review and approve the project.

2. Approval – Not in a Historic District. When the proposal is not in compliance with the overlay development standards contained in subsection C, the Zoning Administrator shall have the final authority to review and approve the project.

3. Zoning Administrator Approval - Considerations. In approving an application for additional bedrooms, bathrooms, and/or other related improvements not in compliance with the overlay development standards contained in subsection C, the Zoning Administrator shall consider the following:
a. The proposal will preserve the public peace, health, safety, and welfare within those areas that neighbor the affected residence and other surrounding areas within the Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District.
b. The size and design of the proposal will minimize the likelihood of excessive disturbances or unruly behavior such as parking on front lawns, illegal street parking, congregation of crowds in the front yards over and above the number of occupants, and other public nuisances to the community.
c. The proposal will comply with those standards and requirements described in this Section and the entirety of Title 17 of this code. 1419
Ord. No. 10-22 10 MEB

4. Appeals. Final decisions of the Community Development Director, Design Review Committee or Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 17.08.050.E.

E. The Community Development Director, Design Review Committee or Zoning Administrator may refer an application for which it may render a final decision to the Planning Commission for a final decision. The Planning Commission shall be subject to those approval considerations set forth in subsection D.3.

SECTION XVI:

If any section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one (or more) section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase had been declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION XVII:

The City Clerk is hereby directed to certify the adoption of this Ordinance and cause a summary of the same to be published as required by law. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from and after the date of its final passage.

APPROVED this ____ day of ________________, 2022.
_____________________________________
Mark A. Murphy, Mayor, City of Orange
ATTEST:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
1420
Ord. No. 10-22 11 MEB

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

CITY OF ORANGE )
I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at the regular meeting of the City Council held on the ___ day of _______________, 2022, and thereafter at the regular meeting of said City Council duly held on the ___ day of _______________, 2022, was duly passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
1421
ORDINANCE NO. 10-22

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ORANGE CREATING THE

NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION OVERLAY
ZONE; PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

TO REGULATE THE ADDITION OF BEDROOMS

OR BATHROOMS TO A PRIMARY RESIDENCE
WITHIN SPECIFIED BOUNDARIES; REVISING OR

ADDING DEFINITIONS PERTAINING TO

RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS AND STUDENT
HOUSING; AND UPDATING PROVISIONS FOR

REVIEWING BODY APPROVAL OF SPECIFIED
MATTERS.
[Pertinent provisions only]

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORANGE
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION II:

The definition of “BATHROOM” is hereby added to Section 17.04.021 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “B” Definitions,” to read as follows:

SECTION III:

The definition of “BEDROOM” in Section 17.04.021 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “B” Definitions,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

BEDROOM - Any habitable room in a dwelling unit other than a bathroom, kitchen, dining room or living room with the following features: an interior door that can be closed or an opening into the room in which an interior door or double door can be easily installed; a window; and a closet or room for a wardrobe in addition to a bed. In general, a bedroom may not contain a door directly to the outside, facilities for a sink, refrigerator or microwave, e.g., a wet bar, a kitchenette, or infrastructure that can be easily converted to a wet bar or kitchenette, e.g., GFCI outlets.
1422
Ord. No. 10-22 2
SECTION IV:

The definition of “DORMITORY” in Section 17.04.023 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “D” Definitions,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

DORMITORY, DORMITORY-STYLE HOUSING, See also STUDENT
HOUSING – A structure used for group accommodations, containing a number of private or semiprivate bedrooms with or without a private bathroom, usually with common recreation and kitchen areas, primarily advertised to and exclusively occupied by students of an educational facility of a provider of higher education.

A dormitory may be owned or operated by a university, college, or private owner.

