Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Wednesday, April 17, 2013 AFTERNOON SESSION ONLY 4:00 pm - 7:00 pm FEW MEMORIAL HALL OF RECORDS, COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Hill, Bartram, Davis, Dawson, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan Members Absent: None Staff Members Present: Senior Associate Planner Hopper, Assistant City Attorney Karin Salameh, Recording Secretary Halabi CALL TO ORDER Chair Hill called the meeting to order at 4:02 pm. CONSENT ITEMS On a motion by Committee Member Davis, seconded by Committee Member Dawson, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the CONSENT ITEMS: AYES: 7 MEMBERS: Hill, Bartram, Davis, Dawson, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None Approval of Minutes 1. April 3, 2013 Approved as submitted. ***End of Consent Agenda*** PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC APPEARANCE 2. Consider 351 Madison Street; AR Application 13-066 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for New Parking Lot Lighting; Applicant/Owner Elvie Camacho for the City of Monterey; CO Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements (Continued from April 3, 2013 meeting) ACTION: Adopt a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 17, 2013 Review for new parking lot lighting at 351 Madison Street with amended Conditions of Approval: Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members' questions. Applicant: Elvie Camacho, the applicant, said the height of the light poles within the Resolution corrected to show a 12 foot pole on top of a 3 foot base for a total of 15 feet. Steve Case, Aurum Consulting, said the project was strategically designed to ensure minimal light transfer across the boundary. Mr. Case said the model of lights being utilized is a 5m LED, which is a fixture approved by the Dark Sky Association. Ms. Camacho said she conducted a view analysis and discovered that on both the east and west of Madison the LED lights are not in the direct line of sight; traveling south bound on Dutra and Van Buren they are minimally visible. Committee Member Davis asked if the additional three feet was represented in the photometrics. In response to Committee Member Davis' question, Mr. Case said the photometrics did include the three foot base. Mr. Dawson inquired about the possibility of setting up a sample in the field. In response to Mr. Dawson's inquiry, Mr. Case said the fixtures are customized to the specific project location; therefore setting a sample in the field would be costly and require the City to purchase the customized light fixture. Public Comment: Molly Erickson, representing concerned citizens, asked if the shields are placed on only one side of the diode. In response to Ms. Erickson's question, Mr. Case said the shields are placed on either side of the diode depending on the location and desired lighting. He said the photometrics at the property line are 0 and this was achieved by strategically placing the lights and shields. Ms. Erickson suggested the Architectural Review Committee establish standards for lighting. She said once projects are approved there is no recourse if, after instillation, the lighting is deemed too bright. Ms. Erickson suggested that the special condition within the resolution be expanded for clarity. Committee Member Questions Committee Member Sullivan asked if the diodes can be altered after installation. In response to Vice Chair Bartram's question, Mr. Case said if the City wanted to alter the lighting the entire fixture would need to be altered. Committee Member Dawson made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for new parking lot lighting at 351 Madison Street with amended Conditions of Approval: Special: 1. That the lights shall be fully shielded according to the manufacturers specifications relative to the position of the shield in relationship to the diode so as to minimize or eliminate the visibility of individual diodes from the 2  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 17, 2013 public right-of-way. Vice Chair Bartram seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Dawson, seconded by Committee Member Bartram, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopted a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for new parking lot lighting at 351 Madison Street with amended Conditions of Approval. AYES: 7 MEMBERS: Hill, Bartram, Davis, Dawson, Jacoubowsky, Latasa, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None Committee Member Latasa departed at 4:45 pm 3. Consider 1375 Josselyn Canyon Road; Sign Permit 13-030 for a New Monument Sign; Applicant Daryl Hawkins, AIA; Owner Living Hope Church of the Nazarene; R-1-20 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements (Continued from March 6, 2013 meeting). ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving Sign Permit 13-030. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members' questions. Karin Salameh, the Assistant City Attorney, said although the ordinance is broad, the legal opinion is that the project in question qualifies as a sign. Applicant: Daryl Hawkins, applicant, said when he originally embarked on this project he was told it did not qualify as a sign and he was only required to get a Building Permit. Public Comment: Reverend Barry Kennard, Pastor of the Living Hope Church, said they took a lot of care to minimize impact along Highway 68 and asked for support for the project. Committee Member Questions Committee Member Davis questioned the parameters of the ARC and asked if the ARC determined the project to be a sign, would they still have the ability to consider approving the project. In response to Committee Member Davis' question, Ms. Hopper said they do have the ability to approve the project as a sign, however if that was the final decision, they would need new findings to support the approval of the project. Committee Member Davis said the projects unique location, high quality design and low profile mitigate the impacts and provide findings to support approval. Committee Member Davis made a motion to approve the Sign Permit. Committee Member Dawson seconded the motion. 