Architectural Review Committee Meeting

DocuSign Envelope ID: 39F27EAD-2D3E-488C-AF1C-95D37EFA208A MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Wednesday, April 21, 2021 4:00 PM – 5:30 PM Teleconference MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Carter, Bluth, Hunter, Ostovar, Schmidt, Tregenza Members Absent: Pauly Staff Members Present: Community Development Director Cole, Interim Principal Planner Roveri, Senior Associate Planner Schmidt, Recording Secretary Cleary, Recording Secretary Ziel 1. Meeting Procedures CALL TO ORDER Chair Carter called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. CONSENT ITEMS Approval of Minutes 2. April 7, 2021 Action: Approved as submitted. On a motion by Committee Member Tregenza, seconded by Committee Member Bluth, and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved the April 7, 2021 minutes as submitted: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Carter, Bluth, Ostovar, Schmidt, Tregenza NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Pauly ABSTAIN: 1 MEMBERS: Hunter RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None PUBLIC COMMENTS None related to the approval of minutes. Community Development Director Cole clarified that the two items on the consent agenda were the approval of April 7, 2021 minutes and the approval of the resolution for the project at 832 Hellam Street. Cole further noted that members of the public could ask for the Hellam Street item to be pulled from the consent agenda during the public comment period. Gary Soule, President of the Old Town Neighborhood Association (OTNA), requested the item for 832 Hellam be pulled from the agenda to allow for public feedback. Soule noted the OTNA has filed an appeal of the approval and requested the owner update the roof line to be more harmonious with the neighborhood. Soule noted if modifications are made to the roof line, the OTNA will pull their appeal. DocuSign Envelope ID: 39F27EAD-2D3E-488C-AF1C-95D37EFA208A Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 21, 2021 Interim Principal Planner Roveri explained that Item #3 had been pulled from the agenda. Roveri explained the purpose of this item is for the ARC to review the proposed resolution and findings for approval and for the ARC to confirm or modify the findings to make sure that they reflect the findings for decision that were made at the April 7th ARC meeting. Roveri noted that approval cannot be changed but the findings could be modified. Community Development Director Cole recommended approving the April 7th minutes before discussing the resolution for 832 Hellam. OTHER CONSENT ITEMS The following item was pulled from the consent agenda. 3. Approve Resolution for 832 Hellam Street; Architectural Review Permit ARP-20- 0241 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review of a Single-Story Addition to an Existing One-Story Single-Family Dwelling; Applicant/Owner Kelly Locke; R-3-6 Zoning District; Medium Density Residential General Plan Designation (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) Action: Approved as submitted. Public Comments Nancy Soule, Secretary of the Old Town Neighborhood Association (OTNA), expressed appreciation of staff and the ARC for their efforts. Nancy explained the only concern OTNA had about the project was the pronounced butterfly roof line that includes a sharp v-wedge at the back of the roof line. Soule stated that she does not feel the roof line is compatible with the neighborhood and noted it is a jarring roof line. Soule commented that if you look at the roofline from the front of the property you will see that a sharp v-wedge is visible from above the canopy that extends from front to back of the property. Soule asked that the project be reconsidered based on the roof line and noted that the proposed style is not compatible with the Old Town neighborhood style. April Harrison commented that she lives on Jefferson Street and was a writer of the Old Town Area Plan. Harrison noted that the intention of the Old Town Area Plan was not to make everything look identical but ensure that structures fit in the blockface within the block. Harrison stated the roof line was very jarring and too modern for the blockface and asked the applicant to reconsider the roof line. Committee Member Comments Committee Member Tregenza noted he lives in the Old Town neighborhood and reviewed the comments submitted by the public. Tregenza commented that both negative and positive comments were received from the public. Tregenza spoke in favor of the project and stated it is a nice design that would enhance the neighborhood. Tregenza also stated that the owner/architect’s purpose in using the proposed roof line was to allow light into the great room of the home. Lastly Tregenza noted he would like to move forward with the approval and explained that once the landscaping grows, the roof line will not be as jarring in appearance. Community Development Director Cole clarified the decision for approval from the April 7th ARC meeting could not be reconsidered. However, Cole explained the committee could rewrite the findings for decision for the resolution. Vice Chair Bluth asked how the appeal of the decision would affect the process. Cole clarified that the ARC is ratifying