Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Wednesday, December 3, 2014 AFTERNOON SESSION ONLY 4:00 – 7:00 pm 580 PACIFIC STREET, COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Searle, Silva Members Absent: Latasa Staff Members Present: Senior Associate Planner Hopper, Construction Project Manager Williamson, Principal Engineer Harary, Recording Secretary Leinen CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Freeman called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. CONSENT ITEMS Vice Chair Freeman informed the Committee that a request from the public was received to remove item #2 from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Committee Member Searle requested that the spelling of “palette” be corrected on page two of the minutes. Committee Member Searle made a motion to approve the Consent Items, excluding item #2, with amendments to the Minutes. 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 #2 with amendments to the minutes: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Searle, Silva NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Latasa ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None Approval of Minutes 1. November 5, 2014 ACTION: Approved as amended. Other Consent Items 2. Consider Restroom at Municipal Wharf II; AR Permit 14-415 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review of Exterior Alterations; Applicant/Owner City of Monterey; Exempt from CEQA Requirements ACTION: Removed from Consent; Discussed; Continued the project to allow the applicant time to verify the project budget with the following specific direction for redesign: 1. Create a more cohesive design from front to Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 3, 2014 rear of the project; 2. Reduce the garishness of the wave design; 3. Include a rear screen fence to cover the back flow preventer; and, 4. Explore alternate wall treatments. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Christine Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Laurie Lynn Williamson, Construction Project Manager, said bringing the lavatories outside of the toilet space will minimize time spent in the toilet area by allowing sink use without entering the restroom, and will meet all building, plumbing, and ADA requirements. She also said the proposed screen will be decorative, but also functional, in preventing sand from drifting into the restroom drains. In response to Vice Chair Freeman’s question, Ms. Williamson said the back gate proposed would be a powder coated finish, black or blue in color, and would serve to protect access panels from the general public. In response to Committee Member Kimzey’s question, Ms. Williamson making the two bathrooms unisex will give more flexibility since ADA regulations will require a reduction from four toilets to two. Ms. Hopper clarified that the portable toilets currently outside the bathrooms are likely for after hours use and are outside of the ARC’s purview. In response to Committee Member Silva’s question, Ms. Williamson said the floor drain system will be replaced with sand traps and the interior of the bathroom will be concrete block painted with a graffiti-resistant coat. In response to Committee Member Searle’s question, Ms. Williamson said in the event that a screen wall is not installed the access panel will be painted to match the building. Public Comments Sharon Dwight, alternate Neighborhood Improvement Program (NIP) spokesperson, said the existing restroom cannot be completely replaced due to site and state restrictions, so the project will provide a much needed upgrade. She also said the NIP has placed a cap on funding and any requests for additional funding will likely be denied. Ms. Dwight said that the reduction in the number of stalls is not favorable, but is the only option due to ADA requirements. She also said a screen wall for the backflow preventer is absolutely necessary, and asked the ARC to require it with their approval of the project. Bob Harary, Principal Engineer and Capital Programs Manager, said a Portland Loo was initially requested, but ultimately rejected, because installation would require a flood plain increase. He also said no more than 50% of the existing building can be modified, and the proposed project is the best option for the existing footprint. Mr. Harary said Capital Projects is on a timeline to complete the bathroom by summer, and therefore submitted two proposals for the bathroom to allowing for approval with or without the screen wall. Mr. Harary said he agrees the backflow preventer is an eyesore, but asked the ARC to approve the project with both options to prevent further delay of the project. In response to Committee Member Silva’s question, Mr. Harary said ledgestone is slightly more expensive than other materials but was chosen due to its superior appearance. In response to Vice Chair Freeman’s question, Mr. Harary agreed that the backflow preventer is a public safety issue, but said the Fire or Police departments would likely not 2 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 3, 2014 provide funding for a screen wall. In response to Committee Member Searle’s question, Ms. Williamson said the wave wall is proposed to be constructed from CMU masonry with waves cut into the top, however she would be agreeable to a Condition of Approval being added to the Resolution that stucco is used instead of stone to allow for the screening budget. In response to Committee Member Silva’s question, Ms. Williamson said that a continuance pending the return of the screen wall cost estimate would delay the timeline, and suggested a Condition of Approval instead to meet the ARC’s requests. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Dawson suggested use of cheaper materials to allow for a screen wall budget. He also said he supports the washable interior of the bathroom and the wave wall to prevent drifting sand, but would prefer to see stucco in a wave form instead of blue colors. Committee Member Kimzey said the project should be continued due to the many variables and to allow the applicant time to look at cost saving alternatives to ensure the backflow preventer is screened. Committee Member Searle said the project includes both whimsical and traditional elements and should be narrowed down include one or the other, not both. Vice Chair Freeman said the restroom interior and side entrance are cleverly designed, and the main issues are the front and back fences and materials used. Committee Member Silva made a motion to continue the project to allow the applicant time to verify the project budget with the following specific direction for redesign: 1. Create a more cohesive design from front to rear of the project; 2. Reduce the garishness of the wave design; 3. Include a rear screen fence to cover the back flow preventer; and, 4. Explore