Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Wednesday, May 4, 2011 4:00 - 5:30 p.m. 7:00 - 11:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBER, FEW MEMORIAL HALL OF RECORDS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa Members Absent: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie Staff Members Present: Senior Planner Ebbs, Recording Secretary Abadilla CALL TO ORDER (Vice Chair) Dawson – Present, (Member) Finklea – Present, (Member) Jacoubowsky – Present, (Member) Latasa – Present Vice Chair Dawson called the meeting to order at 4:06 PM. CONSENT ITEMS Committee Jacoubowsky moved to place Item 2 on the Consent Agenda. Committee Member Finklea seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0-3 (Absent Arellano, Davis, McKenzie). Approval of Minutes 1. April 6, 2011 ACTION: Approved the Minutes of April 6, 2011 as submitted. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Latasa moved to approve the Minutes of April 6, 2011 as submitted. Committee Member Jacoubowsky seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Latasa, seconded by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, and passed by the by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the Minutes of April 6, 2011 as submitted. AYES: 3 MEMBERS: Dawson, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 3 MEMBERS: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie ABSTAIN: 1 MEMBERS: Finklea RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None ***End of Consent Agenda*** PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC APPEARANCE  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, May 4, 2011 2. 2330 Del Monte Avenue; Sign Permit Application 11-069; Applicant Rob Dunigan for Stahl Motor Cars; Owner United Rentals Northwest; C-3-D2 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. Sign Permit Application for New Internally-Illuminated Wall Signs. ACTION: On consent, approved the application with the Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. Conditions of Approval: 1. The applicant shall secure all necessary building permits prior to the installation of the signs. 2. Prior to application for building permits for the installation of the signs, the applicant shall eliminate the automobile display stands – all automobiles must be displayed at grade level. 3. Prior to application for building permits for the installation of the signs, the applicant shall remove all vehicles from landscaped areas and replace the landscaping per the approved landscape plan. On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Finklea, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the application with the Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. AYES: 4 MEMBERS: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 3 MEMBERS: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 3. 815 Cass Street; Sign Permit Application 11-032; Applicant Thomas M. Carr of Signworks for Tuesta DMD, Inc.; Owner Tom Minnis; C-O Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. Request for Retroactive Approval of a Sign Permit for an 8.5 square-foot wall sign and alterations to an existing freestanding sign. ACTION: Continued the application to the May 18, 2011 meeting for more information. 1. The applicant shall submit photos to staff to research examples of other businesses on Cass Street. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the staff report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Thomas Carr, Drs. Enrique and Trisha Tuesta were present. Mr. Carr gave a brief history of his experience and explained the proposed sign as compared with the original sign on the building and with references to the Municipal Code. He compared this sign to other signs in the area that don’t comply with the regulations. 2  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, May 4, 2011 Dr. Enrique Tuesta thanked the Committee and gave a brief history of how the practice and the sign came to be installed without the proper approval. He explained that the sign is beautiful and fits with the building, it shows a sense of status and achievement, and it is smaller than the previous sign on the building. He added that the building is angled to the street and the sign is hard to see. Dr. Trisha Tuesta stated that they did rush into the installation of the sign and added that they just wanted to have a nice sign installed. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: After a discussion regarding the proposal with regards to the sign regulations, Committee Member Jacoubowsky moved to continue the application to the May 18, 2011 meeting for more information. Committee Member Finklea seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Finklea, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee continued the application to the May 18, 2011 meeting for more information. AYES: 4 MEMBERS: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 3 MEMBERS: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 4. 96 Fisherman's Wharf No. 1; Sign Permit Application 11-014; Applicant Merritt Palminteri for Benji Shake; Owner City of Monterey; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. Sign Permit Application for New Business Signs. ACTION: Continued the application to the May 18, 2011 meeting. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Jacoubowsky moved to continue the application to the May 18, 2011 meeting. Committee Member Latasa seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Latasa, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee continued the application to the May 18, 2011 meeting. AYES: 4 MEMBERS: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 3 MEMBERS: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 5. 90 Fisherman’s Wharf No. 1; Sign Permit Application 11-093; Applicant Angelo Shake; Owner City of Monterey; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. Continue Sign Permit Application for New Freestanding Sign. 3  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, May 4, 2011 ACTION: Approved the revised application submitted at the meeting. