Scope of Work 

1. Add Driveway Gates and stucco wall (72”H)

2. Walkway and Driveway

3. Rear Northern Side Elevation Alteration and Addition. 

4. Remove existing non-contributing rear covered patio (permitted 1959) and replace with Mediterranean Revival Style patio cover. 

5. Remodel Rear Elevations (Not Street Visible)

6. Convert Living Quarters to ADU

The following are the written descriptions and findings for the proposed additions and alterations/remodel based on the guidelines in the Windsor Square HPOZ Preservation Plan, in the above-referenced order, using the A, B and C designations of the scope of work.  

NOTE: The blue type is the verbatim quote from the HPOZ guidelines with the responses from the applicant Architecture JHK immediately below in black type.

A. Driveway Gates and Stucco Wall 

Because the existing detached garage and storage will be converted to an ADU, a new 72” high double gates with a 72” high stucco wall will be placed to the south side of the house in order to screen the exterior parking behind the gates.  The new double gates and the stucco wall on the driveway will be in keeping with the other neighbors’ driveways on the block, where driveway gates and/or pedestrian gates and trash enclosures are installed (see detail below).  The look and feel of the gates will be in keeping with the traditional carriage doors which historically existed at the front face of the garage.

HPOZ FINDINGS: 

6.4 FENCES, HEDGES, GATES, WALLS, AND PHYSICAL FEATURES:

1. Historic retaining walls or fences exist, they should be rehabilitated or preserved in place. If they must be removed, they should be replaced in-kind. If reinforcement is necessary, finish materials should match the original in materials and design.

2. Historically, fencing, walls, or hedges did not exist in front yard areas; their construction or planting is generally discouraged. If found to be appropriate, new or replacement retaining walls, fences, or hedges should be constructed in a style and with materials that harmonize with the house and other existing historic retaining walls, fences, or hedges in the area.

Architect: The proposed new 72” high gates and stucco wall is located to the south side of the house, behind the line of the front facade of the main structure, not in the front yard areas.  The new 72” high gates and stucco wall will be constructed in a Mediterranean Revival style to harmonize with the historical main house and garage/accessory building on the site, as well as other existing historic walls, fences, or hedges in the neighborhood.  This addition is also appropriate due to the conversion of the detached accessory structure to an ADU.

3. In matters of safety, historically appropriate fence styles, such as a simple open dark-colored wrought iron fence, may be appropriate. Per the City’s fence regulations, (LAMC Section 12.22 C.20) front yard fences, walls, and hedges can be no more than 42-inches tall in residential areas.

Architect: A historically appropriate fence style in this neighborhood would be carriage-style gates and stucco walls as found in the neighborhood, specifically 260 Lorraine Blvd, where gates and stucco wall were recently installed. The proposed new gates and stucco wall will be located at the side yard driveway location.

4. In matters of safety, the addition of a handrail along steps for safety or handicapped access reasons may be appropriate if the handrail is simple in design, matches the architectural style of the structure, and is not attached to the structure or façades.

Architect:

5. Visible side and rear yard fencing should have a historically appropriate design but may be less transparent than front yard fencing where found to be appropriate.
   
   

Architect: The new 72” high gates and stucco wall fencing is located on the side yard.  The new 72” high gates and stucco wall fencing is of Mediterranean Revival design which is the historically appropriate design and compatible with the neighborhood.

6. On corner lots it may be appropriate to have a side yard gate with less transparency.

Architect: Not Applicable, as this is not a corner lot

7. Exposed concrete block, horizontal wood, hollow steel, vinyl, chain link, and heavy masonry pilasters are inappropriate for publicly visible walls, gates, and fencing. Stucco covered retaining walls may be appropriate. Overly decorative wrought iron accents are inappropriate.

Architect: No exposed concrete block, horizontal wood, hollow steel, vinyl, chain link, and heavy masonry pilasters are proposed.  No retaining walls or overly decorative wrought iron accents are proposed. The proposed walls will be stucco finish similar to the house.

