No Bookmarks Exist.
Request. 00:00:02
Record. 00:00:03
Get in hotel. 00:00:09
I thought I had made an appointment. 00:00:11
OK. It's 3:00 o'clock. I think we'll go ahead and. 00:01:01
Call this meeting to order. Welcome to the Architecture Review Board meeting today, Tuesday, June 13th. 00:01:04
Can we please have a? 00:01:15
Roll call. 00:01:17
Yes, chair Boyle. 00:01:24
Here, Vice Chair Eldridge. 00:01:26
Member Bornstein here. Member Brooks. 00:01:29
Here a member Sutton here. So all five members are present. Thank you. 00:01:33
Great. Thank you. 00:01:38
And. 00:01:40
I think. 00:01:42
Um, Laurel, nothing's changing on the agenda. Would that be correct? That is correct. OK, so we just need to get in a motion to 00:01:43
approve the agenda. 00:01:48
2nd. 00:01:58
Great. Can we get a roll call vote? 00:01:59
Member Brooks. 00:02:05
Aye member Bornstein. 00:02:09
Chair Boyle. 00:02:12
Aye, Vice Chair Eldridge. 00:02:13
Aye and Secretary Stephen's motion passes 5 to 0 to approve the agenda as submitted. 00:02:15
Great. Moving right along. 00:02:24
Umm. 00:02:26
Item number three, board announcements. Any board announcements? 00:02:27
No and staff announcements. 00:02:34
No, we don't have any. Thanks. 00:02:38
Great and #4. 00:02:40
Our council liaison, I see Debbie Beck. 00:02:42
Can we get any sort of report from you? Miss Beck? You may. Hi, Turbo Oil and members of the Commission, the ARB Commission. We 00:02:46
have a couple of updates. Our last City Council meeting 2324 fiscal year budget was approved. On the first reading, we did have a 00:02:52
few modifications, one being a. 00:02:59
Council voted for a $50,000 allocation for a safety and traffic engineering for a permanent parklet program. So that will be 00:03:07
moving forward. We do have that on our council agenda which is coming up on June 21st, so look forward to that as well. More 00:03:15
information to be provided. Also a special event calendar permit was issued or approved by council at a four, three vote for I 00:03:22
believe it's pints on the Bay. 00:03:30
Which is the Monterey Seltzer Company or Pacific Grove Shelter Company which will be holding an event? 00:03:37
Upwards of 3000 people down in front of their restaurant on September 30th. 00:03:43
Ocean View Blvd. will be closed off for that event during that day. It might be an all day event even though the schedule will be 00:03:50
a four hour schedule event. 00:03:55
And that's all I have. You have a full agenda. So have a great meeting. Thank you. 00:04:01
Thank you very much for that. 00:04:05
And moving along to general public comment, this is the point in the meeting where members of the public via Zoom and here in Umm. 00:04:09
The Chambers can come and and speak for three minutes. 00:04:23
And the things that you would speak on would be things that are not. 00:04:28
On our agenda. 00:04:32
This afternoon. 00:04:36
So we can go ahead and open up general public comment if anybody in the audience would care to. 00:04:38
Speak, you can stand up and come to the podium and. 00:04:45
Otherwise raise your virtual hand. 00:04:48
See. 00:05:00
Aries. 00:05:00
Yes. 00:05:02
Missus. 00:05:02
Miss Gianni. 00:05:03
Thank you. I I just wanted to do sort of the standard reminder since this audio system has. 00:05:07
To everyone, if you could, please speak directly into the microphone. 00:05:15
I'd appreciate it. And I I just barely could hear Laurel just then and and I just wanted to say that we are. 00:05:20
Having a new roof installed and so I apologize in advance for my. 00:05:28
Later con comments if you have trouble hearing me. Alright, thank you very much. 00:05:33
Thank you. 00:05:40
And can we is there any way that we can turn the audio up so that we can hear our. 00:05:41
OK. 00:05:59
Perfect. OK. Thank you. 00:06:00
We can adjust that later if we if we need to. 00:06:02
Umm. 00:06:06
Great. OK. I don't. 00:06:07
Oh, I see. One more hand. 00:06:09
Sorry, we have Miss Dahmer. 00:06:13
Thank you. I didn't have an unmute button. 00:06:25
Also, I had a great deal of difficulty. I just now got on to this meeting. 00:06:28
From the city of Pacific Grove. It wouldn't load. It wouldn't this. I tried calling in so something else is going on today with 00:06:34
the. 00:06:38
Computer or the the the whole IT system? Thank you very much. 00:06:43
Great. Thank you. I'm glad you're able to be present. 00:06:49
All right. Any other general public comment? 00:06:55
Seeing none, we're going to close public comment and. 00:07:00
Go to our consent agenda. 00:07:06
We've got. 00:07:11
Just our two meetings from last month on our. 00:07:13
Consent agenda. 00:07:19
Does anybody on the board care to pull either of those items from the consent agenda? 00:07:23
No, OK. Any members of the public? 00:07:32
Wishing to pull. 00:07:36
Any items from the consent agenda? 00:07:39
I see no hands raised. OK, great. Um, then we can close that public, little public comment. And we can. 00:07:44
Entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda. But anybody care to make that motion? 00:07:57
