Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Wednesday, March 7, 2012 4:00 - 7:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBER, FEW MEMORIAL HALL OF RECORDS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Bartram, Dawson, Davis, Finklea, Hill, Jacoubowsky, Latasa Members Absent: None Staff Members Present: Senior Planner Ebbs, City Forester Reid, Recording Secretary Abadilla CALL TO ORDER Chair Dawson called the meeting to order at 4:00 PM. CONSENT ITEMS Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Bartram abstained from the Minutes due to not being appointed to the Committee at that time. On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Vice Chair Hill, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the CONSENT ITEMS: AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Davis, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 1 MEMBERS: Bartram RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None Approval of Minutes 1. January 18, 2012 ACTION: Approved the Minutes as submitted. Other Consent Items 2. Consider 42 Fisherman’s Wharf No. 1; Sign Permit Application 12-020 for a sign revision; Applicant Bob McIntyre; Owner City of Monterey, Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Approved the application with the Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. Conditions of Approval: 1. This approval is for a revised projecting sign, shown on the plans dated January 31, 2012. This approval does not change any other condition of any previous approval. 2. An encroachment permit is required for the display of the installation of the projecting sign. Approval of these signs by the ARC does not suggest or guarantee that an encroachment permit will be issued for this purpose. 3. The approval of this project is conducted in accordance with Chapter 31 of the Monterey Municipal Code, which authorizes the Architectural Review Committee to impose  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, March 7, 2012 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 31. 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. ***End of Consent Agenda*** PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC APPEARANCE 3. Consider 57 Soledad Drive; Tree Removal Permit Referral 8450; Applicant Garry Tornowski; Owner Monterey Peninsula Land Partners, LLC; R-3 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Approved the application with the amended Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. Conditions of Approval: 1. The trees shall be removed and the stump shall be grounded. Further, the site shall be properly prepared for the planting of four (4) liquidambar trees in 24-gallon size. 2. The species of liquidambar shall match, as close as possible, the established liquidambar trees on the opposite side of the street. 3. The four liquidambar trees shall be staked, watered and tended to until maturity. Should any damage occur to these trees that requires their removal, they shall be replaced with an identical specimen. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the agenda report and both he and City Forester Reid answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: David Kaplan was present. He explained the project with regards to the trees’ roots growing into the water system at the apartments and causing problems, the planter boxes being overgrown and the tree roots causing tripping hazards in the sidewalks. He added that the primary reason for the tree removal is the safety of the people and the uniformity of the street. He answered questions regarding fixing or moving the sewer line, the line connection to the street, digging the trenches, snaking the sewer lines, and the placement of the new trees. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: Vice Chair Hill stated that the applicant needs to have enough room to repair the line with the size of the replacement trees. 2  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, March 7, 2012 Chair Dawson stated that replanting with 24 gallon box liquidambar trees would be better than 15 gallon. The Committee agreed. On a motion by Committee Member Finklea, seconded by Committee Member Davis, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the application with the amended Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. AYES: 7 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Davis, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 4. Consider 2 Shepherds Place; Tree Removal Permit Referral 8467; Applicant/Owner James Bajari; PC Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Approved the application with the Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. Conditions of Approval: 1. Within sixty (60) days of tree removal, a replacement tree of one Oak tree and one Pine tree shall be planted on the site. The size and location shall be at the direction of the City Forester. 2. The replacement trees shall be staked, watered and tended to until maturity. Should any damage occur to the trees that requires its removal, it shall be replaced with an identical specimen. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the agenda report and both he and City Forester Reid answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: James Bajari was present. He explained the history of the tree and past practices of trimming the canopy and cabling the tree to prevent it from falling. He stated that he has many trees on his property and in the vicinity. He added that by keeping the tree will decrease the property value for the reason that the tree could fall on his house or the neighbors. He stated that his wife has become very anxious by having the tree on the property and has passed this anxiety on to him. He showed pictures of past trees that have fallen in the area and submitted a letter from a neighbor stating that they see the tree sway in a dangerous way in the wind. He ended by saying that he does really like the tree but that he and his wife are fearful of the tree falling onto the house and destroying it. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Jacoubowsky stated that the owner needs to take the tree down because he has had many trees on his property and at one time did have a tree that was a problem so he knows what the applicant is dealing with. Committee Member Latasa commended the applicant on his informative presentation. 3  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, March 7, 2012 On a motion by Committee Member Davis, seconded by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the application with the Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. AYES: 7 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Davis, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 5. Consider 871 Jessie Street; Architectural Review Application 12-030 for Water Tank Enclosure; Applicant Andreas Baer; Owner City of Monterey, O Zoning District, Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Approved the amended application with the Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. Conditions of Approval: 1. The applicant shall secure any necessary building permits. 