8. When possible, fences, walls, and gates in the front yard areas should be set back from the front property line.

Architect: The proposed walls and gates are not in the front yard areas.  The new gates and stucco wall are located at the side yard and set back 59’-9” from the front property line, and also behind the front-facing elevation plane of the main house.

9. New fencing, walls, and gates, in the Street Visible Areas of the side yards, should be located behind the front façade of a structure.

Architect: The proposed new, walls, and gates, in the street visible areas of the side yards, are located behind the front façade of the structure of the house.

10. New physical features within the front yard area and street visible side yard areas, such as ponds, fountains, gazebos, recreational equipment, sculptural elements, etc., that were not historically present in the area are generally inappropriate. Sustainability features (i.e. rain gardens, etc.) may be found appropriate; when found to be appropriate, they should be designed to match the architectural style of the structure and match the historic context of the neighborhood. 

Architect: Side yard gates and stucco walls can be considered a sustainable feature as it is being proposed in conjunction with the ADU which is a state-mandated sustainability element.  As such, the proposed walls and gate are designed to match the architectural style of the structure and match the historic context of the neighborhood. 

B. Walkway and Driveway

NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION:

For vehicles to navigate into and out of the proposed side-by-side parking behind the front facade of the main building, behind the new proposed driveway gate, the driveway will need to be expanded slightly.  Also, a small walkway to access the trash enclosure is proposed.  The design of both the widened driveway and the proposed additional walkway, will be poured concrete, bordered by brick paving, similar to the design of the existing driveway.

HPOZ FINDINGS: 

6.3 FRONT YARD: HARDSCAPE

1. Historic walkways, stairs, and other hardscape features should be preserved. If these elements are replaced, they should be replaced with materials consistent with those historically present in the area and within the same footprint. Special attention should be paid to restoring or replicating score patterns, pavement texture, swirl patterns, and coloration.

Architect: Historic walkways, stairs, and other hardscape features located in front of the house will be preserved.

2. Additions or widening of driveways are generally discouraged, but when found appropriate, should be composed of semi-permeable surfaces such as decomposed granite, grasscrete, interlocking pavers, stone pavers, etc. in lieu of impermeable surfaces such as concrete or brick- and-mortar. If found appropriate, original driveways should not be widened more than 18-inches within the front yard area.

Architect: The widening of the driveway is proposed primarily at the side yard and therefore is appropriate due to the conversion of the garage to an ADU.  In order to “accommodate the realities of 21st century living” (item #14 pg. 88 of the guidelines), two exterior, side-by-side parking spaces on the driveway needed to be placed at the side of the main house behind the proposed new gates and stucco wall (behind the front facade plane of the house) so as to provide screening of parked vehicles out of sight to the street view.

The existing driveway in the front yard area will be widened and joined at 90 degrees by a proposed new 4’ wide walkway path to the trash containers.  The new hardscape will be with similar brick and concrete paving material in front of the new double gate entry for cars and the trash enclosure gate. In the front yard portion, the widening of the driveway will be mainly under 18”, and will not exceed an average of 18”.

3. Paving in front yard areas for parking that did not historically exist is inappropriate. Parking pads and parking within the front yard is prohibited by the City’s municipal code. Parking should be located to the rear or side of a structure, behind the front façade.

Architect: No paving is proposed for parking in front yard areas.  Parking will be located to the side to the main structure, behind rear of the front façade.

4. Adding additional or new curb cuts where they did not historically exist is inappropriate. Curb cuts should be limited to not more than one per property.

Architect: No new curb cuts will be added.

5. When found appropriate, front yard walkways that did not historically exist on the subject site should use historically appropriate materials with special attention paid to the overall design, location, footprint, and score patterns.

Architect: The proposed walkway to access the trash enclosure will use historically similar materials and score patterns. Special attention was paid to the overall design, which is similar to the existing historical driveway, with concrete bordered by similar brick paving.  The walkway joins the existing driveway and so that the transport of the trash containers is via a limited hardscape footprint.  In other words, the size, location and orientation of this walkway is designed so as to minimize hardscape footprint, in order to not interfere with nor significantly alter the historic landscape.

