Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Wednesday, January 21, 2015 AFTERNOON SESSION ONLY 4:00 – 7:00 pm FEW MEMORIAL HALL OF RECORDS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 580 PACIFIC STREET MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Latasa, Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Silva Members Absent: Abma, Searle Staff Members Present: Principal Planner Cole, Senior Planner Hopper, Senior Associate Planner Bennett, Recording Secretary Leinen CALL TO ORDER Chair Latasa called the meeting to order at 4:01 pm. CONSENT ITEMS Vice Chair Freeman requested that item #2 be pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion and clarification. Vice Chair Freeman made a motion to approve item #1 of the Consent Agenda with amendments and remove item #2 from the Consent Agenda for discussion and clarification. Committee Member Dawson seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Freeman, seconded by Committee Member Dawson, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved item #1 of the Consent Agenda with amendments and removed item #2 from the Consent Agenda for discussion and clarification: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Latasa, Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Silva NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Abma, Searle ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None Approval of Minutes 1. December 17, 2014 ACTION: Approved as amended. Committee Member Dawson requested that “Frank Riddell” be corrected to “Craig Riddell” on page 6 of the Minutes. Other Consent Items 2. Consider 2338 Del Monte Avenue (Mobil Gas Station); Sign Permit 14-268 for Two Free Standing Vehicle Oriented Signs and Decals; Applicant Ahmand Ghaderi (A&S Engineering); Owner Tesoro Sierra Properties LLC.; C-3-D2 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements (Continued from December 17, 2014)  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, January 21, 2015 ACTION: Removed from consent; Discussed; Adopted a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-268 with Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Kimberly Cole presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Ahmand Ghaderi, A&S Engineering, said the numerals displaying price must be at least six inches tall, and 50 square feet is not enough space to display both the logo and the price. He also said internal illumination is preferable, but he is willing to work with staff to make external or halo illumination work. Public Comments None. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Kimzey made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-268 with Conditions of Approval. Vice Chair Freeman seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Kimzey, seconded by Committee Member Freeman, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopted a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-268 with Conditions of Approval: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Latasa, Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Silva NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Abma, Searle ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None ***End of Consent Agenda*** PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC APPEARANCE 3. Consider 57 Soledad Drive; AR Permit 14-466 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review of a New Dog Park; Applicant Eddie Hurt, Architect; Owner Daniel Combs for Laramar Group, LLC; R-3 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for a new dog park at 57 Soledad Drive, with Conditions of Approval and amended Special Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Todd Bennett presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Eddie Hurt, applicant/architect, said the landscape and lighting were designed by BFS Landscape Architects. In response to Vice Chair Freeman’s question Mr. Hurt said artificial turf was chosen for maintenance and water conservation reasons, and that the dog owners and property management would be responsible for keeping the area clean. Regarding light spillage, he said the neighboring Pacific Vista Apartments are approximately 20 feet above the proposed dog park and would not be affected. 2 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, January 21, 2015 Public Comments Daniel Combs, project manager, said he has developed two dozen dog parks and artificial turf is the most effective ground cover because it does not die like live grass. Mr. Combs also said sprinklers will run twice a day to clean the artificial turf and maintenance workers will ensure solid waste is cleaned up twice a day. He said the proposed LED lighting will not cause a lot of bleed off and that the dog park will be an aesthetic improvement for the area. Mr. Combs said the applicant wants to be a good neighbor and is happy to work with the City in the future, should problems arise. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Silva said he supports the project, but does not think adjusting the timing of the lights is within the ARC’s purview. Committee Silva made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for a new dog park at 57 Soledad Drive, with Conditions of Approval. Committee Member Kimzey seconded the motion. Mr. Bennett said that since publication of the Agenda Report, the applicant submitted the proposed shields for the festoon lights, eliminating Special Conditions #5 and #6. He also asked the ARC to consider whether or not to keep condition #7 of the Resolution, prohibiting patio lights after 11:00 pm. Committee Member Silva said the timing of the lights is not within the ARC’s purview and amended his motion to adopt a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for a new dog park at 57 Soledad Drive, with Conditions of Approval and eliminating Special Conditions of Approval #5, #6, and #7. Vice Chair Freeman said she supports Special Condition of Approval #7 regarding the patio lights. Chair Latasa concurred and said it is reasonable to have a time limit. Committee Member Silva said the lighting would not have an impact on surrounding apartments due to their elevation. Committee Member Kimzey said he supports Special Condition of Approval #7 and did not second the amended motion. The motion died for a lack of a second. Committee Member Silva made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for a new dog park at 57 Soledad Drive with Conditions of Approval and eliminating Special Conditions #5 and #6. 