Planning Commission Meeting

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, November 22, 2011 Afternoon Session Only 4:00 pm - 6:30 pm FEW MEMORIAL HALLS OF RECORDS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Commissioners Present: Davis, Garden, McCrone, Stites, Stocker, Widmar Commissioners Absent: Osorio Staff Members Present: Chief of Planning, Engineering, and Environmental Compliance Rerig, Principal Planner Cole, Senior Planner Ebbs, Recording Secretary Hanes CALL TO ORDER Chair Davis called the meeting to order at 4:01 pm. CONSENT ITEMS On a motion by Commissioner Stocker, seconded by Commissioner Widmar, and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission approved the CONSENT ITEMS: AYES: 6 COMMISSIONERS: Davis, Garden, McCrone, Stites, Stocker, Widmar NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Osorio ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 1. Year End Report. Recommend that the City Council Receive the Planning Commission’s Year End Report for 2011 ACTION: Forwarded the Planning Commission 2011 Year End Report to the City Council. 2. Revisions to Monterey Municipal Code Chapter 31, Signs, and Citywide Sign Guidelines. Advisory Review of Comprehensive Revisions to Sign Ordinance and Citywide Sign Guidelines. ACTION: Recommended that the City Council approve the Sign Ordinance. Approval of Minutes 3. November 8, 2011 ACTION: Approved as amended.  Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, November 22, 2011 Commissioner McCrone requested clarification to his comment on the Revision to the Sign Ordinance. ***End of Consent Agenda*** PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC HEARING 4. 1001 Hellam Street; Appeal 11-250 of Architectural Review Application 11-062; Appellants/Owners Ray and Liz LaBonte; R-1-6 Zoning District; Exempt from CEQA Requirements. (Continued from October 25, 2011) Consider an appeal of the Architectural Review Committee denial of Preliminary and Final Architectural Review for the construction of an addition and exterior alterations to an existing single family dwelling. ACTION: Denied the appeal and upheld the decision of the Architectural Review Committee to deny the project. Staff Presentation/Commissioners Questions: Forrest Ebbs presented the staff report and answered Commissioners’ questions. Appellant: Ray LaBonte and his wife Liz were present. Mr. LaBonte made reference to a letter he submitted at the meeting and read key points from the letter pertaining to the study/loft over the garage that he said was a suggestion from City staff, and the lack of proper noticing by the City. Public Comments: Christine Kemp, Attorney representing the Mercurio Family, referenced a letter she submitted and pointed out some key points from the letter. She said the Mercurio Family contacted the City in February 2011, when the story poles went up with their concerns. She said a conversation took place between the Mercurio and the LaBonte Families and Mr. LaBonte indicated that he was building a lower project than the story poles showed, but the project was not re-staked to indicate the lowered height and the actual project that was built ended up higher than the stakes indicated. The building appears 8'6" taller than the original structure. She also indicated that the Mercurios did not receive any notices informing them of the intended remodel, and recommended the Commission uphold the Architectural Review Committee findings and deny the project. Ms. Kemp showed the Commission pictures of the structure and the view impact it has on first floor of the Mercurios home. Steve Mickel, general contractor, submitted plans suggesting a possible remodel of the LaBonte's house to fix the view impacts to the Mercurio's property. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, November 22, 2011 2 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, November 22, 2011 Angeli Mercurio and her husband Sam were present. Mrs. Mercurio clarified that she contacted the Planning office with concerns about the project prior to construction and informed the Commission that she never received a notice of the intentions of the project. She said the addition has completely blocked her view from the first floor which is where the majority of their living is done and requested the Commission consider denying the project. Sam Mercurio said his wife contacted the Planning Office on February 14, 2011 with her concerns about the project. On February 21, 2011, a conversation occurred between him, the LaBontes and John Pisto, a family member, where the Mercurios were informed that the remodel would not consist of an increase in the building height. He also said that he had a conversation with Mr. Ebbs regarding his concerns about the project and was informed that they would receive notification of any plans to the project. John Pisto said he was present for a conversation about the project that involved no conversation about an increase in the height of the roof pitch that took place on February 21, 2011. Vince Dorio, general contractor, asked why the story pole netting was put up when there was no direction given to do so, and said a letter was sent to the City Council and Mayor because after no action was being taken to address the concerns. David Crab, realtor with Sotheby's Realty, said the remodel has the potential to reduce the value of the Mercurio's property. Mr. LaBonte spoke again clarifying that there is no plumbing in the loft area and said the reason for the change of the pitch of the roof on the garage was because it was collecting water and needed to be remodeled after it caved in from water damage. He also said he never indicated that he would not do anything to the roof. Commissioner Comments: Commissioner Stocker said the ARC did not err in their decision and apologized for the unfortunate process that took place and motioned to deny the appeal and uphold the ARC decision to deny the project. Commissioner Widmar seconded the motion. Commissioner McCrone concurred that the ARC did not err and said there could have been alternative locations for the loft and the Planning Commission cannot consider the legal ramifications of the project. Chair Davis also concurred and said there could have been better leadership on this project. On a motion by Commissioner Stocker, seconded by Commissioner Widmar, and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission denied the appeal and upheld the decision of the Architectural Review Committee to deny the project: AYES: 6 COMMISSIONERS: Davis, Garden, McCrone, Stites, Stocker, Widmar NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Osorio ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, November 22, 2011 3  Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, November 22, 2011 COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS 5. Response to Commissioners’ Comments at the November 8, 2011, Meeting. Report received. New Comments:  Commissioner McCrone requested an update on the Wharf Master Plan and Resolution 9000.  Chair Davis informed the Commission that he will not be at the next two Planning Commission Meetings. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS 6. Planning Office Update Report received and reviewed.  Commissioner Garden clarified his comment regarding the Planning Office going paperless stating that he did not intend to say that the Planning Office go completely paperless, rather the packets only should become paperless.  Ms. Cole asked for clarification as to the direction the Commission would like to go regarding packets. She also concurred that an update on the Specific Plans is appropriate and informed the Commission of an upcoming Council meeting on January 25, 2012 where the Specific Plans will be presented and suggested it be a joint meeting with the Planning Commission and City Council. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:43 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Kimberly Cole, AICP Chair Managing Principal Planner Planning Commission Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, November 22, 2011 4