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the staff report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Dennis Hodgin, Merritt Palminteri and Angelo Shake were present. Ms. Palminteri handed out photos of a new proposal and all three present explained the project with regards to the business, other signs on the wharf and the building location. They answered questions regarding the height of the sign. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Latasa moved to approve the revised application submitted at the meeting. Committee Member Finklea seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Latasa, seconded by Committee Member Finklea, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the revised application submitted at the meeting. AYES: 4 MEMBERS: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 3 MEMBERS: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None RECESS: 5:30 PM RECONVENE: 7:00 PM Members Present: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa Members Absent: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie Staff Members Present: Senior Planner Ebbs, Recording Secretary Hanes CALL TO ORDER (Vice Chair) Dawson – Present, (Member) Finklea – Present, (Member) Jacoubowsky – Present, (Member) Latasa – Present Vice Chair Dawson called the meeting to order at 7:20 PM. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC APPEARANCE 6. 71 Via Paraiso; Architectural Review Application 11-094; Applicant Greg Burkhart; Owner Greg Burkhart, Jason and Christy Mehringer; R-1-8 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. Approve Preliminary Architectural Review for a Two-Story Addition to a Single-Family Dwelling. 4  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, May 4, 2011 ACTION: Continued the application so the ARC can verify view and privacy impacts. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the staff report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Greg Burkhart and Christy Mehringer were present and gave a brief description of the project with an emphasis on the differences between the original and new plans. Mr. Burkhart also gave a description of the changes that have been made to address the view impact concerns. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Latasa requested to have 11x17 copies of plans in the Committee packets. The Committee concurred. Committee Member Jacoubowsky moved to continue the application so the ARC can verify view and privacy impacts. Committee Member Finklea seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Finklea, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee continued the item to verify view and privacy impacts. AYES: 4 MEMBERS: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 3 MEMBERS: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 7. 685 Cannery Row; Architectural Review Application 11-096; Applicant Denise Nielson; Owner Cannery Row Company; CR Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. Approve Architectural Review of Exterior Alterations to an Existing Commercial Building. ACTION: Denied the application and adopted Findings for Decision. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the staff report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Denise Nielson was present and said the current corrugated metal has a warehouse look and she is intending to update the look of the building with the new color. Vince Balestreri Cannery Row Company said the Cannery Row Company is in support of the project. Public Comments: None. 5  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, May 4, 2011 Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Finklea said he is concerned that seagull droppings will be very evident on the red color and supports staff's recommendation to deny. Committee Member Jacoubowsky said he is not in favor of changing the color of the corrugated portion of the building and suggested staying with the current grey color. He said all corrugated metal on the building should stay with one consistent color. Committee Member Latasa concurred with Committee Member Jacoubowsky and said the grey corrugated material looks appropriate in the area. Committee Member Latasa moved to deny the application and adopt Findings for Decision. Committee Member Jacoubowsky seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Latasa, seconded by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee denied the application and adopt Findings for Decision. AYES: 4 MEMBERS: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 3 MEMBERS: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 8. 25 Fisherman's Wharf No. 1; Sign Permit Application 11-079; Applicant Dennis Joshi for Wharf Woonka Chocolate Factory; Owner City of Monterey; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. (Continued from April 6, 2011) Approve Sign Permit for New Internally-Illuminated Sign. ACTION: Approved the application with the amended Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. Conditions of Approval: 1. The scope of this approval is limited to the single sign. It does not authorize any other existing or proposed element, such as signs, displays, statues, or other element. 2. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for the installation of this sign, the applicant shall install the approved screening devices on all exterior recessed light fixtures. Said screening devices shall be indefinitely retained and shall not be removed unless approved by the Architectural Review Committee. 3. The approval authorizes installation of the sign with the following modifications: a. The sign shall be fabricated of 1" thick solid letters stud-mounted to the building. b. The letters shall contain a matte finish. c. The sign, if illuminated, shall be illuminated by two white gooseneck light fixtures that are designated for this purpose and project against the wall rather than directly downward. d. The applicant shall install lenses on all of the recessed light fixtures as demonstrated. 