So moved. 00:08:07
Thank you. 00:08:09
I'll second that. 00:08:11
Great, we have a motion and a second. Can we get a roll call vote please? 00:08:12
Yes, we can. 00:08:17
Number Brooks. 00:08:19
Vice Chair Eldridge. 00:08:23
Aye. 00:08:26
Member Bornstein. 00:08:27
Secretary Sutfin aye. 00:08:30
And chair Boyle. 00:08:32
Aye. 00:08:33
The board has voted 5 to 0 to approve the motion. 00:08:35
And the motion has passed. Thank you. 00:08:39
Thank you. 00:08:42
Now we're going over to our. 00:08:44
Regular agenda and we'll start with item 8A. 00:08:48
Architectural permit and coastal development permit. 00:08:54
Number. 00:08:58
23-0023. 00:09:00
Location, 100 Asilomar Ave. 00:09:03
Can we have a staff report please? 00:09:07
Yes, good afternoon, Chair, board members and members of the public. I'm Laurel O'halloran presenting this architectural permit 00:09:11
and coastal development permit for 100 Asilomar. 00:09:16
The proposed project includes the construction of 188 square foot, one story addition of a sunroom to an existing one story single 00:09:21
family residence. 00:09:26
The property is located at a Solamar and Lighthouse Ave. and is located in the coastal zone and an archaeological sensitive area. 00:09:31
And within an environmentally sensitive habitat. 00:09:40
An archaeological survey report was prepared for a previous project at the property by a qualified archaeologist. 00:09:43
The report concluded that the subject property contains no indication of cultural sites, features or artifacts. 00:09:50
The project is conditioned to address inadvertent discovery of human remains or cultural artifacts. 00:09:57
Since the proposed addition is located on a previously developed and disturbed and would not disturb new area, the report remains 00:10:02
valid for the current project. 00:10:06
The applicant has provided a project data sheet. 00:10:11
Indicating that the development standards of the zoning district, including building coverage, site coverage and gross floor area 00:10:13
have been met with no exceptions requested. 00:10:18
Staff recommends approval to the Planning Commission of the proposed architectural permit and coastal development permit. 00:10:23
Subject to the findings, conditions of approval and a class one. 00:10:29
Sequel exemption for existing facilities. 00:10:33
This concludes my staff report and the. 00:10:35
Applicant is here to speak for the questions and I'm also available. Thank you. 00:10:39
Thank you for that staff report. Does the applicant care to? 00:10:43
Speak. 00:10:48
No, OK. 00:10:50
We can open this up for. 00:10:52
Public comment. 00:10:56
If anybody in the audience cares to speak, you can just stand up and walk right over to the podium. 00:11:03
And if anybody in our audience virtually would like to speak, now is your chance to raise your virtual hand. 00:11:08
I see no hands raised. 00:11:18
I'm going to give it about another 30 seconds. 00:11:21
OK. 00:11:32
I'm confident nobody's trying to raise their hand. We'll go ahead and close public comment and bring it back to the board. Does 00:11:33
anybody have any comments? 00:11:37
Burning desire to speak first. 00:11:40
I'll fix that. 00:11:45
It's my understanding that this project has been. 00:11:47
Before us a couple of times at the last. 00:11:51
Two consecutive hearings and they you didn't have your netting up or? 00:11:54
There was some minor issues. 00:11:58
At this point I. 00:12:00
I feel like I'm very familiar with what your objectives are and. 00:12:01
I don't have any concerns, nor does it seem like anyone in the community does, so I would. 00:12:05
I'm pretty comfortable with this and and I'll just leave it at that. Great. 00:12:10
Thank you. 00:12:14
I will agree with Commissioner Eldridge, it's a really conservative addition and I hope the property owners can enjoy their new 00:12:16
space. 00:12:20
I approve. 00:12:25
I feel the same. Either of you guys wish to speak? 00:12:27
No. 00:12:30
I totally concur. Our apologies for. 00:12:32
You being. 00:12:36
Pushed and pushed and thank you for your patience on behalf of the Board and and I think it's fair to say on the behalf of staff 00:12:38
as well. 00:12:42
OK, we can we can wrap it up then and. 00:12:47
If somebody would like to. 00:12:50
Make a motion. 00:12:53
Please feel free. 00:12:55
I would like to make a motion that we approve this project as proposed. 00:12:56
I would second. 00:13:01
OK, we have a motion and a second. Can we get a roll call vote please? 00:13:04
Yes, Vice Chair Eldridge. 00:13:09
Aye member Bornstein. 00:13:12
Chair Boyle aye member Brooks. 00:13:14
Aye. 00:13:17
Good Terry Sutphin. 00:13:19
Motion passes 5 to 0. Thank you. 00:13:21
Great. 00:13:27
All right, at this time, I think we're having vice chair. Eldridge is recusing himself. 00:13:28
And we will. 00:13:37
Move on to item 8B. 00:13:40
This is architectural permit and administrative use permit. 00:13:43
And a tree permit with development. 00:13:49
23-00 00:13:54