6. New physical features within a front yard area, such as ponds, fountains, water features, gazebos, recreational equipment, sculptural elements, etc., that were not historically present in the area are generally inappropriate. Sustainability features (i.e. rain gardens, etc.) may be found appropriate; when found to be appropriate, they should be designed to be compatible with the architectural style of the structure and the historic context of the neighborhood. 

Architect: No new physical features are located within the front yard area.  The new stucco wall and gates are located to the side of the Main House facade.  These proposed elements are designed to be compatible with the architectural style of the structure and the historic context of the neighborhood.

C.  Rear Northern Side Elevation Alteration and Addition.  

NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION:

Special care was taken in the design process to ensure that the proposed addition does not disrupt the prevailing architectural character of the district or of the structure itself.  Also, great care was taken so as not to communicate a false sense of history within the district with respect to the size and arrangement of structures. For example, the additions are subordinate in scale and volume to the existing house while echoing the existing Mediterranean Revival style with more simplified architectural detailing.

The alteration and addition are as follows:

1. Remodel, and add about 91 SF to the existing 1st-floor rear bedroom in order to convert it into a Family Room.  The setback for the addition will be 7’ from the property line, which is inset 1’ 3” from the existing north side facade of the building.  The addition is differentiated by the additional setback.

2. Remodel and add about 244 SF to the existing 2nd-floor rear bedroom and existing rear balcony.  The setback for this addition will be 8’ from the property line, which is inset an additional 2’ 3” from the existing north side facade of the building.  The addition is differentiated by the additional setback.

While the main structure, as it currently stands, appears unaltered from its historical design, when viewed from the street. However, as indicated in the HPOZ Survey Notes, some windows have been changed. 

City online building permit records show some remodeling and additions to the side and rear portions of the house as follows:

A Kitchen remodel and 2nd-floor bathroom remodels in 1995. 

Based on a comparison of the current as-built condition to the original construction plans (see Appendix A), this remodel in 1995 altered the look of the north side elevation.  For example, the original tall windows for the kitchen were removed for a new bay window.  Also, two windows on the second floor were removed and replaced by a single wood casement window. 

HPOZ FINDINGS: 

8.2 ADDITIONS TO PRIMARY STRUCTURES

1. Additions to the primary residential structure should be located outside of the Street Visible Area, whenever possible. 

Architect: The proposed additions are located at the rear-most portion of the primary structure, outside of the Street Visible Area, whenever possible.

2. Additions should be subordinate in scale and volume to the existing house. Additions that involve more than a 50% increase in the Building Coverage are generally inappropriate.

Architect: The proposed additions are subordinate in scale and volume to the existing house. Additions do not involve more than a 50% increase in the Building Coverage.

3. Additions should be compatible in scale with the overall block lot coverage. Additions that involve more than a 5% increase to the block average lot coverage may be inappropriate.

Architect: Additions are compatible in scale with the overall block lot coverage. Additions do not involve more than a 5% increase to the block average lot coverage.  In fact, the block average will only increase by .30%.  

4. The depth of the front and side yards should be preserved.

Architect: The depth of the front and side yards has been preserved.

5. Additions, including second-story additions to primary structures, should be compatible in size, scale, and massing with the original building or structure, and should harmonize in scale and massing with the existing historic structures in the surrounding blocks.

Architect: The proposed additions to primary structures, are compatible in size, scale, and massing with the original building or structure, and harmonize in scale and massing with the existing historic structures in the surrounding blocks

6. Additions that will be larger than their neighbors should be subordinate to the original main structure, with the greater part of the mass located away from the main façade to minimize the bulk of the perceived structure. To the extent possible, two-story additions to one-story buildings should be located outside the Street Visible Area.

Architect: The proposed additions are not larger than the neighbors. Still, the proposed addition is subordinate to the original main structure, with the greater part of the mass located away from the main façade to minimize the bulk of the perceived structure. To the extent possible, the proposed addition is located outside the Street Visible Area.

7. Additions should be located at the rear of the structure, away from the street-facing architectural façade.

Architect: The proposed additions will be located at the rear of the structure, away from the street-facing architectural façade.