4. The approval of this project is conducted in accordance with Chapter 38, Article 25 of the Monterey Municipal Code, which authorizes the Architectural Review Committee to impose Conditions of Approval and obligates the applicant to abide by such Conditions of Approval. Further, each lease on Fisherman’s Wharf No. 1 requires that the tenant abide by all local laws, including Chapter 38, Article 25. As such, any violation of this approval may also 6 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, May 4, 2011 constitute a violation of lease and any resulting action described in the lease and available to the City of Monterey, potentially including declaration of a breach of lease. In proceeding with this approval, the applicant acknowledges the imposition of Conditions of Approval, the importance of abiding by them, and any potential ramifications of violation of the approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the staff report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Not present. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: The Committee had a discussion regarding suggested changes to the sign concerning color, size, lighting and mounting. Committee Member Finklea suggested continuing the item to allow the applicant to come back with a proposal that reflected the suggested changes. Committee Member Jacoubowsky expressed concerns regarding no covers on the light fixtures. The Committee suggested changes to the Conditions of Approval to improve the appearance and mitigate the lighting impact: 1. The approval authorizes installation of the sign with the following modifications: a. The sign shall be fabricated of 1" thick solid letters stud-mounted to the building. b. The letters shall contain a matte finish. c. The sign, if illuminated, shall be illuminated by two white gooseneck light fixtures that are designated for this purpose and project against the wall rather than directly downward. d. The applicant shall install lenses on all of the recessed light fixtures as demonstrated. Committee Member Jacoubowsky moved to approve the application with amended Conditions of Approval and adopt Findings for Decision. Committee Member Finklea seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Finklea, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the application with amended Conditions of Approval and adopt Findings for Decision. AYES: 4 MEMBERS: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 3 MEMBERS: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 7  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, May 4, 2011 9. 78 Fisherman's Wharf No. 1; Architectural Review Application 11-089; Sign Permit Application 11-090; Applicant Dutch Meyer/Tony Rappa; Owner City of Monterey; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. Approve Architectural Review Application and Sign Permit Application for Exterior Alterations and New Signs at Existing Commercial Building. ACTION: Approved the revised application submitted at the meeting with amended Conditions of Approval and Findings for Decision. Conditions of Approval: 1. The applicant shall paint all four sides of the building including the wall facing the water. 2. The scope of this approval is limited to the exterior building colors and signs. It does not authorize any other existing or proposed element, such as signs, displays, statues, or other element. 3. The approval of this project is conducted in accordance with Chapter 38, Article 25 of the Monterey Municipal Code, which authorizes the Architectural Review Committee to impose Conditions of Approval and obligates the applicant to abide by such Conditions of Approval. Further, each lease on Fisherman’s Wharf No. 1 requires that the tenant abide by all local laws, including Chapter 38, Article 25. As such, any violation of this approval may also constitute a violation of lease and any resulting action described in the lease and available to the City of Monterey, potentially including declaration of a breach of lease. In proceeding with this approval, the applicant acknowledges the imposition of Conditions of Approval, the importance of abiding by them, and any potential ramifications of violation of the approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the staff report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Dutch Meyer was present and clarified that he had not been privy, as stated in the staff report, to the light blue color that was previously approved. Mr. Ebbs clarified that the staff report was referring to the previous owner. Mr. Meyer briefly discussed the colors for the building stating that bright colors are appropriate on the Wharf and he has made adjustments to the signage sizes. He also informed the Committee that the red trim around the windows had been touched up because it had faded. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: The Committee had a discussion regarding the blue color of the building and the adjustments to the signage and suggested the following change to the Conditions of Approval:  Strike proposed Conditions 1 and 3. The Committee also suggested the following change to the Findings for Decision:  Eliminate the last three sentences in Finding 4, beginning with "The Condition of Approval....from the surroundings" and replace with the following sentence: "The proposed blue color blends better with the immediate surroundings, is not excessively bright and does not contrast against the Bay." 8 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, May 4, 2011 Committee Member Jacoubowsky moved to approve the revised application submitted at the meeting with amended Conditions of Approval and Findings for Decision. Committee Member Latasa seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Latasa, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the revised application submitted at the meeting with amended Conditions of Approval and Findings for Decision. AYES: 4 MEMBERS: Dawson, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 3 MEMBERS: Arellano, Davis, McKenzie ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Committee Member Jacoubowsky requested a better map for Wharf applications that offers a more descriptive location of the property with regards to the Wharf Concessionaires. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS Senior Planner Ebbs gave a brief explanation of the changes to the Agenda Packets particularly as it relates to the availability of larger size site plans. He informed the Committee that staff would produce 11x17 site plans as an addition to staff reports. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:34 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Forrest Ebbs Chair ARC Planner Architectural Review Committee 9