Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Wednesday, December 19, 2012 AFTERNOON SESSION ONLY 4:00 - 5:30 pm FEW MEMORIAL HALL OF RECORDS, COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Hill, Bartram, Davis, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan, Dawson Members Absent: None Staff Members Present: Senior Associate Planner Hopper CALL TO ORDER Chair Dawson called the meeting to order at 4:05 pm. CONSENT ITEMS On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Hill, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the CONSENT ITEMS: AYES: 7 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Davis, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None Approval of Minutes 1. December 5, 2012 ACTION: Approved as amended. Committee Member Jacoubowsky requested his comment on item 6 be altered to reflect that he suggested a band of material be utilized to visually separate the sidewalk and outdoor seating areas. Committee Member Hill informed staff that he was not present for items 7 and 8 and asked that the November 7, 2012 minutes reflect his absence from both items. He also requested the minutes be amended to reflect that he recused himself from item 4 instead of Committee Member Latasa. Committee Member Jacoubowsky made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Committee Member Hill seconded the motion. ***End of Consent Agenda***  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 19, 2012 PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC APPEARANCE 2. 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: Continued to the January 16, 2012 meeting to allow the applicant an opportunity to provide a sample of banner heights in the field. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: None. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Hill made a motion to continue the item to the January 16, 2012 meeting due to the inability to view sample heights of the banner program on the Monday, December 17, 2012 fieldtrip, and to allow the applicant an opportunity to provide a sample of banner heights in the field. Committee Member Bartram seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Hill, seconded by Committee Member Bartram, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee Continued to the January 16, 2012 meeting to allow the applicant an opportunity to provide a sample of banner heights in the field. AYES: 7 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Davis, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 2  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 19, 2012 3. Consider 1000 Aguajito Road; Architectural Review 12-367 for New Paint Colors, New Exterior Lighting, One (1) New Window, Three (3) New Awnings and Retaining Wall Enhancement; Applicant Jayson Zimmer for Hilton Garden inn Monterey; Owner 1000 Aguajito, LLC; VAF Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review with Conditions of Approval and continued review of the Awnings to the January 16, 2013. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members questions. Applicant: Jayson Zimmer said the railings will be painted dark brown to provide a more modern look. Public Comments: None. Committee Member Comments: In answer to Committee Member Bartram’s question, Mr. Zimmer said the addition of the awnings would draw attention to the full service restaurant which has limited public visibility. Ms. Hopper informed the Committee approval of the awnings will be brought back to the Architectural Review Committee for final approval. Committee Member Sullivan suggested painting the underside of the fascia to match the railings. Mr. Zimmer concurred but informed the Committee that he was not intending to paint the underside of the fascia. Committee Member Jacoubowsky said the white underside of the fascia enables greater reflection of light and therefore should not be painted dark brown. Committee Member Bartram said the awnings proposed do not match the architectural style of the building, and suggested considering an alternative material like wood with a contemporary feel that would draw attention to the restaurant in a more suitable fashion. Committee member Davis suggested wood overhangs, such as a trellis design as a more appropriate solution. Committee Member Bartram concurred. Mr. Zimmer said he will present the suggestions and concerns of the Committee Members regarding the awning to his design team and research alternative options. Ms. Hopper informed the Committee that the Conditions of Approval need to be modified if the Committee would like to review the awnings instead of delegating review to staff. Committee Member Bartram made a motion to approve the application with amended conditions as follows: 3  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 19, 2012 Special: 6. The final colors and materials for the awnings shall be submitted to staff for final review and approval. 7. The fascia and the roof beams on the octagonal building shall be painted to match the railing color. And continue review of the awnings to the January 16, 2013 meeting to allow the applicant to pursue alternative solutions. Committee Member Sullivan seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Bartram, seconded by Committee Member Sullivan, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopt the Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review with Conditions of Approval and continue review of the awnings. AYES: 7 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Davis, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None Committee Member Latasa recused himself from item 4 due to conflict of interest. 4. Consider 7 Dunecrest Avenue, Architectural Review 12-336 for Construction of a New Two-Story Single-Family Residence; Applicant Terry Latasa, Architect; Owner Harry and Laura Nagel; R-1-6-D1 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving Preliminary Architectural Review with amended Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant: Terry Latasa said the project is contemporary in design and the house has a reverse floor plan due to the small lot. He said the plans were designed to highlight the view of the harbor from the upper story and there is no obstruction of view for the neighboring properties. Public Comments: Ms. Hopper made reference to a letter submitted by Louis Pales, who has a neighboring property and has expressed concern about the impact of the proposed project to his property. In response to Mr. Pales’ concerns, Mr. Latasa said the proposed project will not have an impact on the neighbor’s property. 4 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 19, 2012 Judi Lehman, neighbor, expressed concern about favoritism from the Committee because the applicant is also an Architectural Review Committee Member. She also expressed concern about loss of privacy with the proposed side entry being placed adjacent to her bedroom and requested an illustration of elevations from 9 Dunecrest, 7 Dunecrest and 5 Dunecrest to allow the Committee Members and the public an opportunity to see the impact on the street elevation. Mr. Latasa said he has spoken with the City Attorney regarding potential conflict of interest and was informed that due to his status as a sole proprietor, he is legally cleared to present the project to the Committee, and assured Ms. Lehman that the project has met all applicable City standards. Committee Member Comments: The Committee Members discussed the concept of an alternative entry, but concurred that there are no restriction on side entries. In response to Committee Member Davis’ question, Mr. Latasa said he would discuss with the owner the possibility adding a six foot stucco wall to help mitigate noise impacts to the adjacent residence. Committee Member Jacoubowsky made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving Preliminary Architectural Review with Conditions of Approval. Committee Member Hill seconded the motion. Committee Member Bartram suggested adding a condition requiring the applicant to provide a solution to mitigate noise from the side entry upon final review. Chair Dawson suggested that future applications also incorporate an illustration showing the side by side buildings and the proposed project. Committee Member Jacoubowsky and Committee Member Hill concurred with the changes to the motion regarding noise mitigation. On a motion by Committee Member Jacoubowsky, seconded by Committee Member Hill, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopted the Resolution approving Preliminary Architectural review with amended Conditions of Approval. AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Dawson, Hill, Bartram, Davis, Jacoubowsky, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 1 MEMBERS: Latasa COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Committee Member Latasa expressed concern about a potentially historic Cypress Tree that was recently torn down on a vacant lot above the bike trail. Ms. Hopper said she would research the concern. Chair Dawson gave the Committee a briefing regarding the Boards and Commissions meeting. 5 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 19, 2012 INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:09 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Christine Hopper Chair Senior Associate Planner Architectural Review Committee 6