Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AFTERNOON SESSION ONLY Wednesday, December 6, 2017 4:00 PM – 7:00 PM 580 PACIFIC STREET, COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Silva, Freeman, Rogers, Catanzaro, Gorman, Rath Members Absent: Williamson Staff Members Present: Housing and Community Development Manager Caraker, Senior Associate Planner Bennett, Associate Planner Roveri, Recording Secretary Salameh CALL TO ORDER Chair Silva called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m. CONSENT ITEMS Approval of Minutes 1. November 15, 2017 Action: Approved as amended. On a motion by Committee Member Gorman, seconded by Committee Member Catanzaro, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the minutes of November 15, 2017 as amended. AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Freeman, Silva, Rogers, Catanzaro, Gorman, Rath NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Williamson ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None ***End of Consent Agenda*** PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC APPEARANCE 2. Approve 371 Monroe Street: Architectural Review Permit 17-023 for Two-Story Addition to Single-Family Dwelling; Applicant/Owner John G. Davi, for DED General Partnership; R-3-6 Zoning District; (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19 Section 15301, Class 1), Continued from the April 19, 2017 Architectural Review Committee Meeting Action: Approved with staff-recommended Condition of Approval that the two  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 6, 2017 front fixed windows be installed as proposed and remaining six (6) existing windows be replaced with wood frame, single pane casement windows consistent with the window details submitted to the Planning office on November 21, 2017. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Senior Associate Planner Bennett presented the Agenda Report and took Committee Members’ questions. Applicant John Davi said that they had decided to not go forward with the previously proposed addition, but that they would like to replace the vinyl windows with wood clad windows per the ARC’s direction at the April 19, 2017 meeting. Public Comments None. Commissioner Comments Vice Chair Freeman said that she was pleased to see the vinyl clad windows being replaced with wood frame windows and that the appearance and appropriateness for the neighborhood would greatly improve with the change. Chair Silva concurred with Vice Chair Freeman and thanked the applicant for putting forth the effort to change the window frames. Committee Member Gorman agreed with Vice Chair Freeman and Chair Silva. On a motion by Committee Member Freeman, seconded by Committee Member Catanzaro, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved Architectural Review Permit 17-023 with staff-recommended Condition of Approval that the two front fixed windows be installed as proposed and remaining six (6) existing windows be replaced with wood frame, single pane casement windows consistent with the window details submitted to the Planning office on November 21, 2017. AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Freeman, Silva, Rogers, Catanzaro, Gorman, Rath NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Williamson ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 3. Approve 2020 Del Monte Avenue; Architectural Review Application ARP-17-0541 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review of a New One-Story Commercial Building and Site Improvements; Applicant/Owner FE Monterey, LLC; C-2-D2 Zoning Designation (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15303, Class 3) ACTION: Approved with staff-recommended Conditions of Approval 1) that the applicant shall submit a landscape plan showing plant quantities and placement to be approved by Planning staff prior to building permit issuance. 2) That the landscaping along the drive-through curve shall be maintained at a four-foot height, not less or more. 3) That all lighting shall be in the range of 2,700 and 3,500 kelvin temperature to be consistent with citywide lighting temperatures. 4) That the applicant shall remove the 9 wall-mounted decorative lights from the construction plans or shall resubmit fully cut-off lights to be approved by Planning 2 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 6, 2017 staff prior to installation. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Associate Planner Fernanda Roveri presented the Agenda Report and took Committee Members’ questions. Ms. Roveri explained the photometric study at Chair Silva’s request. Vice Chair Freeman asked Ms. Roveri if it was staff’s recommendation to remove the nine wall-mounted light fixtures or to change the bulbs’ intensity. Ms. Roveri explained that it was staff’s recommendation to remove or submit fully cut-off lights. Applicant Matt Nohr of FE Monterey gave a brief history of the site and its development process. He explained that the façade was articulated in order to create visual interest and the parapet depth was proposed at a level so that mechanical noise would not affect neighbors. He noted that he would submit landscaping quantities with construction documents and that he would be open to discussion of lighting for the project, adding that lighting was the building’s jewelry and that it was an important element of the building’s design. Committee Member Rogers asked Mr. Nohr if they had considered orienting the building toward the shops opposite the apartments, rather than toward the apartments. Mr. Nohr said that the adjacent property owner preferred that the building be oriented as presented because of parking issues. Chair Silva said that he appreciated the overall design quality of the project, but that he was troubled by the lack of transparency along the Del Monte frontage. He asked, in consideration of the operating space inside the building, how feasible it would be to create transparency along the front of the building by adding glass windows. Mr. Nohr said that he respected Chair Silva’s comments regarding transparency along the building frontage, but that there was no feasible way to create transparency due to the operational floor plan and the external dynamics of the building. He noted that orienting the design in the opposite direction would cause the project to abut the neighboring apartments and create a pedestrian hazard, as the drive through lane would then run through the sidewalk. Public Comments None. Commissioner Comments Committee Member Rogers said that the project was beautifully-done, but that the cypress trees proposed near the apartments may not be an appropriate choice because of how large they grow. She noted that most of the trees proposed in the landscape plan were deciduous, but that it would be nice to have more evergreens as a buffer against the nearby