Sorry 03034960 Bayview Ave. 00:13:57
And can we please have a staff report? 00:14:02
Yes, good afternoon Chair Boyle and board members. 00:14:06
The project site is located at 960 Bayview Ave. and the R1 Zoning District property is an 11,100 and square foot interior lot. 00:14:09
Located on the north side of Bayview between 17 Mile Drive. 00:14:19
And Del Monte Blvd. 00:14:23
The property is located in the Archaeologically sensitive area and in the city's area of special biological significance. Property 00:14:25
is not listed on the city's Historic Resources Inventory. 00:14:30
The site is developed with a 2187 square foot, one story single family residence. 00:14:35
And 219 square foot detached garage. 00:14:42
The surrounding neighborhood is comprised of a mix of one and two-story single family residences of varying styles and sizes. 00:14:45
The applicant proposes 493 square feet of additions to the front and rear of the existing residence, allowing for a new master 00:14:54
bedroom and enlarged front bedroom. 00:14:58
The proposal includes an additional site coverage in the form of non exempt decks, patios and walkways that will bring the total 00:15:03
site coverage to 52.9%, not including the ministerially approved. 00:15:09
731 square foot detached. 00:15:16
AU. 00:15:19
The AU, being under 800 square feet, is exempt from site coverage requirements and does not require discretionary permit. 00:15:21
In addition, the tree permit with development for the removal of 143 inch Monterey pine is an association with the AU development 00:15:28
only. 00:15:32
A phase one Historical resources assessment was performed in November of 22. 00:15:38
By Historic Resource Associates and found that the residence is not eligible for state or federal listing and does not appear to 00:15:44
be eligible for inclusion. 00:15:48
On the historic resources inventory due to substantial renovations and additions that took place. 00:15:53
In 1949 and 1975. 00:15:59
Phase one and two archaeological assessments were performed in September of 22, also by Historic Resource Associates. 00:16:02
These assessments found that the property was not indicative. 00:16:10
Of. 00:16:13
Pre contact, use or occupation. 00:16:14
Existing residents, including the proposed addition, complies with applicable development standards regarding maximum allowed 00:16:17
floor area, allowed height and setbacks, maximum building coverage and maximum site coverage. 00:16:22
An existing nonconforming detached garage will undergo repairs with no increase in floor area. 00:16:28
The project is categorically exempt from Sequoia per Section 15301, pertaining to existing facilities, allowing additions and 00:16:33
alterations to existing facilities and structures. 00:16:39
And that concludes this staff presentation. I and the. 00:16:44
Applicant. 00:16:49
Are available for questions, and again I do want to. 00:16:50
Remind everyone that the Adu is ministerially approved and not part of this. 00:16:54
Application not part of subjective. 00:17:01
Review. 00:17:05
Thank you. 00:17:07
Thank you very much for that report. 00:17:07
Would the applicant care to speak? 00:17:10
I do have a question. Are we going to post the plans? Yes, we need to put them up. 00:17:14
Good afternoon, members of the Architectural Review Board. My name is Hunter Algis, and I've been working with Robert and Lisa 00:17:33
Kagami in their efforts to design an appropriate project to renovate and add on to this home at 960 Bayview for. 00:17:40
Well, over a year. 00:17:47
Umm. 00:17:49
I would like to start my presentation with the following statement due to the conclusions of my architectural historian, Mr. 00:17:50
Supernova. It's phase One historic report. 00:17:55
An agreement of cities planning staff with these conclusions. 00:18:01
The ARB is here today to review the proposed designs consistency with the cities architectural Design guidelines. 00:18:05
Planning staff has determined that the project follows zoning ordinances and applicable regulations. 00:18:13
So the Arby's job today is to evaluate the proposed design. 00:18:18
And decide whether it is appropriate and consistent with the guidelines. 00:18:22
It is not your responsibility to decide whether the project should be reviewed by the HRC versus the ARB. 00:18:28
And indeed, the project has been brought before you today because this decision decision has already been made. 00:18:34
I have also met with noted local architectural historian Kent Seavey regarding this property. 00:18:41
Mr. Seavey. 00:18:48
Has read Mr. Supernaut's report and had no objection to his assessment. 00:18:49
Indeed, I wanted to hire Mr. Seavey to serve as my architectural historian on this project, but he had to decline due to his close 00:18:57
involvement in resolving Mr. Hathaway's collection in the state. 00:19:03
Since Mr. Hathaway's estate is still in probate. 00:19:09
And Mr. Steve has been advised by his legal counsel not to involve himself in my project. 00:19:12
