Planning Commission Meeting

DocuSign Envelope ID: B183A079-4895-42A1-A7C3-5F9C46E1E612 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION January 26, 2021 4:00 PM – 5:30 PM TELECONFERENCE 580 PACIFIC STREET, COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Commissioners Present: Brassfield, Freeman, Dawson, Fletcher, Latasa, Millich, Reed Commissioners Absent: None Staff Members Present: Community Development Director Cole, Associate Planner Sabdo, Recording Secretary Ziel CALL TO ORDER Chair Brassfield called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. CONSENT ITEMS Approval of Minutes 2. January 12, 2021 ACTION: Approved as amended. Vice Chair Freeman noted there are two “the(s)” on page 5 of the minutes in the second to last paragraph. Vice Chair Freeman asked for the duplicate the to be removed. On a motion by Commissioner Reed, seconded by Commissioner Freeman, and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission approved the January 12, 2021 Minutes as amended: AYES: 6 COMMISSIONERS: Brassfield, Freeman, Fletcher, Latasa, Millich, Reed NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Dawson RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ***End of Consent Agenda*** Recording Secretary Ziel provided details on how to participate and provide public comment during the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS Marta Kraftzeck expressed concerns about a large parking improvement project at Monterey High School that is proposed by MPUSD. Kraftzeck expressed specific concerns about how the project would affect the historic Carmel stonework at the high school. Kraftzeck shared images of damaged areas of the stonework at Monterey High School and stated that according to the draft EIR, the high school is subject to the zoning ordinances of the City of Monterey. Kraftzeck also noted that a historian had deemed the stone bleachers as historic and recommend MPUSD hire a historic architect to develop a plan to restore the historic attributes of their stadium. Kraftzeck shared other images showing damage to the historic DocuSign Envelope ID: B183A079-4895-42A1-A7C3-5F9C46E1E612 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 stonework caused by construction. Lastly, Kraftzeck urged the City to provide guidance and oversight on this project to MPUSD in order to preserve historic resources. PUBLIC HEARING 3. Consider Appeal of 500 Del Monte; AP-20-0262 Appealing the Historic Preservation Commissions No Action Vote (Resolution H20-015) of HP 20-0245 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 ACTION: Appeal approved. Staff Presentation/Commissioner Questions Associate Planner Sabdo presented the Agenda Report and answered Commissioner questions. Chair Brassfield inquired how the changes to window patterns and second story would apply to approval of historic applications. Sabdo explained these changes were noted as part of the significant changes in the 1979 remodeling and noted the historians could provide further information and feedback on this. Commissioner Dawson asked about the lack of majority for the Historic Preservation Commission vote and if that meant it was a tie vote. Community Development Director Cole confirmed this was accurate and explained the motion failed to pass due to lack of majority. Vice Chair Freeman inquired about the reason for wanting the building removed from the Historic list. Community Development Director Cole explained the property owner is looking at their options and what the future could involve for the buildings. Cole noted a key decision on how to move forward with the property would be whether or not these properties are historic resources. Cole also noted the reconnaissance level surveys were intended to provide base information and that typically an intensive survey would follow which would provide a conclusion about the historic significance of a property. Commissioner Reed asked if it would be subjective to retain or not retain the historical integrity of the property. Reed mentioned he drove by the properties and the property looks the same as it did when it was built other than the windows on the north side. Reed asked if every aspect of the building was the same as when it was built, would the building still be considered historical? Cole explained the ordinance requires a qualified professional to evaluate whether a building qualifies as a historic resource. Cole stated these professionals look at the California and National Register Criteria along with the seven aspects of integrity and make a judgement based on these items. Cole further explained the differences between a reconnaissance survey and intensive survey. Commissioner Millich questioned if the major difference between the current building and the 1978 survey was the windows. Cole explained Associate Planner Sabdo noted the changes to the building over the years and that the survey is a more complete analysis of the structure. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 2 DocuSign Envelope ID: B183A079-4895-42A1-A7C3-5F9C46E1E612 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 Commissioner Latasa inquired about the side of the building facing the corner a Del Monte and Figueroa. Latasa asked about the Secretary Standards related to the side elevation facing the street. Sabdo deferred the question to Anthony Kirk. Chair Brassfield asked if this building would be impacted by sea level rise. Cole explained the building is in an area possible affected by future sea level rise. Applicant Comments Appellant David Howe, historian Kent Seavey and Dr. Anthony Kirk spoke in favor of the appeal. Historian Kent Seavey spoke about the historical integrity of the building. Seavey explained fenestration (the rhythm voids and solids) has been completely changed and noted the windows on the Figueroa side of the building are not original. Seavey stated that the building has lost its physical integrity and its ability to express itself in its original function. Seavey further noted that CEQA requires a property to meet two criteria to be considered historic. The property must have physical integrity and must have significance. Seavey explained in this instance the property has lost both criteria. Dr. Anthony Kirk noted that he agreed with Kent Seavey’s report but explained he felt the property was Spanish Colonial revival as opposed to Spanish Eclectic. Commissioner Reed asked if the property would still be considered a historic resource if no exterior changes has been made and if the changes that were made make it not qualified to be a historic resource. Dr. Kirk commented that this is an unanswerable question because in order to establish historical significance in a potential district, all buildings in the district would have to be looked at and examined. However, Kirk noted he agreed with Seavey’s findings for these two buildings. Commissioner Latasa noted the applicant provided the intensive survey and got a second historian to write a report. Latasa inquired if that was required or if that was something the applicant did to help with the report. Community Development Director Cole confirmed that was correct and the applicant did this to help with the report. Chair Brassfield mentioned the original historic survey that was done and noted that we are now asking to remove that category for the property. Brassfield asked if this adds strength to one survey being better than the other survey. Brassfield also asked if it was the property owner that asked for the initial historic survey. Community Development Director Cole commented on the initial reconnaissance historic survey and explained that the City of Monterey received a grant from the Office of Historic Preservation to prepare a reconnaissance survey of the entire downtown area. Cole also noted that in that survey this building was not formally identified as a historic resource but as a building that required future research through an intensive survey. Cole confirmed the survey was not requested by the property owner. Public Comments Vice Chair Collum and Commissioner Smith-Crivello from the Historic Preservation Commission shared their public comments. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: B183A079-4895-42A1-A7C3-5F9C46E1E612 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 Commissioner Smith-Crivello explained the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) had a split vote on this property and received 18 public comments on these properties. Smith- Crivello noted the change to the windows was a topic of discussion, but the HPC did not feel this was a significant change or an irrevocable change. Smith-Crivello explained the HPC had also seen buildings change use and still remain historic so the change in use was not a concern. Lastly, Smith-Crivello shared the HPC had concerns about the future use of the building if the historic designation was removed. Vice Chair Collum supported Smith-Crivello’s comments. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Reed spoke about the historical significance of the City of Monterey and stated that any building over 100 years old should be carefully considered before it is deemed as not historic. Reed also noted that the default should be to prove that a building is not historic and explained this building is more challenging than the other property since this building does look different. Lastly, Reed explained the letters and comments spoke to the business inside the building rather than the historical integrity of the building and that the Planning Commission is looking at the integrity of the building. Commissioner Dawson commented that he owns and values a historic home. Dawson stated that he is in support of preserving the history of Monterey and feels very strongly that these buildings are historic. Dr. Kirk commented that if a building loses its integrity it is no longer considered historic. Kirk stated that these buildings have lost their integrity and looks significantly different than the initial façade and are no longer historic. Commissioner Latasa agreed with Commissioner Reed’s comments. Latasa also expressed support for the staff and historian findings. Commissioner Fletcher supported Commissioner Latasa’s comments and explained that there are a set of rules and standards for these projects and not every building is historic, and this building does not seem to be historic. Vice Chair Freeman echoed Commissioner Fletcher’s comments. Chair Brassfield noted that some buildings (such as the Ice House) were deemed historic had different interiors but were still considered