apartments. Vice Chair Freeman said that the applicant should submit the quantity and placement of trees and shrubs. She asked that the applicant reconsider the tulip tree, as it could 3  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 6, 2017 become quite large. She also asked the applicant to reconsider the crepe myrtle trees, as they required heat to bloom, but commended the choices of privet or hawthorn for the hedge. She also noted that the alternate choices for lighting presented by the applicant were more appropriate for the project, particularly the up-down can lighting. Committee Member Gorman noted that while he agreed with Chair Silva’s point that the transparency of the business was important, he felt that the neighborhood opinion was the most important. He said that the project itself was well-done and an improvement to the site, noting that he liked the alternative lighting choices as well. Committee Member Rath said that she felt this building would complement the neighboring buildings and Committee Member Catanzaro agreed. Chair Silva commended Mr. Nohr on his design and said that while he felt the project was almost complete, it was still lacking. He said that because the project would be a prevalent feature along Del Monte Avenue that it was a shame the internal program function would be dictating the entire external appearance. On a motion by Committee Member Rath, seconded by Vice Chair Freeman, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved Architectural Review Application ARP-17-0541 for preliminary and final architectural review of a new one-story commercial building and site improvements with staff recommended Conditions of Approval 1) that the applicant shall submit a landscape plan showing plant quantities and placement to be approved by Planning staff prior to building permit issuance. 2) That the landscaping along the drive-through curve shall be maintained at a four-foot height, not less or more. 3) That all lighting shall be in the range of 2,700 and 3,500 Kelvin temperature to be consistent with citywide lighting temperatures. 4) That the applicant shall remove the 9 wall-mounted decorative lights from the construction plans or shall resubmit fully cut-off lights to be approved by Planning staff prior to installation. AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Freeman, Rogers, Catanzaro, Gorman, Rath NOES: 1 MEMBERS: Silva ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Williamson ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 4. Approve 2 Upper Ragsdale Drive, Building A; Sign Permit Application SI-17-0540 for Two Internally-Illuminated Wall Signs and One Non-Illuminated Wall Sign at an Existing Commercial Building; Applicant Anjanette Adams; Owner Community Hospital roperties; Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) Chair Silva recused himself from Item 4. ACTION: Approved Sign Permit Application 17-0540 for two internally-illuminated wall signs and one non-illuminated wall sign at an existing commercial building. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Associate Planner Fernanda Roveri presented the Agenda Report and took Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Shawn Adams of Monterey Signs said that the primary reason for illuminating the sign for 4 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 6, 2017 Building A was to allow patients to easily find and access the area at night. He noted that the hospital administration had received complaints from patients unable to find the building after dark and they believed that an illuminated sign would remedy that issue. He also noted that by illuminating the sign itself, that would reduce the need for lighting the area with floodlights or other means in order to guide patients to their destination. He addressed the multi-colored Montage logo and said that it was proposed to be internally illuminated in keeping with brand standard, as well as to appear appropriately after dark. Committee Member Rath asked if any consideration had been given toward directional signage. Mr. Adams said yes, that they were currently working on a wayfinding signage project. Public Comments None. Commissioner Comments Committee Member Gorman noted that it was difficult to navigate Ryan Ranch, adding that signage was lacking and that it was overall confusing. He said that while he was not opposed to illuminating the signage, he would like to know if it was appropriate to add wayfinding signage and illuminate the letters on other buildings for consistency purposes. He added that he felt it was appropriate to illuminate the Montage logo in order to maintain regional branding consistency. Committee Member Rath said that the Montage logo should be illuminated, adding that it would be a good idea to create wayfinding signage rather than illuminating the “A” sign. Committee Member Catanzaro said that the Montage logo was eye-catching and therefore illuminating it would be appropriate, but that illuminating the “A” sign would not be suitable because of visibility issues. Committee Member Rogers noted that the “A” sign on the building was not visible until one was upon it and therefore it would not be appropriate for illumination. She said that it would be appropriate to illuminate the Montage logo. Vice Chair Freeman concurred with the previous comments about the illumination of the Montage logo and not illuminating the “A” sign. She asked if the ARC could request that building signage be consistently illuminated. Ms. Roveri clarified that it could be requested for signage to be illuminated, but that unless signage came before the ARC for review, they could not make a determination on illumination. On a motion by Committee Member Catanzaro, seconded by Committee Member Rath, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved Sign Permit Application 17-0540 for two internally-illuminated wall signs and one non- illuminated wall sign at an existing commercial building. AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Freeman, Rogers, Catanzaro, Gorman, Rath NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Williamson ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 1 MEMBERS: Silva 5 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, December 6, 2017 COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Vice Chair Freeman said that Christmas in the Adobes would be taking place over the upcoming weekend and invited all to attend. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Caraker said that an item that would fall under the Waterfront Master Plan would be on the December 20, 2017 ARC meeting agenda and encouraged ARC members to review the plan in advance. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:17 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Elizabeth Caraker Chair Housing and Community Development Manager 6