He had to decline from serving as the art as my historian. However, he did agree to share that he supports the conclusion. 00:19:21
Of the phase one assessment by Mr. Super Nawaz. 00:19:27
And he sees no reason to add this property to the city's HRI. 00:19:31
And I'll just leave it at that. 00:19:36
Umm. 00:19:37
My project historian did not overlook Mr. Seavey's great efforts. 00:19:39
And Mr. Hathaway's. 00:19:45
Significant contribution to the cities. 00:19:47
History in terms of the photographic collection that he. 00:19:50
Put together during his lifetime. 00:19:55
Let's all recognize that Mister Hathaway's collection of photos. 00:19:57
Is a treasure and absolutely worthy of preservation, and let's applaud Mr. Stevie for his efforts in preserving it. 00:20:01
But this isn't the topic we need to discuss today. 00:20:07
We are here today to review this proposed design and decide as to its consistency with the City's architectural design guidelines. 00:20:10
This House can be described as a Mediterranean eclectic, with a history of permit records clearly showing several modifications 00:20:19
over time. 00:20:23
It has been added on to modified and during Mr. Hathaway's period of residence it has suffered. 00:20:27
From a significant number of deferred maintenance issues. 00:20:33
Frankly, this property really needs to be renovated. 00:20:37
And that's what we are trying to do here. 00:20:40
There are at least two comments and letters of opposition. 00:20:44
Comparing my client's property to the La Porte mansion. 00:20:48
The LaPorte Mansion is beyond argument, one of the most important. 00:20:52
Pieces of architecture in this city's boundaries and comparing 960 Bayview is a big stretch of the imagination. 00:20:55
I don't want to spend much more time on this topic, but I did want to point out that there is a huge disparity between the 00:21:04
historic significance of the LaPorte Mansion versus 960 Bayview. 00:21:08
Beyond concerns about historic preservation, there have been comments from public questioning. 00:21:15
Our approach to tree protection, tree removal, archaeological protection, how we intend to connect to the municipal sewer system 00:21:20
and parking. 00:21:24
We have provided extensive reports. 00:21:31
From Frank Ohh, no. 00:21:33
Regarding all matters relating to trees on this property. 00:21:36
We have submitted an archaeological assessment from a qualified archaeologist. 00:21:39
We will connect to the municipal sewer system through an approved design with the blessing of the city's building department and 00:21:44
public works. 00:21:47
Just as anyone else would do, would be required to do to assure functional and legal disposal of wastewater. 00:21:50
Lastly, we meet the city's parking standards. 00:21:57
My clients could not be here today because they are currently in Mexico volunteering with their church to build a school for for. 00:22:02
Children far less fortunate than any of us in this room. 00:22:09
They're good people. 00:22:12
And I've been thoroughly enjoyed working with them on this lovely property. 00:22:14
They have long dreamed about having a nice home at Pacific Grove and it is their intention to invest a significant amount of money 00:22:18
and life energy into making appropriate renovations. 00:22:22
And additions to this residence. 00:22:27
I'm sure over time. 00:22:30
Once they move into their renovated home, everyone will realize that Bob and Lisa Tajimi are just the type of people we should all 00:22:32
welcome into this community. 00:22:36
And I'll leave it at that. Thank you. 00:22:40
Thank you. 00:22:44
Well, we can open. 00:22:50
This on. 00:22:52
Thank you. We can open it up to public comment. 00:22:53
At this time. 00:22:58
So if anybody in the audience cares to speak, then I would ask you to just come on up to the podium and we'll give you 3 minutes. 00:23:00
I'd like to speak on behalf of myself and my husband. We lived at 990 Bayview and in response to what Mr. Eldridge has said. 00:23:15
As far as the House being historical and can see his agreement. 00:23:25
In the report, The Phase one Report. 00:23:29
It actually says that the house does meet the criteria for Pacific Groves historical register. OK, so if he's agreeing with that 00:23:32
then I agree with that. 00:23:37
It's right here on page 11. I included. I sent a letter and it says clearly that it does qualify for the register. It was the 00:23:42
national and California register that it did not qualify for. 00:23:47
And part of that I want to just add it was in my. 00:23:53
A letter that they store the last store frontage that the neighbor had that Pat had closed around 2014. 00:23:57
And many people agree with that. And I have a a little thing from one of his friends saying, yes, it closed, he thought before his 00:24:06
mother died, which was the end of 2014. 00:24:11
So not all the information in that packet was accurate. 00:24:16
If you look at Yelp, the store is still open. 00:24:20
So anyway, if you went by Yelp, that was a problem. So anyway, and Pat. 00:24:23
