Historic Preservation Commission Meeting

DocuSign Envelope ID: BB35E5F8-47AA-4DF4-A8DC-2E2A381F3472 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, November 12, 2020 4:00 PM – 6:00 PM TELECONFERENCE MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Members Present: Napoli, Collum, Barlow, Dawson, O’Neil, Smith-Crivello Members Absent: O’Brien Staff Members Present: Community Development Director Cole, Principal Planner Flower, Senior Associate Planner Schmidt, Recording Secretary Cleary, Recording Secretary Ziel 1. Meeting Procedures CALL TO ORDER Chair Napoli called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. CONSENT ITEMS Approval of Minutes 2. October 8, 2020 Action: Approved as submitted. On a motion by Commissioner Dawson, seconded by Commissioner O’Neil, The Historic Preservation Commission moved to approve the October 8, 2020 HPC minutes as submitted, by the following vote: AYES: 5 MEMBERS: Napoli, Collum, Barlow, Dawson, O’Neil NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: O’Brien ABSTAIN: 1 MEMBERS: Smith-Crivello RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC HEARING 3. Consider 508 Del Monte; HP-20-0222 to Remove the Property from the Downtown Area Historic Context Statement and Reconnaissance Survey List; Applicant David How; Owner 508 Del Monte Avenue LLC; PC-D Zoning District; Commercial General Plan Designation; Exempt from CEQA Requirements per Article 19, Section 15305, Class 5 Action: Project Denied. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions DocuSign Envelope ID: BB35E5F8-47AA-4DF4-A8DC-2E2A381F3472 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Thursday, November 12, 2020 Principal Planner Flower presented the Agenda Report and answered Commissioner questions. Commissioner Smith Crivello noted the agenda packet mentioned David Howe as the applicant applying on behalf of the owner and asked Principal Planner Flower to confirm who the owner is. Flower confirmed the owner is 508 Del Monte Avenue LLC. Smith-Crivello then inquired if David Howe is a contractor and if there were development plans for the property. Flower confirmed that no plans have been submitted, but there are preliminary plans for redevelopment. Commissioner Dawson requested to make a comment and share her screen. Dawson shared information about three properties that were recommended for Mills Act contracts and noted these properties have massive changes. The first example Dawson shared was 260 Laine Street which was recommended for approval by HPC at the July 9, 2020 meeting. Dawson noted the ARC approved substantial changes to this property including demolition of the existing garage and 30% more square footage being added. Dawson also reiterated her comments from the July 9th meeting that stated the remodel did not align with Secretary of Interior Standard #9 that states the new work shall be differentiated from the old, yet it was still recommended for a Mills Act contract. Dawson also shared 491 Webster which was reviewed and a Mills Act contract was recommended on October 8, 2020. Dawson noted the additions that were done to this property in 2017 were extensive and included a first and second story addition, a detached two-story garage, a new tile hood over the French doors, new garage doors and tile work of the Virgin Mary. Dawson noted again that while the remodel of this property was similar to the old design, the remodeled façade looks entirely different from the original, and even with all of those changes, the property was still recommended for a Mills Act contract. The last example Commissioner Dawson shared was 603/605 Hoffman. Dawson explained this property was drastically changed since the house was moved from another location. Dawson also noted that aluminum siding was added, all original windows were removed and replaced, there are no original gutters or down spouts, and the property was converted into a duplex. Dawson shared this property was approved for a Mills Act, more than a year ago, in September 2019, and all of the aluminum windows were still intact when they were supposed to be replaced with wood windows. Dawson also noted in addition, that when the Mills Act contract was recommended by HPC, it was assumed that the wood siding under the aluminum siding was intact and the aluminum siding was supposed to be removed showing the original wood siding. Dawson noted this still has not been done. Dawson asked staff look into this issue. In closing, Dawson explained that if these three homes were approved for Mills Act contracts, then the Del Monte properties should not be taken off the historic list since the changes to the Del Monte properties are not as drastic as the examples she shared. Commissioner Barlow asked if there’s an opportunity to have a portion of the property remain historic while a more modern portion of the property be demolished. Principal Planner Flower asked for clarification by inquiring what part of the property has historic value and would be worthy of retaining. Flower noted there have been many changes to the façade and that the only item that may have historical significance is the sign that says J. Taufner and explained that the applicant would be willing to incorporate that sign into another building. Barlow added that he likes the nod to the history of the building and other unique features and explained those items could be preserved. Commissioner Crivello noted some of the changes to the building occurred 70 years ago and seem to qualify as historic. Crivello mentioned the public comments received and that the commission needs to consider the feedback the are receiving from the public. Commissioner O’Neil asked if the building being considered is the small stucco building and asked for clarification if the French Laundry was included in this property since the facades are DocuSign Envelope ID: BB35E5F8-47AA-4DF4-A8DC-2E2A381F3472 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Thursday, November 12, 2020 very different. Principal Planner Flower explained the French Laundry was an addition to the stucco building that operates as a singular building on a singular lot, which is why 508 was brought forward as a single request. O’Neil