CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
TELEPHONE (831) 648-3190 • FAX (831)
648-3184
NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING
ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW BOARD
DATE & TIME: TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2009 – 6:00 P.M.
LOCATION: CITY
HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS –
NOTE: The Architectural Review Board (ARB) may move and reorder the items on the consent and regular agendas. The public is encouraged to be present at the start of the meeting to hear and comment on items of interest.
The Architectural Review Board will not begin consideration of any item on the agenda later than 9 p.m. unless, by majority vote, the ARB decides to consider an item or items after 9 p.m. Any items on this agenda not considered this evening will be continued to a future meeting.
The general findings and conditions of approval for architectural approval applications are noted on the last page of this agenda. These apply to all final approvals of architectural applications. Special and additional findings and conditions may be added to an architectural approval as deemed necessary by the ARB.
All projects are subject to the
Structures listed on the City’s Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) are denoted on the agenda with an “(HRI)” next to their project address.
Architectural Review Board (ARB) Members:
Robin
Aeschliman
Jeff Becom
Jeff
Edmonds, Vice-Chair
Ken
Hinshaw
Doug Howe,
Chair
Wilda
Northrop
Members of the audience may come forward to review and observe
exhibits being presented for any agenda item.
Public comment on a specific agenda item may be made after the applicant
has presented his/her project to the Board.
1.
CALL TO ORDER
2.
ROLL CALL
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Review and
take action on the minutes from the October 27, 2009, Regular ARB
Site Review and Regular Meeting.
4.
COMMENTS FROM
THE PUBLIC
(Comments from the audience may concern matters not on the
agenda, but must deal with matters subject to the jurisdiction of the
Board. Comments will not receive Board
action.)
5.
COMMUNICATIONS
6.
WRITTEN
CORRESPONDENCE
7.
CITY COUNCIL
ACTIONS
8. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS
9. SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBER REPORTS
10. ADMINISTRATIVE ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS
11. ITEMS WITHDRAWN OR TABLED
12.
REQUESTS FOR
CONTINUANCE
13.
CONSENT AGENDA
a.
Project Address: 1771 Sunset Drive
Request for an extension for Architectural Approval No. 3733-07
Applicant: Eric Miller
CEQA status: Not a project under CEQA
Staff
reference: Senior Planner,
Recommended
action: Discuss and approve one-year extension to November 13, 2010.
b.
Project Address: 1130 Presidio
Boulevard
Architectural Approval Application No. 3916-09 (Final), to
allow the relocation of a side window to the front façade of a single-family
dwelling.
Applicant: Erika Lidke, on behalf of Anthony and Gloria Gambale
CEQA
Status: Categorically Exempt, Class 1
Recommended
Architectural Review Guidelines: 33 and 35.
Staff
reference: Senior Planner, Karen Vaughn
Recommended
action: Discuss and take appropriate action.
c.
Project Address: 223 Grand Avenue
Architectural Approval Application No. 2665-99 (Final), to review
the landscape plan, exterior lighting plan and exterior colors as a condition
of approval from the May 22, 2001 Architectural Review Board Approval.
Applicant: Eric Miller Architects, Inc.
CEQA
Status: Categorically Exempt, Class 3
Recommended
Architectural Review Guidelines: 10, 11, 12, 15, 36 and 40.
Staff
reference: Associate Planner, Valerie
Tallerico
Recommended
action: Discuss and take appropriate action.
d.
Project Address: 206 14th
Street
Architectural Approval Application No. 3890-09 (Final), to review
final details for a 225 square foot addition to the rear of an existing
single-family dwelling. The existing
structures are listed on the City’s Historic Resources Inventory and have
non-conforming setbacks. The project
received Conceptual Architectural Approval and approval of a Historic
Preservation Permit on October 13, 2009.
Applicant: Charles Huff, on behalf of Cyril and Diana Bonanno
CEQA
Status: Categorically Exempt, Class 31
Recommended
Architectural Review Guidelines: Historic Buildings, Appendix I, Guidelines 1,
2, 3, and 4.
Staff
reference: Associate Planner, Valerie
Tallerico
Recommended
action: Discuss and take appropriate action.
14.
REGULAR
AGENDA
a.
Project Address: 672 Mermaid Avenue/671 Ocean View Boulevard
(HRI)
Historic Preservation Permit
No. 07-0229 to allow the existing second dwelling structure on site to remain
in its historic location encroaching in the east side yard setback, and
replacement of a previously demolished 494 square foot detached garage with a new
808 square feet, detached three car garage that would encroach in the
west side yard setback to the property line, and to retain the nonconforming
parking with three covered and one uncovered parking space in lieu of the
required three covered and three uncovered spaces. Architectural Approval No. 3739-07
is for the new garage design, replacement of asphalt driveway, parking pad
and walkway, remodel of the existing two-story secondary housing unit known as
672 Mermaid Avenue, demolition of an attached 166 sq. ft. laundry/storage
facility, and, after the fact, the new foundation under the main house at 671
Ocean View Boulevard.
Applicant: Jeanne Byrne, on behalf of the Bonnici Family
CEQA status: Mitigated
Negative Declaration Prepared
Recommended
Architectural Review Guidelines: 4, 9, 10, 12, 16, 24, 27, 33, 35, 37, 38,
Guidelines for Historic Buildings 1, 3, 4 & 5, and Window Guidelines 1
& 2
Staff
reference:
Recommended
action: Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve Historic Preservation
Permit No. 07-0229 with project modification to reduce proposed garage from
three bays to two bays, retaining the 5’8” west side yard setback. Discuss and take appropriate action on the
Architectural Approval.
b.