2. The enclosure shall be extended around all four sides of the water tank/trash enclosure area. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the agenda report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Andreas Baer and Sharon Dwight were present. Mr. Baer explained the proposal with regards to protecting the water tank with something that is not an eye sore, complying with the Park Master Plan and added that the first proposal cost too much which is why the second proposal was submitted. Sharon Dwight stated that this was an NIP project and by using the two different materials proposed would break up the look by having the wood nearer the building it would tie into. She added that the Parks and Recreation Committee agreed that the tank needed to be covered to discourage the climbing of the kids and others having access Both present answered questions regarding the upkeep and maintenance of the tank and how the tank could be removed from the enclosure. Public Comments: William Whipple stated that he is the new President of the Neighborhood Association and that the neighborhood likes the alternative proposal and recommends approval. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Jacoubowsky stated that he will not vote for the project because the masonry wall around the entire enclosure will be less noticeable and cost should not be an issue. Committee Member Latasa stated that since the neighborhood likes it, he will vote for the motion. 4  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, March 7, 2012 On a motion by Vice Chair Hill, seconded by Committee Member Davis, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the amended application with the Conditions of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Davis, Finklea, Latasa NOES: 1 MEMBERS: Jacoubowsky ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 6. Consider 5 Custom House Plaza; Sign Permit Application 12-021 for the installation of eight (8) signs; Applicant Lisa Coscino of Museum of Monterey; Owner City of Monterey; PC Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Approved the application with the Condition of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. Condition of Approval: 1. The existing signs may remain for a time period of one year until new signs are approved and installed. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the agenda report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Lisa Coscino was present. She clarified the function of the signs by stating that when exhibits are going on then the banners will be changed out for each new exhibit being shown and the A-frame signs are movable and are taken in and out when car shows are out on the plaza to help people into the building. She added that the existing signs are not permanent and people access the building from many points and needs the signs on all three entrances. The vinyl banners will remain vinyl until the property has enough money and then they would like to make the MOM banners permanent along with replacing the existing signs with new. She ended that the Museum of Monterey is having many upcoming exhibits and they need to establish the building as the place to go in a quiet plaza and hopes to keep all the signs since they are very important to them. She answered questions regarding how MOM advertises in connection with the Portola Plaza location, when the existing signs were installed, the temporary banners, the chalkboard A- Frame signs, and the support of the State Parks. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Jacoubowsky stated that the site is cluttered with signs all over the place but he could tolerate them with a temporary sign program with a set time for removal. Committee Member Davis asked why signs G, H, and I were needed since they can be seen at the same time. 5  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, March 7, 2012 Chair Dawson stated that a possible solution could be to install a 50 foot sign at the door to get rid of the other signs and ignore the banners since they come and go. Committee Member Bartram stated that this proposal is a challenge. The quantity is the issue and that the signs are in conflict with the building by trying to get more out of less in addition to using vinyl for the banners. He ended by stating that a possible solution would be to review new signs as a whole package and put a time limit on the current signs for removal. Committee Member Latasa stated that he will vote for the motion but is not crazy about the A- frame signs. On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Bartram, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the application with the Condition of Approval and adopted Findings for Decision. AYES: 7 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Davis, Finklea, Jacoubowsky, Latasa NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 7. Consider 320 Toyon Avenue; Tree Removal Permit Referral 8414; Applicant/Owner Chuck Hughes; R-1-6 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Denied the Tree Removal Permit. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Senior Planner Ebbs presented the agenda report and both he and City Forester Reid answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Chuck Hughes was present. He explained the proposal with regards to the ramp being covered with sap and interfering with his mother’s walker in addition to it falling on his parked cars. He added that he has trimmed six or eight large branches to get to the front door and stated that he is willing to plant a replacement tree by the fence as recommended by the City Forester. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Bartram stated that this is a challenging issue but that the applicant could extend the existing entry cover over the ramp as a solution. Committee Member Jacoubowsky stated that it is nice to see a tree when you drive up the street and thinning it could be a solution. Committee Member Latasa stated that he thinks the applicant could deal with the tree situation by pruning. On a motion by Committee Member Latasa, seconded by Committee Member Finklea, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee denied the Tree Removal Permit. 6 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, March 7, 2012 AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Finklea, Latasa NOES: 2 MEMBERS: Davis, Jacoubowsky ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS New Committee Member Bartram gave a brief history of his life and experience. Committee Member Latasa asked about the signs displayed on the construction fence at 595 Munras Avenue. Chair Dawson asked the Committee if they wished to respond to Fred Cohn’s memo with a letter. The Committee declined. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS Senior Planner Ebbs updated the status of 1001 Hellam Street and the View Impact Policy. He added that the Sign Ordinance was passed at the last City Council meeting and explained the memo that was sent by Fred Cohn to the Committee. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:17 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Forrest Ebbs Chair Senior Planner Architectural Review Committee 7