Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Wednesday, October 15, 2014 4:00 pm - 5:30 pm 7:00 pm - 11:00 pm 580 PACIFIC STREET, COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Latasa, Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Searle, Silva Members Absent: None Staff Members Present: Chief of Planning, Engineering, and Environmental Compliance Rerig, Principal Planner Cole, Principal Planner Caraker, Senior Associate Planner Bennett, Senior Associate Planner Hopper, Recording Secretary Leinen CALL TO ORDER Chair Latasa called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. **Joint Study Session with the Architectural Review Committee, Planning Commission, and Historic Preservation Commission** Planning Commission Members: Historic Preservation Commission Willard McCrone, Chair Members: Leon Garden Carol O’Neil David Stocker Ralph Widmar PUBLIC COMMENTS Mike Dawson, Alliance of Monterey Area Preservationists (AMAP), said Commissioners and Committee Members interested in participating in the October 25, 2014 bus tour of Moderne and Art Deco architecture in Salinas must contact him by October 16, 2014. STUDY SESSION 1. Training Workshop Chip Rerig thanked the Architectural Review Committee, Planning Commission, and Historic Preservation Commission members for their service to the City of Monterey and introduced Nore Winter of Winter and Company. Mr. Winter gave a summary of his prior work and gave a presentation on the following topics:  Introduction to Design Review  Conducting Effective Design Review  Introduction to Historic Preservation  Application of Design Guidelines to Case Studies A discussion was held between the commissioners, committee members, staff and Mr. Winter, and the following points were made:  Commissioners/committee members should not state individual objections to an Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, October 15, 2014 item after voting on the item as part of a higher level hearing body.  Staff should support process and findings at an appeal hearing, not determine whether an error was made, and all appeal hearings are considered to be de novo hearings, per the City Attorney.  Project recommendations should be based on guidelines and standards, not emotion.  Applicants should present information in a public meeting format and if ex parte communications occur with commissioners/committee members, they should be reported at the public meeting.  New information or rebuttals should not be brought forward after public comment is closed.  Personal research, drawings, or revisions should not be presented by commissioners or committee members.  Applicants should be listened to and treated fairly.  Non-project related public comments should be addressed by the commission/committee.  Findings can be constructed either by staff or a commission/committee. RECESS Chair Latasa adjourned the joint meeting of the Architectural Review Committee, Planning Commission, and Historic Preservation Commission to recess at 5:36 pm. RECONVENE Vice Chair Freeman reconvened the meeting of the Architectural Review Committee at 7:00 pm. Members Present: Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Searle, Silva Members Absent: Latasa Staff Members Present: Principal Planner Cole, Principal Planner Caraker, Senior Associate Planner Hopper, Recording Secretary Leinen CONSENT ITEMS Committee Member Kimzey requested that item #4 be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Committee Member Searle made a motion to approve the Consent Items, excluding item #4. Committee Member Dawson seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Searle, seconded by Committee Member Dawson, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the CONSENT ITEMS, excluding item #4: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Searle, Silva NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Latasa ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 2  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, October 15, 2014 Approval of Minutes 2. October 1, 2014 ACTION: Approved as submitted. Other Consent Items 3. Consider 1230 First Street; AR Application 14-190 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for the Remodel of an Existing Home; Applicant Mark Abrahams; Owner Napa Asset Mangement Services, LLC.;R-3-6 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving AR Application 14-190 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for the remodel of an existing home. Committee Member Kimzey said the Agenda Report states that the project is “appropriate” but the Resolution states the project “appears to be appropriate.” Ms. Cole said the language of the Resolution will be changed to reflect the language in the Agenda Report. 4. Consider 2260 North Fremont Street; Sign Permit 14-294 for a New Multi-tenant Sign Program; Applicant John Farahmand for Balance Physical Therapy; Owner Bob Morris; PC-NF Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements ACTION: Removed from consent; discussed; adopted a Resolution approving a new Multitenant Sign Program with added Special Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Christy Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant No applicant present. Public Comments None. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Kimzey asked for clarification regarding the number of signs allowed by the Sign Program. Ms. Hopper suggested a Special Condition of Approval stating that tenants A & D are allowed up to two wall signs each and tenants B & C are allowed one wall sign each. Committee Member Kimzey requested that the typos on Special Condition #7, page 51, be corrected. Committee Member Silva suggested that the word “handicapped” on Special Condition #6b be changed to “International symbol of accessibility.” Committee Member Kimzey made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving a new 3  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, October 15, 2014 Multitenant Sign Program with added Special Conditions of Approval as follows: 6. That prior to the issuance of building permits, the plans shall be revised and submitted to the Planning Office to show the following corrections and clarifications: a. 2A. Clarify that Tenants B & C may only have one wall sign b. 4C. Change the term “handicap” to “International symbol of accessibility” 7. That the approved number of walls signs per tenant space is as follows: a. Tenants A & D – Up to two (2) wall signs b. Tenants B & C – One (1) wall sign Committee Member Dawson seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Kimzey, seconded by Committee Member Dawson, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopted a Resolution approving a new Multitenant Sign Program with added Special Conditions of Approval: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Searle, Silva NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Latasa ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None ***End of Consent Agenda*** CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PRESENTATIONS 5. Consider Presentation Regarding Amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan ACTION: Received a presentation on proposed amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Ms. Hopper and Mr. Winters presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Kim Cole was also present and answered Committee Members’ questions. Public Comments None. Committee Member Comments In response to Committee Member Dawson’s question, Mr. Winter said the Kelvin temperature range will be 3000-3500. In response to Committee Member Kimzey’s question, Ms. Hopper said the issue of 4  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, October 15, 2014 string lights on the trees downtown has not yet been resolved by the City. In response to Committee Member Silva’s question, Mr. Winters said that new construction in a historic area should be compatible but distinguishable. Committee Member Silva said the lighting plan should be incorporated with a master street tree plan to ensure the trees and lights coordinate with one another. Committee Member Dawson said staff should consult with neighbors of Friendly Plaza before implementing lighting in that area. The ARC suggested the following changes to the Downtown Specific Plan amendment:  Change the word “appropriate” to “compatible” throughout the document.  Add caption “Shield light sources to prevent glare” to the first photo on page 89, and add captions to the photos on page 87.  Re-examine the references to footcandles on pages 91 and 244 as 0.5 to 1.0 footcandles it is too dark.  Move “Technical Specifications” on page 91 from the “Guidelines” section to the “Standards” section.  Change the wording on page 88, Section 6, to say “Lighting standards and guidelines apply to the entire Downtown and in addition there are standards for lighting in the public right of way in the later section.”  Draft new language to remove the word “prohibited” from S.6.1. on page 88.  Change the caption on page 242 to “representative of the type that will be ultimately selected.”  Change “miscellaneous” on page 110 to a more descriptive word and clarify the meaning of “improve a non historic property.”  Correct the spelling of “sustainability” on page 112.  Correct the alignment of the diagram on page 144. Vice Chair Freeman said Committee Members should review the document individually and then share suggestions with the group. Ms. Hopper asked the ARC to provide her with additional ideas, suggestions, and photos by the next scheduled ARC meeting. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Committee Member Silva said Paris was the first city to implement streetlights as early as the 1600’s, causing a positive economic impact by allowing merchants to keep longer hours. Committee Searle said he will not be in attendance for the next regularly scheduled ARC meeting on November 5, 2014. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS 6. Planning Office Update  Received update  Ms. Hopper said Lighthouse Specific Plan meetings regarding circulation will be held Thursday, October 16th at 9:30 am and 7:00 pm, and regarding design 5 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, October 15, 2014 guidelines on October 23rd.  In response to Committee Member Silva’s question, Ms. Hopper said she does not know when the open ARC seat will be filled. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:10 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Christine Hopper Chair Senior Associate Planner Architectural Review Committee 6