alternate wall treatments. Committee Member Kimzey seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Silva, seconded by Committee Member Kimzey, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee continued the project to allow the applicant time to verify the project budget with the following specific direction for redesign: 1. Create a more cohesive design from front to rear of the project; 2. Reduce the garishness of the wave design; 3. Include a rear screen fence to cover the back flow preventer; and, 4. Explore alternate wall treatments: 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*** PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC APPEARANCE 3  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 3, 2014 3. Consider 598 Laine Street (Jabberwock Inn); Sign Permit 14-361 for a New Wall Sign and New Pedestrian-Oriented Freestanding Sign; Applicant Phil Vanderkraats of Signs by Van; Owner Rudolph Weichert; VAF Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-361 with Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Ms. Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Phil Vanderkraats, Signs by Van, said the owner of the Jabberwock Inn was unable to attend tonight’s meeting due to an event at the Inn. Mr. Vanderkraats also said Christy outlined the sign well in her Agenda Report, and that the proposed signs will be sandblasted, carved, and dimensional. Public Comments Sharon Dwight, New Monterey Neighborhood Association (NMNA) president, said the proposed signs are attractive and placed appropriately for the site. She also said likes the design and materials of the signs, but asked the applicant if the green on the wall sign will be as bright as presented in the Agenda Report. In response, Mr. Vanderkraats said the green will be muted to blend with the color of the building. Ms. Dwight said the project is completely supported by the NMNA. Committee Member Comments Vice Chair Freeman complimented the applicant on his work and said it is very artistic. Committee Member Searle said the applicant did a good job designing the sign in a manner to convey the meaning of “Jabberwock.” Committee Member Dawson made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-361 with Conditions of Approval. Committee Member Kimzey seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Dawson, seconded by Committee Member Kimzey, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopt a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-361 with 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 4. Consider 2200 Garden Road (Monterey Herald); Sign Permit 14-448 to Amend Sign Permit 14-275 for a New Vehicle-Oriented Freestanding Sign; Applicant Anjanette Adams; Owner Chris Orosco of Coastal Storage LP; IR-130-RA Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving the amended Sign Permit with Conditions of Approval. 4 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 3, 2014 Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Ms. Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Shawn Adams, Monterey Signs, said the proposed Monterey Herald sign is exactly the same in size and location as the former AMP Media sign. Mr. Adams said that the sign was previously legal, non-conforming, but replacing the sign requires conformity to today’s sign standards. He also said the sign is located in the rise of land between the two driveways on the site, and that all businesses along Garden Road have similar signs. In response to Committee Member Searle’s question, Mr. Adams said the sign is supported by two wooden posts. In response to Committee Member Searle’s question regarding the space on the sign below the logo, Mr. Adams said the building is multi- tenant and the space allows for additional signage for a new tenant in the future. In response to Committee Member Silva’s question regarding text spacing on the sign, Mr. Adams said corporate logos usually are not allowed much room for creativity, but he can propose changes to his client if the ARC sees fit. In response to Committee Member Dawson’s question, Mr. Adams said the address is displayed on the side of the sign post. Public Comments None. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Dawson said the address of the property could be added to the sign for balance. Committee Member Freeman said the logo on the Monterey Herald’s website is different from the logo on the proposed sign, and that it is likely for clarity and visibility. Matt Nohr of the Orosco Group, property owner, said that the Herald rebranded their logo upon moving to their new location on Garden Road, and that the logo on the proposed sign represents the most current logo. Committee Member Silva said he supports the sign and made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving the amended Sign Permit with Conditions of Approval. Committee Member Dawson seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Silva, seconded by Committee Member Dawson, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopt a Resolution approving the amended Sign Permit with 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 COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Committee Member Dawson said he attended the December 2, 2014 swearing in of the new City Council Members and there was a full audience. 5  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 3, 2014 Regarding the Lighthouse Area Specific Plan Subcommittee, Vice Chair Freeman said she and Committee Member Kimzey have been diligently attending meetings and the community consensus is that the Lighthouse Corridor needs a personality. Vice Chair Freeman also said artistic business signs, new business façades, and new residents will define the area in the future. Committee Member Searle said he is pleased with the quick progress and construction of the Christian Science Church at since it was recently reviewed by the ARC, and that he ran into the project architect who is excited and confident about the project. Ms. Hopper presented a poster created by the Communications Office entitled “It’s Happening Now” highlighting implementation of the Downtown Specific plan, including outdoor seating. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS 5. Planning Office Update  Update received  Ms. Hopper said there was a request for the City Council to reconsider the issue of water allocations at their December 2, 2014 meeting, which was continued to December 16, 2014.  Committee Member Silva said in the event that the Water Management District requires water for existing outdoor seating in the future, unused water credits could be taken from developers and deposited into a bank solely for outdoor seating use. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:46 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Christine Hopper Chair Senior Planner Architectural Review Committee 6