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 adopted a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for a new dog park at 57 Soledad Drive with Conditions of Approval and eliminating Special Conditions #5 and #6: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Latasa, Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Silva NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Abma, Searle ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 3  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, January 21, 2015 4. Consider 1430 Mark Thomas Drive; AR Permit 14-215 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review of New Personal Wireless Service (PWS) Facility; Applicant John Pappas of the Eukon Group on behalf of AT&T Mobility; Owner Pebble Beach Company; VAF Zoning Designation; Exempt from CEQA Requirements ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for a new Personal Wireless Service (PWS) facility at 1430 Mark Thomas Drive, with amended Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Mr. Bennett presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Betty Saxton, AT&T External Affairs for the Central Coast, said she is accompanied by John Pappas who has worked with staff on behalf of AT&T during the application process. Ms. Saxton said AT&T is agreeable to all of staff’s recommendations and is willing to include or eliminate the up-lighting depending on the ARC’s decision. She also said that the existing site at the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) was temporary and that the facility would like to see the project completed to improve their wireless coverage. In response to Committee Member Kimzey’s question, Ms. Saxton said for previous projects AT&T has recommended up-lighting of the U.S. flag at night, but AT&T is agreeable to not having lighting, depending on what the ARC decides. Public Comments Bart Rall said as an American and former military member it concerns him that staff is proposing a permanent U.S. flag that will not be lit at night time. Mr. Rall said most flag codes say it is proper to light the flag at night, and not having it lit would be a distraction, especially with the NPS’s large presence in the community. Phil Vanderkraats, Signs by Van, said he agrees as a fellow American and former military member that the U.S. flag should be lit if it is displayed after dark. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Dawson said he has read many places that if showing the flag at night it should be lit, and feels that the up-light should remain. In response to Committee Member Kimzey’s question, Mr. Bennett said the height of the flag pole was approved by the airport without lighting proposed, and that a condition could be added to the Resolution delegating approval of lighting to staff to ensure no safety hazards exist. Vice Chair Freeman said the Planning Commission tasked the ARC with reviewing the proposed paint colors, fence materials, signage, and access area, and she supports all of staff’s recommendations in regards to those items. Committee Member Dawson said he would prefer to see flat stakes and not pointed stakes on the grape stake fence. Mr. Bennett said that the FCC requires the facility to be enclosed with a non-climbable fence, and pointed grape stakes are more desirable than alternatives like chain link with barbed wire. Chair Latasa said he supports lighting of the flags, as long as staff determines an appropriate level of lighting. 4  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, January 21, 2015 Vice Chair Freeman made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for a new Personal Wireless Service (PWS) facility at 1430 Mark Thomas Drive, with modified Conditions of Approval as follows: 5. The three proposed up-lights shall be reviewed and approved by the Airport District staff from an FAA and safety perspective. Staff shall consult with the Airport District to ensure that the lighting will not impact landing patterns and is authorized to modify the application to bring the intensity of the lights down to a level that is acceptable to the Airport District, if necessary. Committee Member Silva seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Freeman, seconded by Committee Member Silva, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for a new Personal Wireless Service (PWS) facility at 1430 Mark Thomas Drive, with amended Conditions of Approval: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Latasa, Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Silva NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Abma, Searle ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 5. Consider 800 Cass Street; AR Application 14-477 for Final Architectural Review for New Roofing and Siding; Applicant Jennifer Scudder of Scudder Roofing; Property Owner Pastor Bart Rall for Bethlehem Lutheran Church; CO (Office and Professional) Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements ACTION: Continued the project for redesign to a date uncertain with direction to the applicant to 1) Provide a proper color and material board; 2) Take into consideration the uniqueness of the architecture of the building; 3) Have the colors and materials adequately compliment the striking importance of the building; and 4) Have the same roof material and the same color applied on the lower roof and the upper roof. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Ms. Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Richard Glen, attorney on behalf of Bethlehem Lutheran Church and Chairman of the Board of Elders, introduced Pastor Bart Rall, Board of Directors members Marilyn and Dave Maxter, and Jennifer Scudder of Scudder Roofing. Mr. Glen presented the ARC with a handout detailing the existing conditions of the church. Regarding the proposed membrane material for the roof, Mr. Glen said the pebble print was chosen to give texture, but that any color would be acceptable. In regards to the grey metal roofing material, he said the color was intended to give the building a contrasting look. Mr. Glen said the project will improve the neighborhood without giving an industrial look, and that the church would like to work through the issues and get the project underway. In response to Vice Chair Freeman’s question, Mr. Glen said the church had not considered channel metal roofing for the flat roofs and currently is only looking at re-roofing the nave and front office building, keeping the project simple and cost-effective. 