8. Additions that outwardly break the plane(s) established by the existing roofline or side façades of the structure are inappropriate.

Architect: The proposed additions do not outwardly break the plane(s) established by the existing roofline or side façades of the structure.

9. Additions that extend the existing side façades rearward, without a break in plane, are discouraged. Additions should be stepped-in from the side façade and be lower in height than the primary structure.

Architect: The proposed additions do not extend the existing side façades rearward without a break in plane.  Plane breaks are employed in the design of the proposed additions in the following manner: the proposed additions are stepped in from the side façade and lower in height than the primary structure.

10. Additions should utilize roof forms that are consistent with the existing house to the greatest extent possible but should be differentiated by virtue of scale and volume. Attention should be paid to eave depth and roof pitch, replicating these to the greatest extent possible.

Architect: The proposed additions utilize hip roof forms that are consistent with the existing house, but are differentiated by smaller scale and volume. Eave depth and roof pitch will be replicated to the greatest extent possible.

11. The original rooflines of the front façade of a structure should remain readable and not be obscured by an addition.

Architect: The original rooflines of the front façade of a structure will remain readable and not be obscured by an addition.

12. Addition of roof forms and materials should be consistent with those of the original structure.

Architect: Addition of roof forms and materials will be consistent with those of the original structure.

13. Additions should use similar or otherwise compatible finish materials as the original building or structure. A stucco addition to a wood clapboard house, for example, would be inappropriate.

Architect: The proposed additions will use similar stucco finish as the original building.

14. Additions should distinguish themselves from the original structure through the simplified use of architectural detail, or through building massing or subtle variations of exterior finishes, to communicate that the addition is new construction. All buildings should be recognized as products of their own time.

Architect: The proposed additions will distinguish themselves from the original structure by stepping in the building mass, and through the use of simplified metal rails for the balconies.

15. Additions should utilize fenestration patterns that are consistent with the existing house to the greatest extent possible, though simplified window types may be an appropriate means to differentiate the addition from the original structure. For instance, if windows on the original structure are multi-pane 8-over-1 lite windows, simple 1-over-1 lite windows may be appropriate.

Architect: Additions will use utilize fenestration patterns that are consistent with the existing house to the greatest extent possible. As means to differentiate the additions,  Some diminution, and some minor simplification may be included as per availability. 

16. Decorative architectural features established on the existing house should be repeated with less detail on the addition. Exact replicas of features such as corbels, pilasters, decorative windows, etc., are inappropriate.

Architect: Decorative architectural features established on the existing house are repeated with less detail on the addition.  The windows in the proposed additions, for example, do not replicate the corbels and trims found at the front facade of the house.  

17. Additions that would necessitate the elimination of significant architectural features such as chimneys, decorative windows, architectural symmetry or other impacts to the existing house are not appropriate.

Architect: The proposed additions do not eliminate any significant architectural features such as chimneys, decorative windows, architectural symmetry or other impacts to the existing house.

18. Additions should be designed in the same architectural style and character of the existing building or structure.

Architect: The proposed additions are designed in the same Mediterranean Revival style and character as the existing building or structure.

19. Where additions that comprise a new floor can be found appropriate, such additions should be located to the rear of the structure.

Architect: Not Applicable, as the main house as built is 2 stories and has been since it was originally built.  

20. Rooftop additions should be located to the rear of the structure, should preserve the historic character, architectural details, form, and mass of the existing historic structure; and be designed to be compatible with the surrounding historic structures.

Architect: There are no rooftop additions proposed.

21. The enclosure of non-visible porches, when found to be appropriate, should preserve the overall look of the porch to the greatest extent possible with respect to railings, balusters, openings, and roofs.

Architect: No porches will be enclosed.  

22. Additions that would involve the removal or diminishment of open areas on multi-family properties, such as the infill of a courtyard to be used for floor area, are inappropriate.

Architect: Not applicable, as this is a single-family property.

23. Additions that would require the location of designated parking areas within the front yard area are not permitted under LAMC.

Architect: Designated parking areas are not within the front yard area.

New architectural details and features will be designed with materials and finishes that echo the Mediterranean Revival style in simplified form so as to not convey a false sense of history. 