Project Address: 143 18th Street (HRI)
Historic Preservation Permit No. 09-0249 and Architectural Approval
Application No. 3903-09 (Concept) to allow a 369 sq. ft. second-story addition
to an existing single-family dwelling.
The existing structure is listed on the City’s Historic Resources
Inventory and has non-conforming setbacks and parking.
Applicant: Ted Larson, Architect on behalf of James and
Karen Withrow
CEQA status: Class 31 Categorical Exemption
Recommended
Architectural Review Guidelines: Historic Buildings, Appendix I, Guidelines 1,
2, 3, and 4.
Staff
reference: Senior Planner,
Recommended
action: Approve Historic Preservation Permit No. 09-0249 with suggested
findings and conditions. Discuss and
take appropriate action on the Architectural Approval.
c.
Project Address: 141 Caledonia Avenue (HRI)
Architectural Approval
Application No. 3815-08 (Final) for a
proposed remodel of an existing single-family dwelling that is listed on the
City’s Historic Resources Inventory (HRI), including the removal of stucco
siding, realignment of front porch entry, new front porch with roof overhang,
repair and/or replacement of windows and doors, new skylights and new rear
deck.
Applicant: Dana Motley Zausch,
Architect on behalf of Elizabeth Gordon
CEQA status: Class 31 Categorical Exemption
Recommended
Architectural Review Guidelines: Historic Buildings, Appendix I, Guidelines 1,
3, 4 and 5.
Staff
reference: Senior Planner,
Recommended
action: Discuss and take appropriate action.
d.
Project Address: 883 Lighthouse Avenue
Architectural Approval
Application No. 3902-09 (Final) for a
proposed remodel of an existing single-family dwelling, including a 25 sq. ft.
addition to the front entry, realignment of front concrete stairs, window and
door replacements, plaster over existing brick façade, and new concrete rear
patio.
Applicant: Robert C. Mein, Architect
on behalf of Ken and Susan Lopez
CEQA status:
Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted August 11, 2009
Recommended
Architectural Review Guidelines: 6, 28, 32, 33, 34, 35, and 36
Staff
reference: Senior Planner,
Recommended
action: Discuss and take appropriate action.
15.
Reports of Boardmembers
Boardmembers may
ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement or make a brief
report on his or her activities. In addition, the Board members may provide a
referral to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to
report back to the body at a subsequent meeting concerning a City matter or
direct staff to place a request to agendize a matter of business on a future
agenda (G.C. 54954.2).
16.
REPORTS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Reference: Chief Planner, Lynn Burgess
17.
ADJOURNMENT
Note: Materials for this agenda, and
copies of previous meeting agendas and minutes for the Architectural Review
Board, are available for review at the Community Development Department,
THE CITY OF
NOTICE
TO APPLICANTS
Applicants or their
representatives must be present at the meeting for which their item, including those items on the Consent Agenda,
is scheduled. If unable to attend, the applicant must submit a written request for
continuance prior to the meeting. The
item may be denied if continuance is not requested.
Decisions rendered by
the Architectural Review Board may be appealed to the Planning Commission using
a form available at the Community Development Department. The appeal form, plus an appeal fee, must be
filed with the Community Development Department within 10 days (5 days in the
case of a single-family dwelling not listed on the historic resources inventory
as considered under the terms of subsection A. of Section 23.73.080 of the
Municipal Code) of the action or decision being appealed. Notwithstanding the
time limit for appeal set out in the above section, the Planning Commission and
the City Council shall always have until their next regularly scheduled meeting
following Architectural Review Board action to decide to review such action. No
building permit pertaining to an Architectural Review Board action may be
issued until the appeal period has passed.
Applicants are
requested to contact the Building Department for building permit requirements.
No sign approved by the Architectural Review Board shall be painted, erected,
or otherwise installed until the appeal period has passed. Any
proposed exterior changes from approved plans require Architectural Review
Board review and approval. There is
a fee for design changes submitted after the architectural approval application
has been granted final approval.
Applicants with approved projects that have
been deemed statutorily or categorically exempt under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) may file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) directly
with the Monterey County Clerk in order to reduce the CEQA challenge period
from 180 days to 35 days (CEQA Guidelines Section 15062). Applicants wishing to file the NOE should
contact their planner for instructions on how to file the notice with
Filing of a NOE by the City of
STANDARD FINDING FOR APPROVAL OF AN
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL APPLICATION
The architecture and
general appearance of the building(s) will be in keeping with the neighborhood
and the completed project will not be detrimental to the orderly and harmonious
development of the City nor impair the desirability of investment or occupation
in the neighborhood.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF ARCHITECTURAL APPLICATION APPROVALS
1. This approval shall be null and void if a building permit has not been applied for within one year from the date of approval. Application for extension of this approval must be made prior to the expiration date.
2. All construction must occur in strict compliance with the proposal as set forth in the application(s) for permits, subject to any special conditions. Any deviation from the approved plans must be reviewed and approved by the staff and may require Architectural Review Board approval.
3. The terms and conditions shall be perpetual, and it is the intention of the Architectural Review Board and the permittee to bind all future owners and possessors of the subject property to the terms and conditions.
4. Review
by the Public Works Department is required prior to issuance of the building
permit. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works
Department before undertaking any work in the Public way and prior to issuance
of the building permit.
STANDARD
FINDING FOR APPROVAL OF A SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION
The proposed sign effectively conveys the business
type and identity to the public and possesses pleasing elements of design that
protects and enhances the architectural character and harmony of the community,
buildings, and neighborhood in which it is located.
JUDICIAL
TIME LIMITS
This serves as written notice that Pacific Grove Municipal Code Section
1.20.010 incorporates Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the
State of