Planning Commission Meeting

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, June 27, 2017 4:00 PM - 5:30 PM 7:00 PM - 11:00 PM 580 PACIFIC STREET, COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Commissioners Present: Fletcher, Millich, Davis, Dawson, Reed, Widmar, Latasa Commissioners Absent: None Staff Members Present: Interim Community Development Director Cole, Principal Planner Caraker, Associate Planner Roveri, City Attorney Davi, Recording Secretary Leinen CALL TO ORDER Chair Fletcher called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m. PRESENTATIONS 1. Presentation by Mayor Clyde Roberson Honoring Commissioner Paul W. Davis for His Service to the City of Monterey (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) ACTION: Presented letter of appreciation to Commissioner Paul W. Davis. Mayor Clyde Roberson presented a letter of appreciation to Commissioner Paul W. Davis and thanked him for his service to the City of Monterey. Commissioner Davis thanked Mayor Roberson and said over the years he has been able to appreciate all the decision makers and citizens who have kept the City the same, even with all the changes that have occured. CONSENT ITEMS Vice Chair Millich made a motion to approve the Consent Items. Commissioner Reed seconded the motion. On a motion by Commissioner Millich, seconded by Commissioner Reed, and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission approved the CONSENT ITEMS: AYES: 7 COMMISSIONERS: Fletcher, Millich, Davis, Dawson, Reed, Widmar, Latasa NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Approval of Minutes 2. May 23, 2017 ACTION: Approved as submitted.  Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 Other Consent Items 3. Recommend to the City Council that the 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 Capital Improvement Program is Consistent with the General Plan (See Agenda Report for Project-Specific Environmental Review) ACTION: Adopted a resolution recommending to the City Council that the 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 Capital Improvement Program is consistent with the General Plan. ***End of Consent Agenda*** PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC HEARING 4. Consider 18 Dunecrest Avenue; Application AP-17-0321 Appealing Architectural Review Committee Approval of Architectural Review Permit ARP-17-0139 for a New Two-Story Single-Family Dwelling; Appellants Charles David Duvall, Debra Proctor, and Schwinn Family; Owners Steven and Sharon Platt; R-1-6-D1 Zoning District (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15303, Class 3) ACTION: Adopted a resolution upholding the ARC’s decision (Resolution A17-009) with the following modifications: (1) eliminate Special Condition #4 that requires removal of Cypress trees, (2) add a condition to reduce the proposed building’s height overall by two feet to an elevation of 83.5 feet, and (3) recommend that the applicant obtain a tree removal permit for the existing Cypress trees. Staff Presentation/Commissioner Questions Fernanda Roveri presented the Agenda Report and answered Commissioners’ questions. Kimberly Cole, Elizabeth Caraker and Christine Davi also answered Commissioners’ questions. Appellants Christine Kemp, attorney for appellants, said her clients are requesting that the height of the proposed building be lowered to 83.5 feet and said it is not unreasonable to modify the basement and driveway slope. Ms. Kemp displayed revised project plans showing how the building could be lowered to 83.5 feet. Ms. Kemp also said the Del Monte View Sharing Guidelines supersede Citywide Guidelines but only one member of the ARC referenced the View Sharing Guidelines when making their decision. She expressed concern with two Committee Members being new to the ARC and one Committee Member’s final vote not corresponding with statements made during deliberation. Ms. Kemp said her clients are concerned a precedent will be set if the project is approved at its proposed height. She also said she supports staff’s recommendation to deny the appeal and lower the project an additional two feet, and that she supports conditioning removal of the Cypress trees or capping the trees at 15 feet in height. In response to Commissioner Reed’s question, Ms. Kemp said she is unsure of the second floor ceiling heights of her clients’ houses, but this is not pertinent to the view loss her clients will experience if the project is approved. Dave Duvall, 19 Dunecrest Avenue, said his basic ceiling heights are eight feet. Mr. Duvall said the ARC showed a lack of concern when reviewing the project, throwing out decades of view Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 2  Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 sharing guidelines and policies with their decision, and that many members voted based on their own opinions. He also expressed concern regarding precedent setting if the house is approved at its current height and said the house at 14 Dunecrest Avenue should be the precedent for height. Mr. Duvall said it would not be unreasonable to lower the driveway, basement floor