the resolution for approval and cementing the findings for decision. DocuSign Envelope ID: 39F27EAD-2D3E-488C-AF1C-95D37EFA208A Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 21, 2021 Cole further explained the applicant could submit an amendment to their plan if they chose to, but the ARC’s role is to certify that the findings in the resolution represent what was discussed at the April 7th meeting. Interim Principal Planner Roveri shared the approval of the resolution is also appealable. Committee Member Hunter asked if he could vote on this item since he missed the previous meeting. Cole confirmed he would need to abstain from voting on this item. Committee Member Ostovar asked if the ARC is voting or just discussing the item to support their previous findings. Roveri confirmed the ARC is voting, looking at the resolution and verifying that the findings reflect the findings from the April 7th meeting. Cole clarified that the findings should reflect why the ARC made the decision. Cole further noted that if the findings do not cover why they felt the project was consistent with Old Town character, then ARC should provide additional modifications and clarification. Committee Member Tregenza noted the findings in the resolution reflect the findings from the last meeting. Committee Member Bluth spoke in favor of the project and noted the Old Monterey neighborhood has a diverse set of designs and character. Bluth cited examples of modern architecture that are in the Old Town neighborhood and how these structures enhance the neighborhood. Bluth also noted that Hellam Street has a variation of architecture and that the ARC should support the project. Committee Member Tregenza supported Bluth’s comments on the eclectic nature of that area and noted the architect showed many examples of a reverse shed roof in the neighborhood. Tregenza complimented the owner/architect and noted the owner will maintain the property and take the time to complete the project properly with care and consideration. Committee Bluth noted the angle of the roof is not significant and seems to fit what the design is trying to accomplish of getting more light into the house in an aesthetically pleasing way. Committee Member Ostovar commented that he understood the historic precedent and noted the goal is not to ensure that things stay the same but there is some variation in the neighborhood. Ostovar also noted that the ARC feels the roofline is not jarring and referred to other structures in the lower presidio area that have a similar roofline. Ostovar also expressed appreciation of the owner/applicant being an architect and noted it is important that the space is established with their care. Ostovar encouraged the applicant to try to be accommodating to help functionality of the community and in the planting to keep windows into the entry visible to be neighborly and be seen. Lastly, Ostovar noted the height of the story poles seem minor and the project will add eclectic nature and energy to the community like the purple house in Pacific Grove that adds character and identity to the neighborhood. Committee Member Bluth supported Ostovar’s comments and explained that this is an addition to an existing structure which adds to the project fitting into the neighborhood and that the original structure is being preserved. Chair Carter noted this design, while unconventional, will add character to the Old Town neighborhood. Carter also commented that the applicant has been caring and thoughtful in the design process and she is excited to see how this home will add character to the neighborhood and is hopeful there will be more neighborhood support for the design. DocuSign Envelope ID: 39F27EAD-2D3E-488C-AF1C-95D37EFA208A Architectural Review Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 21, 2021 Ostovar clarified the concerns he expressed at the April 7th meeting in regards to hierarchy of the design and boxy-looking architecture. Ostovar explained some of the renderings do not give justice to the design and noted after looking at the story poles there is hierarchy in the entrance, the historic structure, and the roof. He also reiterated his comments about the home being visible to the neighborhood through planting and landscaping. On a motion by Committee Member Bluth seconded by Committee Member Tregenza and carried by the following vote, the Architectural Review Committee approved resolution for 832 Hellam Street; Architectural Review Permit ARP-20-0241 for Preliminary and Final Architectural Review of a Single-Story Addition to an Existing One-Story Single-Family Dwelling noting that the previous ARC Meeting findings are consistent with current approval with no changes to the current resolution, whereas this decision is appealable within 10 days of today’s meeting. AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Carter, Bluth, Ostovar, Schmidt, Tregenza NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: Pauly ABSTAIN: 1 MEMBERS: Hunter RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS 5. Planning Office Update  Update received. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:49 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Fernanda Roveri Chair Interim Principal Planner Architectural Review Committee