Existing decorative details will be maintained and repaired in a manner that enhances their inherent qualities and maintains as much as possible of their original character. 

7.6 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS & BUILDING MATERIALS AND FINISHES

1. Original architectural details or features, and building materials, on street visible façades should be preserved and maintained. The removal of non-historic architectural features is encouraged.

Architect: Original architectural details or features, and building materials, on street visible façades, will be preserved and maintained.  The existing rear covered patio will be/removed/remodeled, since it is considered a non-historic architectural feature, which was added in 1959, and is not consistent with the historic design of the dwelling.

2. Deteriorated materials or features should be repaired in place, if possible. For instance, deteriorated wood details can be repaired with wood filler or epoxy in many cases.

Architect: Currently no materials or features which are architecturally relevant appear deteriorated. 

3. Repairs through consolidation or “patching in” are preferred to replacement.

Architect: Repairs through consolidation or “patching in” will be considered as necessary if required during the remodel. This will be specified on the Construction plans. 

4. When it is necessary to replace materials or features due to deterioration, replacements should significantly match the original in materials, scale, finish, details, profile, texture, and design as closely as possible.

Architect: When it is necessary to replace materials or features due to deterioration, the replacements will significantly match the original in materials, scale, finish, details, profile, texture, and design as closely as possible. This will be specified on the Construction plans. 

5. Use of materials and finishes should be compatible with the historic style and period of the building or structure.

Architect: Use of stucco, metal rails, and wood doors and windows will be compatible with the historic Mediterranian Revival style. This will be specified on the Construction plans. 

6. When historic original details or features have been lost and must be replaced, reasonable efforts should be made to identify illustrative historical evidence of the original detail or feature; designs should be based on historic photographic or illustration-based evidence. If no such evidence exists or is not obtainable, the design of replacement details should be based on a combination of physical evidence (indications in the structure of the house itself) and evidence of similar elements on houses of the same architectural style in the neighborhood. 

Architect: The original architectural plans are available as illustration-based evidence. (See Appendix B)

7. While paint color on already-painted surfaces is exempt from review, original materials that were not originally painted or sealed, such as masonry or tile, should remain unpainted. Painting such materials is inappropriate.

Architect: not applicable. No painting of original materials that were not originally painted or sealed is proposed in this scope of work.

8. Original surface building materials, details, and/or features should not be covered with inappropriate materials such as stucco, vinyl siding, or other materials/finishes.
   

Architect: Original surface building materials, details, and/or features will not be covered with inappropriate materials such as stucco, vinyl siding, or other materials/finishes.

9. Architectural detail that did not originally appear on a structure should not be added to a structure. For example, precast concrete trims should not be added to a house.
    

Architect: Architectural detail that did not originally appear on a structure will not be added to a structure.

10. Architectural details and features that are not appropriate to the architectural style of a building or structure should not be added. For example, Tudor Revival faux half-timbering should not be added to the façade of a Spanish Colonial Revival residence.

Architect: Architectural details and features that are not appropriate to the architectural style of a building or structure are not added in the proposed scope of work

11. Decorative detail that is expressed through the pattern of materials used in the construction of the house, such as decorative shingles or masonry patterns, should be preserved or replaced in-kind. Covering or painting these details in a manner that obscures these patterns is inappropriate.

Architect: Decorative detail that is expressed through the pattern of materials used in the construction of the house, such as decorative shingles or masonry patterns, will be preserved or replaced in-kind.

12. If resurfacing of a stucco surface is necessary, the surface applied should match the original in texture and finish. For example, Spanish Colonial Revival homes should have a hand troweled finish. Extremely smooth stucco finishes are inappropriate.
    
    

Architect: Stucco will be of a similar finish to match the original in texture and finish as found on the house.

13. Painting or staining with patterns or fluorescent colors are generally inappropriate.
    

Architect: Painting or staining with patterns or fluorescent colors are not considered.

14. Architectural details on building additions should be consistent with the architectural style of the existing building or structure. 

Architect: Architectural details on building additions will be consistent with the Mediterranean Revival style of the existing building or structure.