and lower the ceiling heights. He also requested that a condition be added to the project prohibiting replacement trees and limiting the remaining trees to a height of 15 feet. Debra Proctor, 17 Dunecrest Avenue, said the ceiling height of her home is eight feet. She said view sharing is a priority for the neighborhood and she gave a Powerpoint presentation outlining her concerns, including the ARC not referring to the Del Monte Beach Land Use Guidelines, comments made by the ARC members at the meeting, one ARC member voting in a manner different than her stated opinion, and with privacy issues created by the project’s proposed bathroom window. Ms. Proctor also said the proposed house will be directly in front of her house and increasing the driveway slope is reasonable and would make a huge difference in her views. Ms. Proctor said the proposed house will have substantial views from the first floor and superior views from the second floor. Vida Strong, on behalf of the Schwinn family at 140 Beach Way, said the ceiling height of their house is nine feet. Ms. Strong said the Planning Commission should limit existing views to the area directly over the structure being built, not the area to the left and right of the structure. She also said the project, as approved by the ARC, will completely block her views of the peninsula but if the project was reduced in height by two feet there would be a glimpse of the peninsula. Ms. Strong said the project needs to be consistent with the Del Monte Beach View Sharing Guidelines and approved by the Coastal Commission, and that it will be in violation with CEQA requirements if allowed to go forward as approved by ARC. She also said new story poles and a view analysis should be required and that she supports the ARC’s condition regarding removal of the Cypress trees. Ms. Strong also expressed concern about the story poles at 18 Dunecrest causing a decrease in property values. Applicant Henry Ruhnke, WRD Architects, architect for owners Steve and Sharon Platt, gave a Powerpoint presentation detailing the background of the project. Mr. Ruhnke said the project approved by the ARC does not require any variances, complies with all requirements, and has setbacks that allow for views to be captured on the sides of the house. He also said the house has been lowered as much as reasonably possible, and that the applicants were very responsive to the changes required by the ARC, including lowering the house enough as to preserve a view of the horizon. Mr. Ruhnke emphasized that reasonable view impacts are allowed by the City’s View Sharing Policy and said around 85 percent of the existing view will remain, which is very reasonable. Regarding the house at 14 Dunecrest Avenue, Mr. Ruhnke said it would not be as easy to achieve the same height as this house and that precedent setting is not guaranteed. Mr. Ruhnke said staff’s recommendation to uphold the ARC’s decision with an added condition is bizarre, and he asked the Planning Commission to uphold the ARC’s decision, without the additional condition of lowering the height two feet. In response to Vice Chair Millich’s question, Mr. Ruhnke said lowering the house two feet is impracticable because it would require a steeper driveway slope, additional retaining walls and grading costs, a flatter roof, and a subterranean lower level. In response to Commissioner Reed’s question, Mr. Ruhnke said dropping the height two additional feet would essentially create a flat roof. In response to Commissioner Widmar’s question, Mr. Ruhnke said the lot is flat, aside from a two foot slope at the driveway. In response to Commissioner Latasa’s question, Mr. Ruhnke said the property owners are agreeable to a tree removal permit if the project is approved without the height reduction, and that he was not aware of issues with the proposed bathroom window. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 3  Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 Public Comments Paul Behan, 17 Dunecrest Avenue, said lowering the house two feet is so important because it will allow for more than just a sliver of horizon and will create a continuous horizon line. Mr. Behan said the View Sharing Guidelines are not clear enough and he expressed concern about precedent setting and permanent view losses if the project is allowed to be taller than the house at 14 Dunecrest. He also expressed concern regarding the burden of proof being placed on the neighbors. Mr. Behan asked for clarification on the ARC’s authority to deal with tree impacts and removal. Eugene Hayden, Monterey resident, said that lowering the house two feet is a winning situation for all sides that is doable. He also said it is incumbent upon the Planning Commission to rule in favor of the neighbors when a prescriptive is doable. Due to time constraints Chair Fletcher continued item #4 to the evening session and adjourned the afternoon session at 6:02 p.m. RECONVENE ***Evening Session Agenda*** 7:00 – 11:00 p.m. Chair Fletcher called the evening session to order at 7:01 p.m. CONTINED PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC APPEARANCE 