You know, everyone agrees, I think is a very historical person. The other thing I wanted to. 00:24:28
Disagree with on that is that the house is associated with Pat and and the. 00:24:33
The photos, in fact. 00:24:38
Can't see V who was just spoken of. 00:24:41
Felt that there was such an association that he could not leave the house empty and he actually paid for a caretaker to live there 00:24:44
for a year to protect the photo collection because there was so much interest in it and people, yes, were coming by. 00:24:51
And stopping and ohh it's the Hathaway house and and and word of mouth people knew the photos were in there. 00:24:57
So that is not accurate on that statement. 00:25:03
I want to go on because as the neighbor all the additions are on my side, on the West side of their property and so right now I 00:25:07
have a flat top roof we see over to a nice forest, we see the Monterey Bay over there. The proposal is adding addition to the rear 00:25:14
on at right at our property line 4 1/2 feet and to the front. 00:25:21
And our property line, that's the main additions as far as I know is all on our property line. 00:25:28
Goes back beyond our property line to the neighbors behind and. 00:25:33
Almost to the front, you know you've got the 15 foot setback, so now you've got a big. 00:25:37
Wall. 00:25:42
I have a picture somewhere, but you've seen the picture. It's some little slided windows. 00:25:44
And my whole house. All my windows are directed that way. I have big picture windows. 00:25:48
And now I have just a view of a wall. There's pictures I sent in and so it's going up, out and out, and I have a picture from 00:25:55
every room it's shaded. 00:26:00
And my light has been dimmed. It will be diminished from the living room, family room, kitchen, dining room, my dining room. When 00:26:06
I sit there, I will look at a big wall with some little splits. It looks like a prison. 00:26:11
You know. 00:26:16
The rest of the house I'm sure is very nice. Front, other side. 00:26:17
And I have the least. 00:26:21
A setback. There's 4 1/2 feet on the existing house and he wants to continue that about another 5 seconds. How about for my 00:26:23
husband could speak for him? 00:26:28
Well, your time is up if he'd like to come out, if he doesn't want to talk. But anyway, I just want to say that it is a great 00:26:33
impact on us with that addition being so close to the sideline. And I think that I know he's now applied for an administrative use 00:26:40
permit and I think that should be denied. There's plenty of room on the other side where they can build out and it's not going to 00:26:46
affect anybody to the back to the other side. There's plenty of setbacks. Thank you for your comments. 00:26:52
OK. Does anybody else care to speak to this? 00:27:02
Project in the room. 00:27:05
Can we put the plans up and then see if we have any members of the virtual audience that would like to speak? 00:27:09
I have Miss Chiani would like to speak and I can't share the screen and do the timer. OK. So I'll get the plans back up right when 00:27:21
we're done with. Terrific. Thank you. 00:27:26
Thank you, Uh Pacific Growth has an amazing heritage of ferric structures and of notable residents inspired by the natural and 00:27:33
man-made beauty and diversity of this place. Pat Hathaway was one of those notable individuals. It's not clear how Mr. Soprano, 00:27:41
it's concluded that Pat Hathaway's home at 960 Bayview was not a location of where he curated, copied and sold his photographic 00:27:49
images. That is simply not the case. The city has a bifurcated and inconsistent. 00:27:56
Process for reviewing historic properties. That does not excuse excuse a RB from taking the historical character into account. 00:28:04
I hope that you all have. 00:28:17
The required. 00:28:20
Interest and knowledge in historic preservation and the Cultural resources. Pacific Grove. The familiarity with the City's 00:28:22
Historic Preservation Ordinance, including designation criteria. 00:28:27
The historic context statement and the Secretary of Interior Standards. Please consider whether you can actually make findings 00:28:34
necessary to approve this project based on the Phase one report approved by the applicant. the IT states on page 11 of 21 that the 00:28:41
property meets criterion H retaining enough character character defining elements of its Spanish Revival Mediterranean 00:28:49
architectural design for listing on the HRI, but the report fails to recognize criterion C also. 00:28:57
Applies, namely, that it is strongly identified with a person who's significantly contributed to the history of the City of 00:29:04
Pacific Grove. Please do not approve the current plans, which are not consistent with the Secretary of Interior standards as 00:29:10
required for a house that's eligible for the HRI. And please require an accurate historical report that adequately recognizes the 00:29:16
importance of Pat Hathaway and his work to Pacific Grove and beyond, and that recognizes his family residence at 960 Bayview as an 00:29:23