historic. Chair Brassfield asked for clarification about the standards used to evaluate interior versus exterior of a building. Brassfield also shared concerns about this building being in an area impacted by sea level rise. Kent Seavey responded to Chair Brassfield’s comments about the Ice House and explained that structure was still historic in the exterior and the façade and had significant integrity. On a motion by Vice Chair Freeman, seconded by Commissioner Latasa and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission approved appeal of 500 Del Monte; AP-20-0262 Appealing the Historic Preservation Commissions No Action Vote (Resolution H20-015) of HP 20-0245 to Remove the Property from the Downtown Area Historic Context Statement and Reconnaissance Survey List: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 4 DocuSign Envelope ID: B183A079-4895-42A1-A7C3-5F9C46E1E612 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 AYES: 6 COMMISSIONERS: Brassfield, Freeman, Fletcher, Latasa, Millich, Reed NOES: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Dawson ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None RECUSED: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 4. Consider Appeal of 508 Del Monte; AP-20-0262 Appealing the Historic Preservation Commissions Denial (Resolution H20-014) of 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: Appeal Denied. Staff Presentation/Commissioner Questions Associate Planner Sabdo presented the Agenda Report and answered Commissioner questions. Commissioner Dawson asked if the vote by HPC on this item was unanimous. Community Development Director Cole confirmed the vote was unanimous. Applicant Comments Appellant David Howe commented on the letters received from the public at the HPC meeting. Howe noted that 17 out of 18 letters addressed 500 Del Monte and only one letter addressed 508 Del Monte but did not speak to the historic integrity of the building. Public Comments Vice Chair Collum and Commissioner Smith-Crivello from the Historic Preservation Commission shared their public comments. Commissioner Smith-Crivello explained the unanimous vote by HPC, and the Commission chose to support the building and its history. Smith-Crivello also noted the changes to the building were made 60-70 years ago and these changes may still be deemed as historic. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Reed cited his previous comments but explained this property is harder to decide on since the building still looks similar and the changes are minor compared to the changes at 500 Del Monte. Reed mentioned the minor changes to the building but explained the building still looks very similar to its original appearance. Commissioner Dawson echoed his previous comments and noted the importance of history in Monterey and explained that he believes these buildings are historic. Commissioner Latasa supported Commissioner Reed’s comments and noted he was uncertain on how to vote for this. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: B183A079-4895-42A1-A7C3-5F9C46E1E612 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 Commissioner Millich explained there was no evidence to show the HPC made an error in their decision. Commissioner Dawson supported Commissioner Millich’s comments about the HPC but noted that he would support the applicant. Vice Chair Freeman noted that the adjacent buildings were built at the same time and joined. Freeman also noted she was hesitant to say the HPC erred in their decision since the building has not lost its integrity. Lastly, Freeman said she would uphold the HPC decision. Chair Brassfield commented that the changes seem to be historic as well. On a motion by Vice Chair Freeman, seconded by Commissioner Dawson and carried by the following vote, the Planning Commission denied appeal of 508 Del Monte; AP-20-0262 Appealing the Historic Preservation Commissions Denial (Resolution H20-014) of HP 20- 0222 to Remove the Property from the Downtown Area Historic Context Statement and Reconnaissance Survey List based on the following findings: even with the minor changes the building still maintains its original historic integrity and cited HPC findings 1,2,3 and 4 AYES: 7 COMMISSIONERS: Brassfield, Freeman, Dawson Fletcher, Latasa, Millich, Reed NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None INFORMATIONAL REPORTS & STAFF COMMENTS Update received. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner Reed commented the City should look into hiring the historian if an applicant is trying to remove a property from the historic list. Reed explained this may allow the process to be a more independent review. Commissioner Latasa commented on sea level rise and urged the City to start looking at a comprehensive approach to the waterfront and land usage. Chair Brassfield echoed Latasa’s comments and asked if staff could mention if properties would be impacted by sea level rise. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:22 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 6 DocuSign Envelope ID: B183A079-4895-42A1-A7C3-5F9C46E1E612 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Kimberly Cole Chair Community Development Director Planning Commission Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday January 26, 2021 7