Planning Commission Meeting

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4FB5352A-61B3-4EBA-A613-4899805253B3 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2020 4:00 PM AFTERNOON SESSION ONLY TELECONFERENCE 580 PACIFIC STREET, COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Commissioners Present: Brassfield, Freeman, Dawson, Fletcher, Latasa (Arrived at 4:03 p.m.), Millich, Reed Commissioners Absent: None Staff Members Present: Community Development Director Cole, Principal Planner Flower, Senior Associate Planner Schmidt, Recording Secretary Cleary, Recording Secretary Ziel CALL TO ORDER Chair Brassfield called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. CONSENT ITEMS Approval of Minutes 2. May 26, 2020 ACTION: Approved as submitted. On a motion by Commissioner Dawson, seconded by Commissioner Reed, and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission approved the minutes as submitted: AYES: 6 COMMISSIONERS: Brassfield, Freeman, Dawson, Fletcher, Millich, Reed NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Latasa ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Commissioner Latasa arrived at 4:03 p.m. ***End of Consent Agenda*** Community Development Director Cole provided details on how to phone into the meeting to participate and provide public comment. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC HEARING DocuSign Envelope ID: 4FB5352A-61B3-4EBA-A613-4899805253B3 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 3. Recommend Zoning Code Amendments to the City Council to Allow Medical Offices with Extended Care in the Industrial, Administration and Research District Subject to Review and Regulation; Recommend Approval of Use Permit UP 20-169, a New Medical Office Building with Extended Care for Adolescent Behavioral Health, 6 Lower Ragsdale Drive, to be Effective Concurrently with the Zoning Code Amendments, to Allow Extended Care and Development on 25% Slope; and Approve Variance for Building Height (VAR 20-0168) (35’ Allowed; 50’ Proposed); Applicant William Camille for Montage Health; Owner Montage Health; Industrial General Plan Land Use Designation; Industrial, Administration, and Research District, Design and Development Control Overlay and Emergency Shelter Overlay (I-R-150-D2-ES) Zoning District; CEQA Addendum Proposed ACTION: Approved. Staff Presentation/Commissioner Questions Community Development Director Cole presented the Agenda Report and answered Commissioner questions. Commissioner Fletcher asked how height is calculated. Ms. Cole explained height is relative to existing or proposed grade, whichever is more restricted, and specified it is not an average. Commissioner Fletcher inquired about the project’s progression since its last PC meeting. Ms. Cole provided an update. Commissioner Dawson asked how the addendum came to be done and if there was a complaint. Ms. Cole specified a CEQA document is required with buildings this size and zoning amendment proposals. Vice Chair Freeman asked clarifying questions about the public hearing process and Ms. Cole answered. Commissioner Latasa asked where the 90-day maximum stay came from. Ms. Cole stated that was designed by herself and the development team, clarifying that patients likely will not stay for the full 90 days. Commissioner Latasa asked if emergency rooms are excluded and how future applicants would know it’s been excluded from permitted use. Ms. Cole reported that if the facility were a hospital it would have had to follow State guidelines, and also stated the patients that need emergency or acute services will be admitted to CHOMP and not this facility. Commissioner Latasa asked if a use permit is required for extended care. Ms. Cole confirmed Use Permits are required for extended care, as it is a conditionally permitted use. Commissioner Latasa stated Council would be approving the change in code and approving the Use Permit simultaneously. Ms. Cole clarified the Use Permit would not become effective until the amended code becomes law, 30 days after the second reading. Commissioner Latasa asked about the process of Architectural Review Committee (ARC) review. The Community Development Director clarified the ARC’s purview includes exterior, modulation, building materials, and more. Commissioner Latasa referenced Condition Two, Oak Monitoring, and how it would be monitored. Ms. Cole stated the applicant will send monitoring reports to the Planning Office. Commissioner Latasa asked about the documents Council will be approving and their conditions, asking if they are binding documents. Ms. Cole clarified there will be multiple resolutions to allow each decision to be independent. Commissioner Millich asked how long the abeyance would be between patient return visits and whether the 90-day maximum stay is per visit or per year. Ms. Cole stated there is no maximum Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 2 DocuSign Envelope ID: 4FB5352A-61B3-4EBA-A613-4899805253B3 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 stay on the yearly basis and suggested instances where patients might return to the facility, stating typical inpatient services are projected to transpire between 30 and 60 days. Chair Brassfield asked if any other extended care facilities exist in the area. Ms. Cole stated a medical office building for youth does not exist in the area, and suggested the applicant envisions this will be a model project. Applicant Tim Nylen, on behalf of Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula (CHOMP), responded to previous Commissioner questions by stating the typical inpatient stay would last 30 to 60 days. Mr. Nylen stated CHOMP is aware of two similar facilities in the state and suggested this program would be of state and national interest, prompting CHOMP to break ground prior to the 2020 year-end. Chair Brassfield asked what types of issues CHOMP anticipates addressing and if that includes issues with addiction. Mr. Nylen answered at this point CHOMP is not anticipating seeing children with addiction issues. Chair Brassfield asked if 90-days total stay is too much, and if something shorter would be more appropriate, sharing concern for return patients cycling into the facility. Mr. Nylen responded that with intensive 30- to 60-day treatment, CHOMP hopes patients will be able to return to their natural environment with their families. Commissioner Millich asked if there is a problem with hosting a 90-day maximum in a 365-day period. Mr. Nylen stated patients may re-enter after time off and suggested CHOMP would like some flexibility in treating their patients. The representative also stated CHOMP will work within whatever guidelines the PC suggests. Commissioner Millich cited concern for the possibility of this becoming a long-term facility. Public Comments None. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Dawson stated the length-of-stay decision should be left to the doctors, as they specialize in patient care. Commissioner Reed agreed, suggesting a 90-day limit is good for one treatment but the Commissioners are not medical professionals and cannot determine patient treatments. The Commissioner suggested granting some flexibility in the facility’s treatment practices. Vice Chair Freeman agreed, listing land use responsibilities of the Commission and stating the Commissioners are not responsible for treatment of patients. Commissioner Latasa asked Commissioner Reed and Vice Chair Freeman if they suggest eliminating the 90-day period altogether. Commissioner Reed specified he felt the 90-day limit should remain but suggested allowing for leeway without putting a hard limit to treatment or inhibiting CHOMP’s ability to treat minors. Commissioner Latasa spoke in support of the project and design and stated 90-days seems appropriate. Commissioner Fletcher spoke in support of the project and stated flexibility in length of treatment is necessary. Chair Brassfield shared concerns for this becoming a long-term care facility and stated the need for this use in this area, especially considering the lack of similar facilities. The Chair spoke in support of being deliberate in the amount of time allowed at the treatment facility. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: 4FB5352A-61B3-4EBA-A613-4899805253B3 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 On a motion by Commissioner Reed, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council: 1. To adopt the CEQA addendum as presented by Staff 2. To approve Use Permit (UP-20-0169) to allow extended care for adolescent behavioral health and development on 25% slope and Variance (VAR-20-0168) for building height (35’ allowed and 50’ proposed) AYES: 7 COMMISSIONERS: Brassfield, Freeman, Dawson, Fletcher, Latasa, Millich, Reed NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Commissioner Comments Commissioner Millich spoke in support of the project but suggested there is not enough regulation and specificity in the proposed ordinance language. Commissioner Latasa spoke in support of the proposed project and suggested the amendment does include specific language. Ms. Cole restated the proposed change of definition for short-term care in the Zoning Code and clarified the length of time will be determined by the PC. Commissioner Millich cited concern for abuse of the stay duration and conflicting verbiage in the resolution. Chair Brassfield also stated concern for turning this into a long-term care facility. Commissioner Dawson stated the verbiage seemed clear. Commissioner Millich suggested a firm time limit should be in place to reduce ambiguity. Commissioner Reed clarified if the patient is discharged the next stay would qualify as a new stay, and also cited the need to avoid blocking doctor treatment, suggesting doctors would know best and the Commission is not qualified to limit what a doctor can do. Commissioner Latasa stated he found the 90-day term specific enough. The Commissioner pointed out a typo in the Ordinance, specifying the word deamination was in place of the word determination. On a motion by Commissioner Reed, seconded by Commissioner Dawson, and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council: 3. To approve Zoning Code amendments to allow medical offices with extended care in the industrial, administration, and research districts subject to review and regulation AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Freeman, Dawson, Fletcher, Latasa, Reed NOES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Brassfield, Millich ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 4. Deny Appeal of 415 Spencer Street; Application AP-20-0154 Appealing Architectural Review Committee Approval (Resolution A20-009) of Architectural Review Permit ARP- 20-0072 for 1st and 2nd Story Additions and 2nd Story Deck; Appellant Gwyn De Amaral and John J. Willsen; Applicant Luis Vargas; Owner Robert Gularte; R-3-5 Zoning District; Medium Density Residential General Plan Designation; Exempt from CEQA Per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 ACTION: Appeal Denied; ARC Approval Upheld. Staff Presentation/Commissioner Questions Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 4 DocuSign Envelope ID: 4FB5352A-61B3-4EBA-A613-4899805253B3 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 Community Development Director Cole recused from this topic due to residential proximity to the project location. Senior Associate Planner Schmidt presented the Agenda Report and answered Commissioner questions. Applicant Property Owner Robert Gularte presented the project, emphasizing challenges along the process and ways in which the new design conforms to PC and ARC direction in development. Appellant Appellant Gwyn De Amaral, owner of 416 Archer Street, expressed concerns for privacy, shared views, and massing of the house. Mr. De Amaral suggested that preserving the view of one neighbor while subtracting from those of others does not instill balance and suggested the new development would look into the bedroom, bathroom, and kitchen of 416 Archer. The Appellant also shared concern regarding a future garage addition and requested it be disallowed to preserve views. Appellant John Willsen, owner of 416 Archer Street, stressed the need to prioritize existing views over providing new views to one neighbor, and suggested the applicant has an existing view while the new project would reduce the views of four neighbors. Mr. Willsen suggested the back of 415 Spencer is the same elevation and height as a single-story neighbor, causing the second story addition to seem massive. The Appellant suggested the