important. 00:29:29
Location based work. An accurate historical report is necessary before any plans are approved. The earlier modifications were 00:29:35
permitted during the historical period and were appropriate for the building. The proposed modifications are not appropriate. The 00:29:41
owners can enjoy reasonable use of their historic property without changing its appearance in such a way as to disqualify it from 00:29:46
eligibility. 00:29:52
HR. 00:29:58
And this project would. 00:29:59
Extra care and diligence are required for projects involving properties eligible for the HRI in order to protect PG's historic 00:30:01
resources. 00:30:06
And I would say also I I didn't. 00:30:11
Understand what was said about archaeology, but I see no indication in the permit or in the agenda report about an archaeological 00:30:14
report. 00:30:19
And and survey. And this is in the cities archaeological zone, which means it's an archaeologically sensitive area with the 00:30:25
likelihood of geological resources being unearthed during a ground disturbing work. And I also am not sure that this 00:30:33
administrative use permit followed. 00:30:41
The correct procedure. 00:30:50
So. 00:30:53
Thank you. 00:30:54
For considering my comments. 00:30:54
Thank you for your comments. 00:30:57
I have Miss Dahmer. 00:31:01
Thank you. 00:31:07
I'm really going to support the previous two comments made before me. 00:31:08
Normally I and and even in this case I like. 00:31:15
Hunter Eldridge's. 00:31:20
Plans and and drawings, but not this house and not this historic and it is, is, is. Pat Hathaway is one of our beloved. 00:31:24
Beloved. 00:31:35
Personages. 00:31:36
Here. 00:31:38
And continues to contribute. 00:31:39
To our history. 00:31:42
To so many of us and the entire community and communities beyond us. 00:31:45
There is no way that this cannot be historic and as was said. 00:31:51
In its own right, it could be listed. 00:31:56
For its style, I mean it's. 00:31:59
I just. 00:32:02
I just don't understand how. 00:32:03
There is so dismal much disconnect. 00:32:07
Between. 00:32:10
What we really want in his in our historical. 00:32:12
Resource. 00:32:16
Inventory and. 00:32:17
What's happening? 00:32:20
This is how we lose our history. 00:32:22
And the most. 00:32:26
The most horrifying thing is that we forget. 00:32:29
I think you probably need some sun studies on this house because the poor neighbor with losing her light is just a horrifying 00:32:35
thought. 00:32:40
And I can't imagine that it's going to be. 00:32:46
OK. 00:32:50
So please carefully consider. 00:32:52
And even though you're supposedly not to be asked, it needs. 00:32:55
Further scrutiny? 00:33:00
And. 00:33:02
We're not going to take it lying down. 00:33:05
Thank you very much. 00:33:08
Thank you for your comments. 00:33:10
Mr. Atkins. 00:33:19
Yeah. Hi. I'm Andy Atkins. I'm a neighbor on the downhill side at 951 Jewel. 00:33:22
Umm. 00:33:28
My comments are a little bit different than the previous comments and that's. 00:33:29
Around the ADUI am surprised to hear that it's administratively approved but I'll, I'll, I'll, I'll say this anyhow. I understand 00:33:33
regulations allow a US to be built. 00:33:39
Up to, you know, within 3 feet of the property line. 00:33:47
But if you look at the plans for the AU? 00:33:51
It and the big picture window facing out the back of the master bedroom inside the AU. 00:33:54
It's going to give the occupants a Clearview into my neighbor's backyard and into my backyard. 00:34:01
Umm. 00:34:07
There is plenty of room in the backyard of this property. There's no physical reason for the AD U to be built within 3 feet of the 00:34:08
property lines on the. 00:34:14
On the downhill side, so. 00:34:20
I humbly request that if that AU does get built. 00:34:22
That it's moved away from the property line so that. 00:34:26
People who live in that age, you do not have line of sight into my backyard nor into my neighbors backyard. That's a. 00:34:30
Becky Michael's backyard, So. 00:34:37
That's that's my. 00:34:39
That's my comment and request. 00:34:41
Thank you for your comments. 00:34:46
Mr. Chiani. 00:34:56
Good afternoon. 00:35:01
It's particularly unfortunate that the staff report is materially deficient. 00:35:03
In providing the Architectural Review Board with any of the General Plan policies. 00:35:08
In Chapter 7. 00:35:13
Historic and archaeological, excuse me, and archaeological resources. 00:35:15
Chapter 7. 00:35:20
States quote. 00:35:22
The purpose of preservation is to identify. 00:35:23
Protect and preserve. 00:35:27
The structures of Pacific Groves. Cultural and architectural history. 00:35:28
The staff report is also defective because it omits. 00:35:33
The following principle and the architectural review guidelines. 00:35:37
For single family residences. 00:35:41
It states quote. 00:35:44
In order to maintain and preserve Pacific grows natural. 00:35:46
And historic character. 00:35:50