5 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, January 21, 2015 In response to Committee Member Silva’s question, Ms. Scudder said the existing structure of the lower roof does not have plywood to support metal panels, so USG insulation board with rolled roofing was proposed. Ms. Scudder also showed the ARC different colors of the Duro- last roofing. In response to Chair Latasa’s question, Mr. Glen said the triangles on the front of the church are T-1-11 and will be painted to match the new roofing. Mr. Glen requested that the ARC come to a consensus and then delegate the decision of color tone for the metal and membrane roofing material to staff. Public Comments None. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Silva said he sympathizes with the applicant, but does not like the Duro-last in any color, and proposed that any changes to the lower roof match the upper roof. He also said metal is an appropriate material, but should be a more striking color, such as copper. Committee Member Dawson said the brick tower and the window make forming a contrast difficult. Vice Chair Freeman said the building is very prominent, but currently does not offer a contrast being painted all in the same color. She also said the metal roof, stucco and brick elements would complement each other, but she does not support the pebble print roof. Chair Latasa re-opened Public Comment to give the applicant an opportunity to speak. Mr. Glen said the best results will come from the church working through the issues, and asked the ARC for a continuance of the project to look at the construction of the lower roof. Chair Latasa closed Public Comment. Committee Member Silva made a motion to continue the project for redesign to a date uncertain with the following direction to the applicant: 1. Provide a proper color and material board; 2. Take into consideration the uniqueness of the architecture of the building; 3. Have the colors and materials adequately compliment the striking importance of the building; and, 4. Have the same roof material and the same color applied on the lower roof and the upper roof. Vice Chair Freeman seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Silva, seconded by Committee Member Freeman, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee Continued the project for redesign to a date uncertain with direction to the applicant to: 1) Provide a proper color and material board; 2) Take into consideration the uniqueness of the architecture of the building; 3) Have the colors and materials adequately compliment the striking importance of the building; and 4) Have the same roof material and the same color applied on the lower roof and the upper roof: 6  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, January 21, 2015 AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Latasa, Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Silva NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Abma, Searle ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 6. Consider 2 Portola Plaza Sign Program 14-285; Applicant Phil VanderKraats; Owner Custom House Hotel Co Ltd (Portola Plaza Hotel and Spa); VAF Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements ACTION: Adopted a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-285 with amended Conditions of Approval and the added finding that Alvarado Mall is a unique situation in that it is a pedestrian-only mall and that the statue has been in place for a number of generations, with Conditions of Approval and amended Special Conditions of Approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Ms. Cole presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Phil Vanderkraats, Signs by Van, said the project has been very challenging with each tenant space having a unique personality, but a workable solution has been reached. He also said the proposed fin signs will enliven the underused area and encourage pedestrian traffic. Mr. Vanderkraats said that one issue with the project is that Jack White, owner of LeBlanc Gallery, would like to keep the bear statue outside of his business since it has been there for over 40 years and has nostalgic value. Mr. Vanderkraats also said the statue is harmless and enhances the area, and suggested that it be allowed to remain while the current tenant is there. In response to Committee Member Kimzey’s question, Mr. Vanderkraats said the utility sign on Del Monte Avenue directs people to the parking garage for Chase Bank. Public Comments Janine Chicourrat, General Manager of Portola Plaza Hotel and Spa, said that the redesign of the conference center is a turning point that will encourage the hotel to upgrade their buildings as well. She said she anticipates many projects in the future and looks forward to working with the ARC. Regarding the bear statue, Ms. Chicourrat asked that the ARC have a little patience with it and understand that changes will occur in the area as time goes by. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Silva questioned if the sign program should be held off in until the urban redevelopment of the Conference Center occurs. Vice Chair Freeman said the Portola Plaza Hotel and the Conference Center should have separate identities that work together and are not piecemealed. Chair Latasa complimented Ms. Cole on the thorough Agenda Report she prepared for the complicated project. Committee Member Silva said that the bear statue could possibly be justified because the Alvarado Mall has no vehicular traffic and the bear draws attention for pedestrian traffic. He also said that the statue is the closest thing to public art in the area and that more public art should exist to bring life to the area. 7  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, January 21, 2015 Committee Member Dawson said having a wall sign, fin sign, and an awning sign is excessive, and that the wall signs should be eliminated from the proposal since they parallel the awning signs and are redundant. Vice Chair Freeman said this sign