4 4. Consider 18 Dunecrest Avenue; Application AP-17-0321 Appealing Architectural Review Committee Approval of Architectural Review Permit ARP-17-0139 for a New Two-Story Single-Family Dwelling; Appellants Charles David Duvall, Debra Proctor, and Schwinn Family; Owners Steven and Sharon Platt; R-1-6-D1 Zoning District (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15303, Class 3) – CONTINUED FROM AFTERNOON SESSION Commissioner Comments Commissioner Reed asked Ms. Davi to address questions raised regarding CEQA and the Coastal Commission. Ms Davi said the City claimed an exemption from CEQA and that none of the categorical exceptions to the exemption would apply. Ms. Caraker added that staff believes there is adequate evidence to support the CEQA exemption. Ms. Cole confirmed that a Coastal Commission permit will be required for the project, but said it is not something for the Planning Commission to take into consideration. Commissioner Reed said view impacts and what is considered an existing view is the crux of the Planning Commission’s decision. He said he believes the view should include everything, not just the ocean, and that the current design allows for 40 percent of the view to remain due to the setbacks, along with the view above the house. Commissioner Reed said it is unreasonable to require the house be lowered, creating a flat roof and a subterranean first floor, and that the view impacts of the design approved by the ARC are reasonable. He also said he supports conditioning a tree removal application, but does not think the project should fail if the forester and ARC decide the trees should remain. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 4  Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 Commissioner Davis said the Commission usually sees impacts to small view corridors, so it is a different type of view sharing to consider since the proposed project still allows for uninterrupted views to the right and left. Commissioner Latasa said in the past the City had a view sharing ordinance that was a fair way to approach the issues, and he encouraged staff to bring forward a view sharing ordinance. He also said that he does not believe the ARC erred in their decision, but that a six inch reduction to the first floor and a reduction of the second story ceiling heights to eight feet, along with a tree permit, would be a reasonable way to follow the Del Monte Beach View Sharing Ordinance and preserve as much view as possible. Commissioner Dawson said the Planning Commission does not have the means to follow up if it required a 15 foot maximum height on the Cypress trees. He also said the owners of 18 Dunecrest Avenue will always have a 180 degree view, so it should be ensured that the neighbors’ views are taken into consideration and are reasonable. Commissioner Dawson said the Planning Commission should be visionaries and ensure a precedent is not set with the project at 18 Dunecrest, otherwise the whole view may be blocked as future houses are developed. Chair Fletcher said it is difficult to apply a set of standards that will evenly distribute the burden among all those involved and that if something reasonably possible can be done to share the views it should be done. He also acknowledged that this will take a little more work for the architect and applicants, but that it is possible to lower the project to 83.5 feet. Commissioner Widmar said there is an opportunity to deal with height now and that it is incumbent on the Planning Commission to make the right decision to ensure there is already a guideline when other single family homes are constructed. Commissioner Widmar said he is agreeable to removing the Cypress trees to open up side views and that making the proposed house wider to accommodate a reduction in height would be acceptable. He also said he supports a total height of 83.5 and that the project architect is very skilled and able to make these changes. Vice Chair Millich said he sees the existing view as the ocean view and that a two foot reduction in height to the proposed project can and should happen, especially in light of neighbors’ testimony. He also said there is enough room for all parties involved to preserve a piece of the view, their property values and quality of life. Vice Chair Millich said the project should be approved as it was by the ARC, including the removal of the cypress trees, and with the added condition of the height being lowered by two feet. In response to Vice Chair Millich’s question, Ms. Davi said there is an entirely separate tree preservation ordinance that is separate from what is being considered this evening, therefore the Planning Commission could recommendation a tree removal permit to be obtained but not require the tree removal as a condition of approval. At the request of Ms. Roveri, the Planning Commission addressed the concern of the appellant at 17 Dunecrest Avenue regarding privacy impacts of the proposed bathroom window. Commissioner Latasa moved to deny the appeal and adopt a resolution upholding the ARC’s decision with the following modifications: (1) eliminate Special Condition #4 that requires removal of Cypress trees, (2) add a condition to reduce the proposed building’s height overall by two feet to an elevation of 83.5 feet, (3) recommend that the applicant obtain a tree removal permit for the existing Cypress trees and (4) work with staff to change the second story bathroom window to opaque or frosted glass. Vice Chair Millich seconded the motion. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 5  Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 Commissioner Reed said recommending removal of the Cypress trees in the motion is unenforceable so he would not support the motion for this reason. He also said a one foot reduction could be appropriate, but a two foot reduction is too large. Commissioner Davis said the applicant may want the bathroom window a certain way and he does not see why modifications to the window should be included in the motion since the window was not discussed at ARC. Commissioner Latasa amended his motion to deny the appeal and adopt a resolution upholding the ARC’s decision (Resolution A17-009) with the following modifications: (1) eliminate Special Condition #4 that requires removal of Cypress trees, (2) add a condition to reduce the proposed building’s height overall by two feet to an elevation of 83.5 feet, and (3) recommend that the applicant obtain a tree removal permit for the existing Cypress trees. Vice Chair Millich agreed to the amendment and seconded the motion. On a motion by Commissioner Latasa, seconded by Commissioner Millich, and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission adopt a resolution upholding the ARC’s decision (Resolution A17-009) with the following modifications: (1) eliminate Special Condition #4 that requires removal of Cypress trees, (2) add a condition to reduce the proposed building’s height overall by two feet to an elevation of 83.5 feet, and (3) recommend that the applicant obtain a tree removal permit for the existing Cypress trees: AYES: 6 COMMISSIONERS: Fletcher, Millich, Davis, Dawson, Widmar, Latasa NOES: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Reed ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 5. Receive Report on 590 Perry Lane; Concept Review Application CR-17-0275 for Change of Use from Nursery to Multi-Family Residential and for Constructing Five Residential Apartment Buildings (Total of 28 Apartment Units Proposed); Applicant Simon Phillips; Owner Ray Sumida; C-2 Zoning District (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) ACTION: Received report and held discussion. Staff Presentation/Commissioner Questions Ms. Roveri presented the Agenda Report and answered Commissioners’ questions. Ms. Cole and Ms. Caraker also answered Commissioners’ questions. Applicant Simon Philllips, applicant, said the nursery has been in operation for many year and the owners are now looking to retire and transform the property. He said the owners are not looking to maximize the lot but instead are proposing 16 units per acre and would like the project to be in harmony with the neighborhood, drawing from the agricultural look of the buildings currently on site. Regarding water for the project, Mr. Phillips said there is a possibility of drilling a well, but four wells would be required in total for the project. He also said a storage tank onsite is an option, however more engineering needs to be done. Mr. Phillips said that a neighborhood meeting was held and the biggest concern was parking. He also said there is a lot of on-street parking on Perry Lane, the nursery has always accommodated customer and staff parking onsite, and that the proposed project would satisfy all parking requirements on-site. In response to Commissioner Latasa’s question, Mr. Phillips said a well is needed even though Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 there is six acre feet of water available on site due to the size of the current water meter and the inability to obtain an additional meter from CalAm. He also said another option would be to have the current meter continuously running to fill a tank which would offset demands. Public Comments Rick Hoyer said he owns the property directly across from the nursery and is representing all the neighbors in the audience with concerns. Mr. Hoyer asked the Planning Commission to take a hard look at the project when it comes before them because there are traffic, water and parking issues that need to be addressed. He said a large amount of analysis is needed to determine where water for the project will come from, that the area already lacks parking and is used for all employee parking in the area, and that Perry Lane is a major cut through route that would be subject to additional traffic impacts. Mr. Hoyer questioned the requirements of having an apartment complex in an R1 area and said the project should have an Environmental Impact Report, not just an Initial Study. Douglas Tsuchiya said he is an owner of the Boronda Apartments located close to the nursery and that he has concerns regarding the setbacks, safety, building height exceeding 25 feet and traffic constraints. Mr. Tsuchiya