The community has adopted an architectural review process that is specifically designed to. 00:35:52
Protect Pacific Groves architectural heritage. 00:35:59
Moreover. 00:36:02
The Pacific Grove Minicipal code for alterations and additions. 00:36:04
Provides that the quote. 00:36:08
Appropriate review authority. 00:36:10
Which in this case is the ARB. 00:36:12
Must be guided by the Secretary of interiors. 00:36:15
Standards. 00:36:18
And Appendix One of the architectural review Guidelines for the historic. 00:36:19
Buildings. 00:36:25
Which the report? 00:36:26
The staff report has admitted. 00:36:28
Those should be in front of you. 00:36:30
The applicants historical assessment determined that quote. 00:36:32
The residents at 960 Bayview Ave. 00:36:36
Does. 00:36:40
Does appear to meet criterion age? 00:36:41
Which is a reference to. 00:36:45
One of the historic. 00:36:47
Resource inventory is criteria for listing. 00:36:50
The consultant found. 00:36:55
That the existing house retains in his words enough character defining elements. 00:36:59
In my opinion. 00:37:05
The building is also significant due to its association. 00:37:07
With photographic. 00:37:10
Archivist Pat Hathaway. 00:37:12
And his California Views historic photo collection business. 00:37:14
Which contributed to the. 00:37:19
Culture, history, and development of Pacific Grove thus. 00:37:21
The Historic Resources Inventory Criteria, C. 00:37:25
For a listing. 00:37:29
In the HRI is satisfied and moreover the building retains. 00:37:30
The integrity from the historical period. 00:37:35
I strongly believe that the proposed remodel. 00:37:38
In addition, does not comply. 00:37:41
With the guidelines and standards and the municipal code. 00:37:44
Including, but not limited to. 00:37:48
The proposed placement of the addition on the front facade. 00:37:50
Or the proposed changes? 00:37:54
To the character defining. 00:37:56
Features of the historic resources. 00:37:58
Thus. 00:38:01
The findings required. 00:38:02
To approve the ARP. 00:38:04
Permit cannot be made and therefore must be denied. Thank you for your consideration. 00:38:05
Thank you very much for your comments. 00:38:12
Do you have any more public comments? 00:38:21
I see no other hands raised. 00:38:23
OK, and nobody else in the audience cares to speak. 00:38:28
My name is Daniel Soprano with Can I just ask you to speak as? Yeah, you don't have to speak right into it, but as close as as 00:38:40
comfortable. My name is Dana Supernodes. I'm the principal of Historic Resource Associates. 00:38:47
And I was asked to perform the archaeological inventory. 00:38:54
And to complete the phase one study of the resonance. 00:38:58
Umm. 00:39:03
So just to reiterate what we said earlier, there was a phase one. 00:39:04
And a phase two archaeological study done the property. 00:39:08
And that means not only visually examining the surface. 00:39:11
But actually digging. 00:39:15
Units shovel tests to determine that there if there's anything below grade. 00:39:17
And that's a standard procedure. Nothing was found. 00:39:21
It is an archaeological sensitive zone, but not all Pacific Grove. 00:39:24
Is, you know, covered with archaeological resources, they. 00:39:29
They're scattered throughout the city. 00:39:32
So though the finding was that there would be no effect to archaeological resources from the project. 00:39:35
I also looked at the house. 00:39:40
And gave it a lot of consideration. 00:39:43
Because I knew it was about how there's health. 00:39:46
And I knew pathway. 00:39:49
And there was an intimate friend upon Hathaway, but we did. 00:39:52
Business together. I provided him with photographs. 00:39:55
I collect photographs, ephemera in California and I've been doing that for 50 years. 00:39:58
The difference is it's not a negative thing. But I don't. I didn't monetize what I what I own. 00:40:04
Pat did. It was his business. 00:40:10
I collected solely for research purposes, but I had things that Pat wanted. 00:40:12
And. 00:40:16
Over the years, I've provided those to him. 00:40:18
My my assertion is that Path has Pat Hathaway's collection. 00:40:21
His place of business. 00:40:25
We're in three different locations. 00:40:28
And if you look at the newspapers there, it's pretty clear that he had two studios in Pacific Grove over the years. 00:40:30
And he had a studio in Monterey that I visited and he had his collection, or most of his collection there. 00:40:36
Umm. 00:40:42
And the other, I think the other factor with Pat Hathaway is that. 00:40:43
It's unusual to. 00:40:48
Designate a property significant for a person as a collector. 00:40:50
The norm is, you know, an artist. 00:40:55
Whose principal residence was used as a studio. 00:40:57
Or that event occurred and. 00:41:01
It was recognized as the principal place of that. 00:41:04
As an artist, as an example. 00:41:08
I have a I had a good friend. He's passed on, but he was a collector of. 00:41:10
Uh. 00:41:16
