Architectural Review Committee Meeting

MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AFTERNOON SESSION ONLY Wednesday, February 20, 2019 4:00 PM – 7:00 PM 580 PACIFIC STREET, COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Freeman, Silva, Rogers, Gorman, Rath, Carter Members Absent: None Staff Members Present: Assistant Urban Forester, Principal Planner Flower, Recording Secretary Salameh CALL TO ORDER Chair Rath called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m. CONSENT ITEMS Approval of Minutes 1. February 6, 2018 Action: Approved as submitted. On a motion by Vice Chair Gorman, seconded by Committee Member Carter, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the February 6, 2018 minutes as submitted: AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Freeman, Silva, Rogers, Gorman, Rath, Carter NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None ***End of Consent Agenda*** PUBLIC COMMENTS Phil Vanderkraats of Signs by Van expressed discontent and confusion over not being scheduled to the current afternoon’s hearing for a specific project. Ms. Flower encouraged Mr. Vanderkraats to work with his project Planner for clarification on scheduling. PUBLIC APPEARANCE  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, February 20, 2019 2. Approve 41 Montsalas Drive; Tree Removal Application AP-18-0430 to Allow Removal and Replacement of One (1) Monterey Pine Tree; Applicant, Montsalas Owner Association Representative, Barbara Johnson; Planned Community Zoning District; Low Density Residential General Plan Designation; Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15304, Class 4 Action: Approved Tree Removal Application AP-18-0430 to allow removal and replacement of one Monterey Pine Tree with staff-recommended conditions of approval. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Principal Planner Flower presented the Agenda Report and took Committee Members’ questions. Committee Freeman asked about the required tree-replanting ratio and Ms. Flower explained the 1:1 ratio. Committee Member Silva asked about the ARC’s legal liability associated with denying a tree removal, if the tree were to fail in the future. Ms. Flower said that she would need to confer with the City Attorney’s Office for more information on liability concerns related to approved tree removals. Committee Member Rogers asked Assistant Urban Forester Prouty what could cause the bulging seen in the tree trunk. Mr. Prouty replied that trees can bulge for numerous reasons, but that he and Urban Forester Morton had inspected the tree and disagreed with Arborist Amanda Gates’ report that asserted decay as the cause. He noted that the tree seemed to be growing an extra-strong wood along the base of the trunk and that this seemed to indicate vigor. Committee Member Rogers asked Mr. Prouty if he believed that trimming the branches that hung over the chimney would cause an imbalance in the tree. Mr. Prouty said that trimming the branches would not cause an imbalance in base of the tree and that fire code called for a clearance of 10 feet from chimneys, which was the case in this property. He added that the tree could be further pruned with no damage and that the tree catching fire from the chimney was highly unlikely. Committee Member Rogers asked questions about building the deck around the tree and Mr. Prouty replied that the deck railing would need to go around the tree, rather than abutting it, and asked Ms. Flower to display photos of a neighboring Montsalas deck that had been recently reconstructed to surround an existing tree. Committee Member Silva asked Mr. Prouty if he disagreed with the portion of Ms. Gates’ report that stated pruning the tree would unbalance the crown. Mr. Prouty replied that he disagreed because he felt a reasonable amount of pruning could be done without unbalancing the crown. Public Comments None. Applicant 2  Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, February 20, 2019 Barbara Johnson, Montsalas Homeowners’ Association President, said that the subject tree had been a source of concern and anxiety for the homeowner for years and that she could understand why, once she viewed the tree from the deck. She explained that each condominium had a 10-foot easement to build from the wall, therefore the deck could not be expanded further to wrap around the tree. She added that regardless of pruning, the tree would still precariously lean over the roof of the unit. Neighboring property owner Vicki Rhea said that she and her husband witnessed the homeowner’s fear and anxiety over the tree’s potential failure. She said that the tree currently was leaning into the deck at the subject site and noted her own concerns of diminishing property value or potential damage if the tree were to fail. She asked the ARC to consider approving the tree’s removal. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Freeman spoke in favor of the tree removal and said she felt that the mitigation measures were sufficient. Vice Chair Gorman agreed, noting that he did not feel the ARC should exacerbate the homeowner’s concerns. He expressed appreciation for both arborist’s reports. Committee Member Silva said that he felt the concerns expressed by the homeowner were valid and he agreed with staff findings, however he questioned the conflicting arborist reports. Committee Member Rogers spoke against the tree removal, adding that an advanced assessment of the tree that addressed the bulging and potential pruning would be helpful. Chair Rath said that while she appreciated trees and identified as a tree person, she agreed with the majority of the ARC. On a motion by Committee Member Freeman, seconded by Committee Member Gorman, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved Tree Removal Application AP-18-0430 to allow removal and replacement of one Monterey Pine Tree with staff-recommended conditions of approval. AYES: 4 MEMBERS: Freeman, Silva, Gorman, Rath NOES: 1 MEMBERS: Rogers ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 1 MEMBERS: Carter 3. Approve 1008 Jefferson Street; Architectural Review Application ARP-18-0286 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review of an Addition to