applicant go downwards, excavating to reduce view impacts. Public Comments Glen Mathys, owner of 442 Archer, stated the retaining wall needs drainage and his view has been precious over the past 14 years at the property. Mr. Mathys stated that if the first floor at 415 Archer was the same floor, he’d have two more feet of view. Dillan Knapic, owner of 404 Archer, asked if a plan exists to add a garage at 415 Spencer, suggesting significant grading would have to happen for a garage addition. Citing this issue and the building’s 80-year-old foundation, Mr. Knapic suggested there is no cost saving in adding the addition and urged the Commission to investigate further. Tim Huntington, owner of 367 Archer, stated the original appeal was upheld because of view impact. Referencing Appellant Photo 9, the caller suggested current impacts are higher than initial impacts and said the change in view is negligible considering Embassy Suites is in view but the Bay is not. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Reed suggested the massing of the proposal is in-scale to the neighborhood, and regarding view sharing, stated the view is the totality of everything in sight and not simply one aspect of the view. The Commissioner spoke in support of denying the appeal, noting the applicant had done everything asked of him and suggesting the addition would add to the view rather than blocking it. Vice Chair Freeman agreed that the applicant did everything asked and stated the current issue is whether the ARC erred in their decision. The Vice Chair stated this property is at the end of a long line of two- and three-story apartment buildings and the massing is not out of proportion to the neighboring buildings. Further, Vice Chair Freeman stated the applicant is building a single Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: 4FB5352A-61B3-4EBA-A613-4899805253B3 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 2-story home rather than a large apartment building. The Vice Chair spoke in support of denying the appeal, stating the ARC did not fail its review of this project. Commissioner Latasa sympathized with the appellants and stated that on hills, views from uphill properties are always a concern. The Commissioner spoke in support of denying the appeal and agreed that ARC did not fail in their review. Commissioner Dawson spoke in support of denying the appeal, acknowledging the owner followed through on previous PC and ARC requests. Commissioner Fletcher suggested good faith efforts have been made to minimize impacts based on PC and ARC recommendations. The Commissioner requested neighbors quantify what would make them happy to assist the PC with finding balance in future decisions. Commissioner Millich stated easements for light and view do not exist, and what does exist is the right given by the City Code to try and balance views and properties. The Commissioner suggested at least one side will not be satisfied either way, and spoke in support of denying the appeal. Chair Brassfield agreed that views will always be an issue, stated suggestions made by the PC have been followed, and claimed the ARC did not err. On a motion by Vice Chair Freeman, seconded by Commissioner Dawson, and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission denied the appeal of 415 Spencer Street, permit AP- 20-0154, appealing the ARC approval of architectural review permit ARP-20-0072: AYES: 7 COMMISSIONERS: Brassfield, Freeman, Dawson, Fletcher, Latasa, Millich, Reed NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 4. Consider Stipends for Planning Commission Service ACTION: Item heard. Commissioner Presentation Chair Brassfield suggested to the Commissioners to waive their stipends in this time of crisis, to support the City. Vice Chair Freeman agreed. Commissioners Millich and Reed suggested that decision be left to the Commissioners individually. COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS Commissioner Reed shared that he was pleased to see businesses and restaurants changing and adapting, and shared appreciation for the City allowing businesses to operate outdoors. The Commissioner spoke in support of closing downtown streets to allow more businesses to operate outdoors more often. Further, the Commissioner stated his neighborhood, Fishermen’s Flats, has schools which MPUSD decided to fortify and is not allowing anybody onto the campus. Commissioner Reed’s concern was that Neighborhood Improvement Projects (NIP) Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 6 DocuSign Envelope ID: 4FB5352A-61B3-4EBA-A613-4899805253B3 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 paid for some of the school upgrades with the understanding that area would be open to the public. Commissioner Millich asked what happened to the suggestion of closing off Alvarado Street for outdoor dining at least part time. Vice Chair Freeman stated Rick Johnson, Executive Director of the Old and New Monterey Business Associations, had mentioned businesses feel temporary encroachment is great but long-term encroachment would not be because owners feel limited parking would reduce business and clientele access. Commissioner Latasa shared that the City Manager has permitted outdoor dining. Community Development Director Cole clarified that the City Manager waived architectural review, allowed businesses to put chairs and tables outside, and waived the cost of the encroachment permit. Ms. Cole stated this plan is meant to immediately deal with restaurant closures, and specified Alvarado Street now has bollards on the side of the sidewalk so the City can easily block traffic if desired. Ms. Cole stated Business Associations had not voted to close streets out of concern for limiting traffic to their businesses. Commissioner Latasa stated his experience in the present meeting had been ok, but shared concern for audio being difficult to understand and requested Staff improve this issue. Chair Brassfield asked about field trips and stated a need to consider methods of reinstating field trips. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS  Update received. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Kimberly Cole Chair Community Development Director Planning Commission Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, July 14, 2020 7