Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Wednesday, December 5, 2012 4:00 pm - 5:30 pm 7:00 pm – 11:00 pm FEW MEMORIAL HALL OF RECORDS, COUNCIL CHAMBER MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Hill (absent from evening session), Bartram, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan, Dawson Members Absent: Davis Staff Members Present: Principal Planner Cole, Senior Associate Planner Hopper CALL TO ORDER Chair Dawson called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. CONSENT ITEMS On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Latasa, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the CONSENT ITEMS: AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Davis ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None Approval of Minutes 1. November 7, 2012 ACTION: Approved as amended. Committee Member Latasa requested to have the vote changed on item 8 to reflect that he recused himself from the vote. Committee Member Latasa informed staff that Committee Member Davis and Committee Member Hill were not present for items 7 and 8, and the minutes should be corrected to reflect they were absent. Committee Member Hill requested a correction to the vote for item 4 to reflect that he recused himself. ***End of Consent Agenda*** PUBLIC COMMENTS None.  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 5, 2012 PUBLIC APPEARANCE 2. Consider 828 Lighthouse Avenue; Architectural Review 12-347 for Exterior Alterations to an Existing Commercial Building; Applicant/Owner Dean Rodatos; C-2 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review with Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Dean Rodatos, thanked the committee for hearing the item and said the initial intention of the project was to keep the original exterior appearance of the building, but a water leak led to the discovery of rotting wood on the exterior. He explained to the Committee that the discovery allowed for an opportunity to update the façade of the building to give it a more modern look and there will be no structural alterations. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: In response to Committee Member Latasa's question, the applicant said the proposed lighting fixtures will be placed in a metal casing and would be compatible with the new stucco and other exterior finishes. In answer to Committee Member Sullivan’s question Mr. Rodatos said the signs would depend on the type of business occupying the building, and future tenants would have flexibility with sign location. In answer to Committee Member Jacoubowsky’s question, Mr. Rodatos said the proposed cedar siding will be on the front of the building. Committee Member Latasa commended the applicant on his clear presentation and made a motion to adopt the Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review. Committee Member Hill seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Latasa, seconded by Committee Member Hill, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopted the Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review with Conditions of Approval. AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Davis ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 2  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 5, 2012 3. Consider 2339 North Fremont Street; Sign Permit Application 11-317 for New Vehicle-Oriented Freestanding Sign; Applicant Hyangmi Kim Mikhail; Owner Su Yol Kim; C-2 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Continued the Sign Permit application to January 16, 2013, to allow the applicant time to provide a site plan and details of a possible monument sign location or alternative solution. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Kim Mikhail expressed concern that the installation of a monument sign would result in the loss of one accessible parking space and a wall sign on her business would be useless because it would not be visible from the street. Ms. Mikhail requested more time to consider her options if the City required a new sign. She also requested the Committee consider allowing a larger sign for the business because the building is not visible from the main street. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: In answer to Committee Member Bartram’s question Ms. Mikhail said the existing sign advertises the previous tenant. Committee Member Latasa said a site plan would be a helpful addition to the consideration of the project, and would show the impact of a monument sign on the parking lot. Committee Member Bartram asked for clarification from staff if the Architectural Review Committee is able to grant the applicant temporary use with a six month review. Ms. Hopper informed the Committee that they could approve the item, deny the item which would require the applicant to reapply, or continue the item to a later date for redesign. The Committee had a discussion about the applicant’s concern about cost and Ms. Hopper said a temporary solution would be for the applicant to apply for a temporary banner permit. Committee Member Latasa made a motion to continue the item to the January 2, 2013 meeting. Committee Member Jacoubowsky seconded the motion. Committee Member Latasa modified his motion to include that the applicant provide a site plan illustrating the relationship of the existing pole sign to the street and property line and provide details of a monument sign location or alternative solution, and said the Committee could consider a larger sign due to the unusual placement of the building. Jacoubowsky accepted the modifications to the motion. Committee Member Hill suggested moving the item to the January 16, 2013 because of the holidays. 3  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 5, 2012 Committee Member Jacoubowsky and Committee Member Latasa accepted Committee Member Hill’s modification to the motion to include continuing the item to the January 16, 2012 meeting. On a motion by Committee Member Latasa, seconded by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee continued the item to the January 16, 2013 meeting to allow the applicant time to provide a site plan and details of a monument sign location or alternative solution. AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Davis ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 4. Consider 211 Hoffman Avenue; Architectural Review 12-331 for Construction of a New Two-Story Office Building; Applicant Luyen Vu; Owner EGM Investors, LLC; C-2 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Adopted the Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review 12-331 for the construction of a new two-story office building. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Eric Miller said his goal for the project is to give Hoffman Avenue some identity and to make the building appear as a free standing element. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: In answer to Committee Member Latasa’s question, Eric Miller said the overhang is on the street side of the building and the roof will be metal with 4x6 wood outriggers, and includes gutters. Committee Member Bartram made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for the construction of a new two story office building. On a motion by Committee Member Bartram, seconded by Committee Member Sullivan, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopted the Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review 12-331 for the construction of a new two-story office building. 4  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 5, 2012 AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Davis ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None Chair Dawson called for a recess at 5:05 pm. The meeting reconvened at 7:00 pm. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS PUBLIC APPEARANCE 5. Consider Waterfront Parking Lot (APN 001-701-012, 001-567-012, et al.); Sign Permit Application 12-262 for a Commercial Directory Program; Applicant Bob Wecker; Owner City of Monterey; O Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving the Sign Permit application for a Commercial Directory Program with amended Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members questions. Applicant: Bob Wecker, said the project will provide Wharf 2 with greater identity. The proposed signs would be made from dibond and sealed to provide greater longevity. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Bartram said the proposed Commercial Directory Program is not attractive and would hinder the appealing natural quality of the Waterfront, and the applicant should consider an alternative solution that is not as visually intrusive. Committee Member Bartram said he is pleased with the design of the individual components of the Directory Program and suggested icons as a solution to the sign text to minimize the number of proposed signs. In response to Committee Member Jacoubowsky’s question, Mr. Wecker said the height of the signs is adjustable. 5  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 5, 2012 Committee Member Latasa asked Chair Dawson about the position and vision of the Waterfront Master Plan Subcommittee in regards to signs. Chair Dawson stated if the applicant were to remove all of the current mismatched signs and put in place the proposed signs it would result in an overall decrease of signage by an estimated 50%. Committee Member Sullivan expressed content with the design and that he enjoys the festive nature. He further stated he believes the sign program solves the issue of confusion and identity for the Wharves. Committee Member Jacoubowsky suggested a sample be placed in the field to analyze the sign height in relationship to pedestrians and vehicles. Committee Member Bartram suggested the signs should direct people to landmarks rather than restaurants, shops, museums, etc. Committee Member Sullivan made a motion to adopt the Resolution and approve the Commercial Directory Program with amended conditions to include the following: Specific: 5. . That Sign #9 shall be a single banner instead of double banner. 6. That prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall install an on-site mock-up of one or two of the banners at the desired height and return to the ARC for final approval of the banner height. Committee Member Jacoubowsky seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Sullivan, seconded by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopted the Resolution approving the Sign Permit application, for a Commercial Directory Program with amended Conditions of Approval. AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Dawson, Bartram, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Hill, Davis ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 6. Policy Discussion Concerning Alvarado Street Outdoor Seating. ACTION: Received a report and provide direction to staff. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Kimberly Cole presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members questions. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Bartram suggested creating a palette to give applicants the 6  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 5, 2012 opportunity for design creativity within parameters that would produce successful applications. Committee Member Jacoubowsky referred to the approved MYO design and said proposed plans for outdoor seating should include both solid and transparent elements in the design of the fences to separate the seating from the street. He said design freedom can occur in the open areas, while the solid elements would provide a degree of consistency between the various outdoor seating locations. Committee Member Jacoubowsky suggested adding requirements for planters. However, a concern regarding the potential for trash to collect in the planters was expressed. Committee Member Sullivan said no plastic elements should be permitted within the outdoor seating plans. Committee Member Bartram concurred and suggested the required materials be stone, metal or wood. Chair Dawson expressed concern in giving the applicants extensive design freedom and requirements should be specific to assure solid a material is used that does not wear. Committee Member Bartram suggested a restriction be added prohibiting multi-colored or patterned flooring. Mrs. Cole said the approved Cafe Trieste proposal includes three shades of grey pavement for the plan. Committee Member Latasa concurred. Committee Member Jacoubowsky suggested adding a band of material that visually separates the sidewalk and the outdoor seating areas. Committee Member Bartram expressed concern about the service of alcohol in the outdoor seating areas, and said it would detract from the larger goal of turning the Alvarado into a mixed-use area. After a discussion regarding business that have expressed a desire to have the outdoor seating located adjacent to their business, the Committee concurred that this was not an option that should be allowed at this time. The committee had a discussion regarding expanding the outdoor seating concept to streets other than Alvarado. Committee Member Latasa said opening the concept to streets other than Alvarado as a general policy is a great idea. The Committee Members discussed common elements that should be added to the outdoor seating areas. Chair Dawson suggested the furniture within the seating consist of quality material and the color should be black. Committee Member Sullivan said color is debatable. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Chair Dawson referred to a letter submitted by the New Monterey Neighborhood Association regarding possible regulation of residential lighting, and recommended agendizing the item for the second meeting in January 16, 2013. 7  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 5, 2012 INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS Mrs. Cole reminded the Committee of the December 13, 2012 Boards and Commissions meeting in the Council Chambers and the reception immediately following. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:07 PM Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Christine Hopper Chair Senior Associate Planner Architectural Review Committee 8