followed up by asking Flower to describe how the buildings come together and if they are on the same lot. Flower clarified that the French Laundry was an addition to the stucco building and is on the same property and explained that the two buildings operate as a single building. O’Neil also asked if the metal fabrication building next door is historic. Flower mentioned it may be historic but is not sure if it has been officially designated as historic. Commissioner Dawson noted the French Laundry is connected to the stucco building because she could see laundry staff working in the building. Chair Napoli mentioned page 18 of the packet shows an image of all three buildings which could help Commissioner O’Neil’s understanding of the building layout. Commissioner O’Neil noted the buildings are on Del Monte Avenue but there is a parking lot in front of the French Laundry. Flower explained that the parking lot was constructed when the addition was added. Chair Napoli asked when the addition to 508 Del Monte was completed. Principal Planner Flower explained the addition was completed in the 1960s. Commissioner Collum expressed confusion about page 19 of the report where the Historic name was listed as the J. Taufner Building-1928, while the name is listed as Del Monte French Laundry. Chair Napoli confirmed the original building is on the left while the French Laundry was an addition. Commissioner Smith-Crivello asked if it was normal for a property owner to be listed as an LLC and asked if the owner lives in San Francisco since their address is listed there. Flower confirmed it is normal for property owners to operate through and LLC and confirmed the location of the LLC is in San Francisco. Historian Kent Seavey spoke on behalf of the applicant to answer Commissioner questions. Seavey noted the packet shows the changes to the building size and façade through the years and explained that the changes did not take the historic character of the building into consideration. Seavey asked when the changes were approved without review. Community Development Director Cole explained the Historic Preservation ordinance was established in the mid-1980s. Seavey explained that the changes were made to the building in the 1970s before this ordinance was established. Seavey noted the changes to the building are not historical and that the only historical record is that Taufner owned the building and Taufner alley behind the building. Seavey explained that based on established standards there is no historical integrity to the building. Principal Planner Flower asked Kent Seavey to stay on the line and answer any previous Commissioner questions. Commissioner Smith Crivello cited Commissioner Dawson’s earlier presentation and stated she was confused on why additions or changes made 60 years ago are not considered historic when recent changes are. Commissioner O’Neil asked if there was a period of significance for the building. Commissioner Collum cited the agenda packet and stated the period of significance is 1928-1961. DocuSign Envelope ID: BB35E5F8-47AA-4DF4-A8DC-2E2A381F3472 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Thursday, November 12, 2020 Public Comments None. Before opening public comment, Chair Napoli noted that there were many emails submitted by the public that were reviewed by the Commission.18 emails were received from the public regarding 500 Del Monte, one of which also referenced 508 Del Monte. All of the emails were in favor of preserving the historic building. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Dawson referenced her previous presentation and shared the properties that were previously approved for Mills Act Contracts so Historian Seavey could review her comments. Dawson also noted the 18 emails that were Commissioner O’Neil commented that she inquired about the period of significance since the addition of the French Laundry falls into that period of significance. O’Neil noted that the addition should be considered part of the building since it was added during the period of significance. Chair Napoli mentioned that the French Laundry stucco façade includes a 1932 relief which could indicate the business was started at that time. Napoli stated that the façade of the building is very unique and interesting. He also noted that the French Laundry has been an important part of the history of Monterey. Vice Chair Collum noted her personal attachment to the building, that the emailed public comments should be considered, and the commission should preserve history. Commissioner Smith-Crivello questioned if the historic status was being removed in preparation for the buildings to be torn down. Smith-Crivello also expressed concern about apartment complexes being built at the site and said she was concerned about removing the historic status. On a motion by Commissioner Dawson, seconded by Commissioner O’Neil, and carried by the following vote, the Historic Preservation Commission denied 508 Del Monte; HP- 20-0222 to Remove the Property from the Downtown Area Historic Context Statement and Reconnaissance Survey List based on the following findings: the façade looks original considering the stucco, the building contains integrity including the French Laundry due to its date of construction, the public input and the changes to the windows and doors can be reversed to retain the historic status. AYES: 6 MEMBERS: Napoli, Collum, Barlow, Dawson, O’Brien, O’Neil, Smith-Crivello NOES: 0 MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: O’Brien ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None PUBLIC APPEARANCE 4. Consider 500 Del Monte; HP-20-0222 to Remove the Property from the Downtown Area Historic Context Statement and Reconnaissance Survey List; Applicant David How; Owner 500 Del Monte Avenue LLC; PC-D Zoning District; Commercial General Plan Designation; Exempt from CEQA Requirements per Article 19, Section 15305, Class 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: BB35E5F8-47AA-4DF4-A8DC-2E2A381F3472 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Thursday, November 12, 2020 Action: Motion fails for lack of majority. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Principal Planner Flower presented the Agenda Report and answered Commissioner questions. Public Comments Kent Seavey spoke about the windows and the façade of the building and explained revisions have taken place that have completely altered the façade of the building. He says he stands by the staff recommendation. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Barlow agreed with Seavey’s comments and explained there are not strong character defining features with this building and it is not of the same caliber as the previous building. Barlow noted he does appreciate that the property represents a row of buildings with history in that area, but from an applicant’s standpoint the corner lot would be more valuable for owner’s in whatever use they have planned. Commissioner O’Neil agreed with Commissioner Barlow’s comments. She also noted that this property doesn’t have the same integrity of the original building and she supports it being taken off the list. Commissioner Dawson mentioned all of the public comments and that her previous comments apply to this building. Dawson stated that the façade is similar to the original structure and that the windows could be changed to look like the original building. Commissioner O’Neil responded to Commissioner Dawson comments and explained that more changes have occurred onthis building. O’Neil also explained the commission’s job is to look at the history of the building and the City Council or Planning Commission should look at public feedback and comments. O’Neil noted the building has the same footprint but looks very different than the original building. Commissioner Smith-Crivello stated that while the building does not have any character defining elements, she likes the buildings together because it establishes a community of buildings that have a timeliness about them. She noted she would like the buildings to remain on the list. Smith-Crivello also said that she would like to hear more about the owner’s plans for the property. Commissioner O’Neil noted that it’s not the Commission’s place to know what the next steps are, and they need to consider the history of the building. O’Neil reiterated that it would be up to the Planning Commission or City Council to address the public concerns. Chair Napoli agreed with Commissioner Barlow and O’Neil’s comments. Napoli stated that the project does not seem as architecturally significant as the previous building. On a motion by Commissioner Barlow, seconded by Commissioner O’Neil, and carried by the following vote, the Historic Preservation Commission did not take action on 500 Del Monte; HP-20-0222 to Remove the Property from the Downtown Area Historic Context Statement and Reconnaissance Survey List. No action was taken due to lack of majority. DocuSign Envelope ID: BB35E5F8-47AA-4DF4-A8DC-2E2A381F3472 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Thursday, November 12, 2020 AYES: 3 MEMBERS: Napoli, Barlow, O’Neil NOES: 3 MEMBERS: Collum, Dawson, Smith-Crivello ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: O’Brien ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None 5. Review of Solar Projects at Historic Sites (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Update received. Staff Presentation/Committee Member Questions Senior Associate Planner Schmidt presented the Agenda Report and answered Commissioner questions. Community Development Director Cole gave a further update and noted that the staff consulted with the City’s Legal Division on how projects like these can be reviewed and wanted to share the information with the commission since more solar projects will be proposed in the future. Chair Napoli asked if there was any option for review if a solar project was proposed for a property in pristine historical condition. Schmidt explained an applicant would have to get a building permit and if for some reason the Building Official found there is a risk to public health and safety, then there is a mechanism where the City can recommend denial of the use permit. However, Schmidt further explained that if the applicant can determine the roof is sound for solar use that it could still be approved. Commissioner Smith-Crivello encouraged the City to look very carefully at solar projects that would change the look of a historic property. Commissioner Dawson commented that, as an owner of a historic, Mills Act property, she chose to install solar panels on a separate structure instead of installing them on the tile roof. Dawson noted that she was appreciative of staff’s work but would hope there was a way to encourage owners to maintain the historic look of their property. Commissioner O’Neil asked for clarification if installing solar was acceptable as long as it does not damage the history of the roof. Schmidt explained that based off of current state law, just a building permit would be required unless the building staff finds there is no structural improvement that can be done. Public Comments Kent Seavey commented that solar technology is improving, and the size of solar units are decreasing considerably. Seavey noted the materials employed can be hidden or tucked away and that solar companies are now making solar shingles. Seavey encouraged staff to research preservation news and these shingles and find shingles that could be used on historic properties. Commissioner Comments None. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS 6. Planning Office Update DocuSign Envelope ID: BB35E5F8-47AA-4DF4-A8DC-2E2A381F3472 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Thursday, November 12, 2020  Update received. Commissioner Smith-Crivello asked if the Commission will be asked to provide information on trainings they have participated in and if any future trainings will be available. Community Development Director Cole noted that the Certified Local Government Report will be presented at the December meeting so staff will be sending an email to the Commission asking them to identify any trainings they have attended. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:43 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Kimberly Cole, AICP Chair Community Development Director Historic Preservation Commission