SECTION V:

The definition of “LIVING AREA, COMMON” is hereby added to Section 17.04.031 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “L” Definitions,” to read as follows:

SECTION VI :

The definition of “OPEN SPACE, USABLE” in Section 17.04.034 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “O” Definitions,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

SECTION VII:

The definition of “STUDENT HOUSING” in Section 17.04.038 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “S” Definitions,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

STUDENT HOUSING, See also DORMITORY, DORMITORY-STYLE
HOUSING -- A structure designed, primarily advertised to and exclusively used for long-term stay by students of an educational facility for sleeping group accommodations usually with common recreation and kitchen areas, primarily advertised to and exclusively occupied by students of a provider of higher 1423
Ord. No. 10-22 3
education. This may includes a dormitory or fraternity/sorority house or apartment. Student housing may be owned or operated by a university, college, or private owner.

SECTION VIII:

Table 17.06.020 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Zoning Districts and Map – Districts Established,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

Table 17.06.020
Use
District
Symbol Use Classification Chapter
R1-R Single Family Residential District 17.14
R1-40 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-20 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-15 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-12 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-10 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-8 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-7 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-6 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R1-5 Single-Family Residential District 17.14
R2-8 Duplex Residential District 17.14
R2-7 Duplex Residential District 17.14
R2-6 Duplex Residential District 17.14
R-3 Multiple-Family Residential District 17.14
R-4 Multiple-Family Residential District 17.14
MH Mobile Home Residential District 17.14
OP Office Professional District 17.18
CP Commercial Professional District 17.18
C1 Limited Business District 17.18
C-TR Limited Business District—Tustin Redevelopment Project Area 17.18 C2 General Business District 17.18
C3 Commercial District 17.18
OTMU-15S Old Towne Mixed Use District - 15S 17.19
OTMU-15 Old Towne Mixed Use District - 15 DU/AC 17.19
OTMU-24 Old Towne Mixed Use District - 24 DU/AC 17.19
NMU-24 Neighborhood Mixed Use District - 24 DU/AC 17.19 UMU Urban Mixed Use District 17.19
1424
Ord. No. 10-22 4
M1 Light Industrial District 17.20
M2 Industrial Manufacturing District 17.20
SG Sand and Gravel Extraction District 17.32
A-1 Agricultural District 17.22
RO Recreation Open Space District 17.22
SH Slope Hazard District 17.22
PI Public Institution District 17.24
PC Planned Community District 17.26
FP Flood Plain Overlay District 17.28
A Single-Story Overlay District 17.28
E Equestrian Overlay District 17.28
P Parking Overlay District 17.28
NP Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District 17.28
PUD Planned Unit Development District 17.16
SECTION IX:

Table 17.08.020 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – General Administrative Procedures – Reviewing Bodies,” is hereby revised to add the following:

Table 17.08.020
Type of Procedure, Permit or Hearing CDD DRC ZA PC CC
Neighborhood Preservation Overlay
Applications
A/X(1) X(1)
SECTION X:

17.28.080.D.1.b.

SECTION XI:

1. Powers and Duties. The Community Development Director, after consultation with a staff review committee designated by the City Manager appropriate staff as determined by the Director, shall have the authority to:

SECTION XII:

Subsections 17.08.020.E.1(i) through (m) are hereby added to Section 17.08.020 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – General Administrative Procedures – Reviewing Bodies – Community Development Director – Powers and Duties,” to read as follows:
i. Decide upon the conformity of unlisted uses to the zoning district and similar uses pursuant to Section 17.13.070.
j. Decide upon applications to install walls and fences within 5 feet of one another pursuant to Section 17.12.070.A.1.a.
k. Decide upon Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District applications pursuant to Section 17.28.080.C.
l. Decide upon deviations from required number of parking spaces for nonresidential land uses pursuant to Section 17.34.060. m. Decide upon parking requirements for uses not specified pursuant to Section 17.34.070.

SECTION XIII:

Section 17.14.280 is hereby added to the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Residential Districts – Bedrooms,” to read as follows:

17.14.280 Bedrooms
A bedroom may not contain facilities for a sink, refrigerator or microwave, a kitchenette, or infrastructure that can be easily converted to a kitchenette, e.g., GFCI outlets.

Unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Director or designee, a bedroom may not have a door directly to the outside or contain a wet bar.

SECTION XIV:

The chart in Section 17.28.030 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Overlay Districts – Denotation of Overlay Districts,” is hereby revised to read as follows:

District Symbol
Flood Plain 1 FP-1
1426
Ord. No. 10-22 6
Flood Plain 2 FP-2
Single Story A
Equestrian E
Parking P
Neighborhood Preservation NP
SECTION XV:

Section 17.28.080 is hereby added to the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Overlay Districts – Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District,” to read as follows:

17.28.080 Neighborhood Preservation Overlay
A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the Neighborhood Preservation (NP) Overlay District is to provide regulations to control surges in construction of new additions and interior renovations to primary residences concentrated in the overlay district that become multiple tenant rental properties and that result in adverse impacts to single-family neighborhoods.

3. A minimum of 100 square feet of additional usable open space must be provided for each additional bedroom being proposed to the existing primary residence. 1427
Ord. No. 10-22 7

4. A minimum of 100 square feet of additional common living area must be provided for each additional bedroom being proposed to the existing primary residence.

Dwelling units that maintain a minimum of 800 square feet of common living area are exempt from the requirement.

6. In any single-family residential district, the addition of one or two new bedrooms must comply with the following floor area ratio (FAR) standards.

Lot Area (sf) Max FAR Max FAR for One Max FAR for Two
New Bedroom New Bedrooms
<10,000 0.60 0.55 0.50
10,000-12,000 0.50 0.45 0.40

7. Project applications involving exterior modifications to primary residences located in a historic district shall also be subject to design review by the Design Review Committee.

4. Appeals. Final decisions of the Community Development Director, Design Review Committee or Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 17.08.050.E.

ORDINANCE

NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION

OVERLAY DISTRICT
RESOLUTION NO. PC 29-22

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE ORANGE

MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING) TO ESTABLISH A

NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT

AND RELATED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR

PROJECTS ADDING BEDROOMS OR BATHROOMS TO A

PRIMARY RESIDENCE IN THE AREA BOUNDED BY

KATELLA AVENUE TO THE NORTH, MAIN STREET TO
THE WEST, SR 55 TO THE EAST, AND SR 22/FAIRHAVEN

AVENUE TO THE SOUTH
APPLICANT: CITY OF ORANGE
Moved by Commissioner Glasgow and seconded by Commissioner Simpson that the following Resolution be adopted:

WHEREAS, in the past two years, the City has seen numerous applications for additions or interior renovations to single-family dwellings (primary residences) in which several bedrooms and bathrooms are added, many with exterior doors and wet bars in each bedroom, in some cases transforming two or three bedroom homes into seven or eight bedroom and bathroom structures; and
WHEREAS, on February 16, 2021, the City Council adopted interim Ordinance No. 02- 21, prohibiting the addition of three or more bedrooms or three or more bathrooms to a primary residence use on lots less than 12,000 square feet, and adding or revising certain related definitions; on March 23, 2021, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21-A until February 15, 2022; and on February 8, 2022, the City Council extended interim Ordinance No. 02-21-B until February 15, 2023; and
WHEREAS, a permanent Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District Ordinance is necessary because Urgency Ordinance No. 02-21 will expire in February; and WHEREAS, the area within the City where bedroom and bathroom additions are most concentrated and contribute to negative impacts, is defined as the area bounded by Katella Avenue to the north, Main Street to the west, SR-55 to the east, and SR-22 to the south; and WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance adds Section 17.28.08 to Title 17 of the Orange Municipal Code (OMC) with the purpose of controlling surges in construction of new additions and interior renovations to single-family dwellings (primary residences) concentrated in the Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District that are promoted as multiple tenant rental properties, which have resulted in adverse impacts to single-family neighborhoods; and 1430
Resolution No. PC 29-22

Page 2 of 4 ends

Orange City CouncilNovember 15, 2022

Orange City Council
November 15, 2022