said Boronda Lane is the only way to access the proposed apartment complex, along with two others, and he questioned how construction would affect this access. He also expressed concern with the narrowness of Major Sherman Lane. Mr. Tsuchiya asked how fire trucks would access the proposed building and said that although there are only 56 bedrooms proposed, there may be more than 56 tenants. David Foord, neighbor on Mesa Road, said many neighbors only learned about the project in the last week and there will be many more neighbors coming out with concerns and a tremendous amount of opposition. Mr. Ford said the main issue is excess density in the area. He asked that preparation of an Environmental Impact Report be taken into consideration. Michael Lury said he lives across the street from the project’s proposed trash enclosure. He expressed concerns regarding garbage truck maneuverability, parking and density of the area. Mr. Leary said the proposed project, even if made smaller, does not fit the neighborhood and is incredible in size and scope. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Dawson said it would be helpful to see a cross section showing the grade difference between the apartment and Mesa Road. He also said the project appears to change the zoning of the site from C2 to R3 and this will be a big surprise to those neighbors who purchased properties with the expectation of the area remaining C2 zoned. Commissioner Dawson said there is quite a difference in use from a green, quiet nursery to an apartment complex with the possibility of 100 tenants. In response to Commissioner Reed’s questions, Ms. Cole confirmed that multi-family buildings are allowed in the C2 area with a use permit and Ms. Roveri confirmed that there would be no entrance to the apartments allowed on Mesa Road. Commissioner Reed said the project raises concerns regarding traffic impacts, parking and noise from the neighboring El Estero Carwash. He also said it would need to be ensured that businesses are able to maintain their parking on Perry Lane. Commissioner Reed said the site is a fantastic park like area and he would hate to see anything happen to the mature trees on site. Commissioner Latasa said the proposed project is nowhere near the allowed density for the site, however, the design seems dense. He also said it seems like there is an excess of apartment units on the property and that this will have parking impacts. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7  Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 Commissioner Widmar said the concept review is just the beginning of the process and he appreciates that the property owners are going through a change in their lives and are looking to protect their legacy and their family. He also said the property owners are well within their right to pursue this type of project. Commissioner Widmar said apartments are very much needed, however he is uncertain if the project is doable, and that there are many existing issues in the area that have nothing to do with the project. Commissioner Widmar encouraged the family to look into uses to determine what would be great for the site. He also said he appreciates the discussion between the neighbors and he wished the applicants good luck. COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS Chair Fletcher said this was his last meeting as chair and he has enjoyed his opportunity serving as chair. Commissioner Widmar said Chair Fletcher has been one of the best chairs the Planning Commission has had by running the meetings well and making the public feel respected and appreciated. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS 6. Planning Office Update  Update received.  Ms. Caraker said there are currently no items scheduled for the July 11, 2017 meeting and it will be canceled. She also said there will be a joint training with the ARC and Historic Preservation Commission on August 22, 2017 at 4:00 p.m.. Commissioners Latasa and Reed noted that they will be unable to attend the training.  Commissioner Widmar said he has applied for, and will likely be appointed to, the Library Board, making this evening’s meeting his last meeting. He said the City of Monterey has always had such great staff people and that it’s been fabulous working with the staff and commissioners over the years. Commissioner Widmar offered thanks for the opportunity to participate and make a difference in Monterey. Vice Chair Millich thanked Commissioner Widmar for his service. Ms. Cole also thanked Commissioner Widmar for his service and said they spent hours and hours together writing and reviewing plans.  Ms. Cole said Rick Marvin is retiring after 32 and a half years and that Mr. Marvin has made many contributions to the community including the Van Buren Senior Housing project, the Monterey Hotel project, and affordable housing. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:32 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Elizabeth Caraker, AICP Chair Principal Planner Planning Commission Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, June 27, 2017 8