program could end up being temporary as something else could supersede it when the area is revitalized. Chair Latasa re-opened Public Comment to give the applicant an opportunity to speak. Mr. Vanderkraats said both awning and wall signs should be allowed because the awning signs only contain letters, while the wall signs are three dimensional, attractive designs to inform customers of the nature of the business. Chair Latasa closed Public Comment. Committee Member Kimzey said he is concerned with the consistency of decisions made by the ARC in regards to signage, that nine of the proposed signs exceed size guidelines by 2 to 2.5 times and four are smaller, and that being a pedestrian-only mall is not justification to exceed the Sign Guidelines. He recommended the sign program be approved in a way that complies with the Sign Guidelines, only allowing exceptions on a case by case basis with justification. Chair Latasa said there is consistency in the flexibility of ARC’s decisions when there are unique situations, such as the large buildings in the proposed Sign Program. Committee Member Silva said he supports the Staff Report, but hopes the City will create a more comprehensive urban plan to enliven the area and inject activity through a public art program. Committee Member Dawson said that the sign program is over-signed and allows for duplicate signs. Committee Member Kimzey concurred. Chair Latasa said a continuance may be appropriate if the majority feels that the program includes too much signage. Committee Member Silva said he does not believe the program is over-signed. Chair Latasa concurred. Vice Chair Freeman said that the proposed signage is appropriate for the area due to unusual circumstances and made a motion to adopt a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-285 with Conditions of Approval. Committee Member Silva suggested a finding supporting the bear statue for tenant H based on the fact that the area is unique with pedestrian only traffic, unlike any other area in the City, and because an attention getting device is appropriate in this instance. The motion maker agreed to the added finding. Ms. Cole said the sign program cannot approve only the bear statue and no future statues unless a caveat is added stating that the bear statue is only allowed to remain because it has been in existence for such a long amount of time, and that future statues are not allowed. Motion maker, Vice Chair Freeman, said she supports adding Ms. Cole’s language to the motion. Motion seconder, Committee Member Silva, said he does not support the added language, as more public art is needed, not less. Vice Chair Freeman clarified her motion and moved to adopt a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-285 with amended Conditions of Approval as follows and the added finding that Alvarado Mall is a unique situation in that it is a pedestrian-only mall and that the statue has been in place for a number of generations: 8  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, January 21, 2015 7. That the outdoor display for Tenant H be removed within 14 days of the date of approval. Committee Member Silva seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Freeman, seconded by Committee Member Silva, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee adopt a Resolution approving Sign Permit 14-285 with amended Conditions of Approval and the added finding that Alvarado Mall is a unique situation in that it is a pedestrian-only mall and that the statue has been in place for a number of generations: AYES: 3 MEMBERS: Latasa, Freeman, Silva NOES: 2 MEMBERS: Dawson, Kimzey ABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Abma, Searle ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 7. Confirm Annual Appointments for Chair, Vice Chair, and Subcommittees ACTION: Confirmed annual appointments for Chair and Vice Chair, and held off appointments for Subcommittees pending City Council decision. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Ms. Hopper presented the Agenda Report and answered Committee Members’ questions. Public Comments None. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Silva said he contacted Ms. Hopper to find a solution for the Vice Chair appointment and learned that he and Committee Member Kimzey attended an equal number of ARC meetings and were both appointed on the same day. Committee Member Silva said that Committee Member Kimzey is more qualified for the position due to his service on the Colton Hall Museum Cultural Arts Commission and the Lighthouse Specific Plan Subcommittee, and declined the nomination for Vice Chair. Ms. Hopper said appointments to subcommittees have been held over pending City Council’s discussion and decision regarding elimination of subcommittees. Ms. Cole asked the ARC to listen to the January 20, 2015 City Council discussion on Governance, and said Committee Members/Commissioners will be allowed to speak as individuals on the matter at the next City Council meeting. Committee Member Dawson made a motion to confirm Committee Member Freeman as Chair and Committee Member Kimzey as Vice Chair. Committee Member Silva seconded the motion. On a motion by Committee Member Dawson, seconded by Committee Member Silva, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee confirmed Committee Member Freeman as Chair and Committee Member Kimzey as Vice Chair: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Latasa, Freeman, Dawson, Kimzey, Silva NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Abma, Searle ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None 9  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, January 21, 2015 RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS None. 8. Planning Office Update  Update received  Ms. Hopper said the Conference Center discussion was pulled from the January 21, 2015 ARC Agenda by the City Manager’s Office to allow for additional outreach. She also said a meeting will be held on the matter at 7:00 pm on January 28, 2015 at the Conference Center.  Ms. Hopper introduced new ARC Member Renata Abma, and said she will participate in her first ARC Meeting on February 4, 2015. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:20 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Christine Hopper Chair Senior Planenr Architectural Review Committee 10