a Potentially Historic Structure; Applicant Adrian Lopez; Owner Jamie Haaland; R-1-6 Zoning; Low Density Residential General Plan Land Use Designation; Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 ACTION: Approved AR Application ARP-18-0286 for preliminary and final architectural review of an addition to a potentially historic structure at 1008 Jefferson Street with staff- recommended conditions of approval that 1) Prior to Building permit submittal, the applicant shall revise plans to show that the garage will not exceed 12 feet in height 2) That tree protection standards prescribed by the City Forester shall be followed and 3 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, February 20, 2019 special condition of approval that the applicant must submit a landscaping plan for staff review. The ARC also made a recommendation that the applicant consider redesign of the new garage door, new breezeway door, and front-facing façade of addition to differentiate from the existing structure. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Principal Planner Flower presented the Agenda Report and took Committee Members’ questions. Applicant Adrian Lopez addressed the two driveways on the property, noting that one would be eliminated and fully landscaped. He also committed to reducing the garage height by 6” to meet design requirements. Committee Member Freeman asked if the same decorative elements used in the existing structure would be applied to the addition. She also asked if the front door would be obviously located. Mr. Lopez said that similar decorative elements would be applied in certain areas of the design. He added that the entry path to the house would indicate the location of the front door. Public Comments None. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Rogers complimented the design and said that the addition would be an improvement. Committee Member Silva expressed concern that the design was not in observance of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, as the addition was too similar to the existing potentially historic structure. He urged the applicant to further differentiate the addition from the existing home, as he felt the current design was too conjectural. Vice Chair Gorman said that he appreciated Committee Member Silva’s thoughts, but said that he felt the addition was designed well and would enhance the neighborhood. Committee Member Freeman said that she felt the addition would add interest and asked that the applicant consider differentiating the types of arches on the addition—such as a squared off design—from the arches on the existing structure. She suggested making the addition somewhat less grandiose than the existing house. Committee Member Carter said that she felt the addition would be a great enhancement to the home. Chair Rath said that she could see both sides because the addition would look much like the existing structure, but also featured interesting elements. **Public Comment Reopened** Mr. Lopez disagreed with Committee Member Silva’s comments, noting that the homeowner did not desire a severe difference between the existing structure and the addition. He asked for more clarification on the ARC’s direction for the design. 4 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, February 20, 2019 Committee Member Silva clarified that the ARC was a discretionary review committee that must make findings for project approval or denial with individual subjectivity, some of which would be based on opinion. **Public Comment Closed** The ARC discussed the project’s adherence to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and potential design modifications. Committee Member Silva motioned to deny the application based on findings that it did not adhere to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. The motion failed for lack of a second. Committee Member Carter motioned to approve the project for preliminary and final architectural review for addition with staff-recommended conditions of approval that: 1) Prior to Building permit submittal, the applicant shall revise plans to show that the garage will not exceed 12 feet in height and 2) That tree protection standards prescribed by City Forester shall be followed to protect the Monterey Pine tree adjacent to proposed driveway. Vice Chair Gorman seconded the motion. The ARC discussed the motion and Committee Member Freeman suggested the addition of a recommendation to redesign the new garage door, new breezeway door, and front of new addition to differentiate from the existing structure. Vice Chair Gorman asked if a landscaping plan existed. **Public Comment Reopened** Jamie Haaland, homeowner, said that she was very concerned with landscaping and water efficiency and therefore turf would be placed in the yard as a part of the new landscaping. She said that she could submit a landscape plan to staff, at the ARC’s request. **Public Comment Closed** On a motion by Committee Member Carter, seconded by Vice Chair Gorman, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved AR Application ARP- 18-0286 for preliminary and final architectural review of an addition to a potentially historic structure at 1008 Jefferson Street with staff-recommended conditions of approval that 1) Prior to Building permit submittal, the applicant shall revise plans to show that the garage will not exceed 12 feet in height 2) That tree protection standards prescribed by the City Forester shall be followed and special condition of approval that the applicant must submit a landscaping plan for staff review. The ARC also made a recommendation that the applicant consider redesign of the new garage door, new breezeway door, and front-facing façade of addition to differentiate from the existing structure. AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Freeman, Rogers, Gorman, Rath, Carter NOES: 1 MEMBERS: Silva ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 5 Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, February 20, 2019 COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS None. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Ande Flower, AICP Chair Principal Planner Architectural Review Committee 6