3  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 17, 2013 Ms. Salameh said the finding that suggest this is a unique location needs to be elaborated. In response to Ms. Salameh’s suggestion, Committee Member Davis said the unique location includes various vertical elements like tall trees and traffic lights and the corner lot signing difficulties. He said the proposed sign compliments the vertical elements in the background in a low profile. Committee Member Sullivan expressed support for the motion. Chair Hill expressed concern and said he will not support the motion. Bartram concurred and said although he supports the intent of the applicant, he sees support of this application as a movement against the purpose of the Committee and the direction of the General Plan. Committee Member Dawson said in the past the ARC has approved signs that were exceptions to the policies and guidelines of the Sign Ordinance. He said these projects were appealed to the Planning Commission and were unanimously supported approval. He said this highlights the ARC’s ability to support applications that do not necessarily conform to standards and guidelines. Committee Member Bartram reaffirmed his position against the motion and said the purpose is to minimize signage toward the scenic highway and support of this project is contradictory to the purpose. Committee Member Davis amended the motion to require the findings return to the ARC for review. The seconder agreed. On a motion by Committee Member Davis, seconded by Committee Member Dawson, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee Adopted a Resolution approving Sign Permit 13-030. AYES: 3 MEMBERS: Davis, Dawson, Sullivan NOES: 2 MEMBERS: Hill, Bartram ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Latasa ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 1 MEMBERS: Jacoubowsky 4. Consider 554 Del Monte Avenue; Sign Permit Application 12-340 for New Signs and AR Application 13-038 for Final Architectural Review for New Paint Colors and Planters; Applicant Heather Dotto for Metspec, Inc.; Owner Stephen Nannini; C-2 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Continued the item to the May 1, 2013 meeting to allow the applicant to be present. Committee Member Dawson made a motion to continue the item to the May 1, 2013 meeting to allow the applicant to be present. Committee Member Sullivan seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Dawson, seconded by Committee Member Sullivan, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee Continued the item to the May 1, 2013 meeting to allow the applicant to be present. 4  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 17, 2013 AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Hill, Bartram, Davis, Dawson, Jacoubowsky, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Latasa ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 5. Consider 180 East Franklin Street; AR Application 13-126 for Exterior Alterations; Applicant Stephen Lyon for LyonDesign; Owner Mike Bruno and Mike Marotta; PC Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving the exterior alterations with added Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/ Committee Member Comments: Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members' questions. Applicant: Steve Lyon, Lyon Design, said he hopes the proposed project will create a vibrant, urban corner. Public Comment: None. Committee Member Comments: Committee Member Davis asked for a description of the proposed paint colors. In response to Committee Member Davis' question, Mr. Lyon said they intend to alter the proposed shade of red that is on display at the project site, to a deeper shade of red. Committee Member Bartram questioned the inspiration behind the paint color choice. In response to Committee Member Bartram's inquiry, Mr. Lyon said the theme of the new business, Turn 12, is inspired by Laguna Seca Raceway. He said the color red is significant in the racing world and was therefore incorporated into the design and theme. Committee Member Jacoubowsky said he thinks it would be more appealing to paint the recessed area red and the columns grey. Committee Member Bartram concurred. Committee Member Davis made a motion to approve the exterior alterations with added Conditions of Approval: Special: 1. That the red color be limited to the recessed wall area only and the gray color be painted on both sides and face of the “columns” at each bay. Committee Member Jacoubowsky seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Davis, seconded by Committee Member Sullivan, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the exterior alterations with added Conditions of Approval, 5 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 17, 2013 AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Hill, Bartram, Davis, Dawson, Jacoubowsky, Sullivan NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Latasa ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Chair Hill briefed the Committee Members on the Mayor’s Meeting. Committee Member Dawson announced AMAP's Cultural Landscapes Forum would be held at the Monterey Conference Center and invited the Committee Member to attend. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:11 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Chair Architectural Review Committee 6