Of of art California art in his house, and he monetized that. But there's no assertion I've ever heard that the house would be. 00:41:17
Significant because he was a collector of art. 00:41:25
And I do think. 00:41:29
And I'll say it very clearly. 00:41:30
Pat Hathaway made it very important contributions to Pacific Grove. 00:41:32
He made important contributions to. 00:41:37
Collecting photographs. 00:41:40
And providing those to people and often selling those to people. 00:41:42
For use in research or for just simply displaying? 00:41:46
I think it deserves a lot of credit for that. I just didn't feel that the house. 00:41:50
Is the most representative location for Pat Hathaway's contribution. 00:41:55
I think there's a lot of ways that you can take. 00:42:00
Is the museum obviously has a collection of Historical Society. 00:42:04
But there are places in Pacific Grove where Pat Hathaway should be commemorated. 00:42:08
Is collection and I think for the public. 00:42:13
I I saw very little public benefit that the House. 00:42:15
Would be listed for Pat Hathaway. 00:42:19
And I did feel the house had architectural character. But as I said, under Sequel in the National Register, there are some real 00:42:22
serious concerns about its integrity. 00:42:26
The additions. 00:42:31
And it's also important to point out that the House. 00:42:32
Is not the halfway house, it's the Paul Hathaway house. Pauls were the first owners, the house states in 1925. 00:42:35
There's additions to date to the. 00:42:42
Late 40s, fifties in 1975. 00:42:44
The house is not pristine. 00:42:47
It's still, you know, if you look at the front of the house it it's still kind of looks like, I mean it looks like a 00:42:49
Mediterranean. 00:42:52
Spanish revival house. But if you really begin to look at the house and carefully examine it, you can see the back addition was a 00:42:55
major addition in the late 40s. 00:43:00
And then you have the front porch, which is altered. 00:43:04
And those are those are really important character finding features to determine a property being a significant property in 00:43:07
Pacific Grove, they always have been. 00:43:11
The front facade, the most important. 00:43:16
So I felt that lease under the National Register in the California register didn't qualify. 00:43:18
I also looked at the Civic Grove criteria in a way that. 00:43:24
Sort of helps you provide some guidance, but it's not the overarching. 00:43:27
Thing, that is. 00:43:32
The key to determining eligibility or historic significance for residents. 00:43:34
But it sort of guides you in in that sense. 00:43:38
So it was it was difficult and. 00:43:41
As I said, I I think Pat Hathaway did a wonderful thing. 00:43:45
For the community. 00:43:49
But I just don't think the house is the the best place to represent. 00:43:51
His work, I think there's lots of other opportunities and and places to do that. 00:43:54
So. 00:43:59
Any questions? 00:44:00
I have it up. 00:44:02
I have a lot of questions my my initial one is just a. 00:44:03
Clarifying point and. 00:44:07
You at the start of your comments you you mentioned the phase one and two. 00:44:09
Archaeological. 00:44:14
Surveys. Did you do those as well as the historic research? So you did all three. You did 3 reports. 00:44:17
Initially I did the archaeological study. That was the first thing that I did. 00:44:24
OK. 00:44:28
Hmm. 00:44:29
If you don't hold it down, it's just an on off. There you go. 00:44:33
You got it. Very helpful. Perfect. 00:44:37
Umm and and when were the? 00:44:40
Phase one and phase two archaeological studies done. 00:44:43
Uh, let's see what were the dates of that. So the report was done. 00:44:47
In. 00:44:53
Let's see. I just bought part of that in September. 00:44:56
October was the phase one report, historical report, so was probably September. 00:44:59
I believe. 00:45:05
OK. 00:45:08
I have more. I have a lot, but we'll we'll we'll get there. 00:45:10
OK. Thank you. We may call you back up if we have some questions. I appreciate your testimony. I think that was a wonderful 00:45:14
addition. Thank you. 00:45:18
I don't see any other hands raised. So at this time I'm going to go ahead and close public comment, We'll bring it back to the 00:45:23
board. 00:45:28
We can discuss and then maybe what we'll do is sort of develop what questions that we have for. 00:45:33
The architect or? 00:45:41
Whoever. 00:45:45
Else we may have questions. 00:45:46
Or so. 00:45:48
Did you want to? 00:45:49
Open up with what questions just to us and then we can chime in. 00:45:50
Sure, yeah, I'm happy to start. 00:45:56
I I I want to start with saying that I think the plans look. 00:46:00
They look beautiful to me. 00:46:04
It's my subjective opinion. I think they they look. 00:46:07
Lovely. 00:46:10
Umm. 00:46:11
Have a couple questions. 00:46:13
The first one just. 00:46:16
With, well, maybe the first one is kind of a comment with respect to the AU. 00:46:18
I appreciate that. It's. 00:46:22
Within the. 00:46:26
Code guidelines of the three foot setback I also though. 00:46:28
Hear the comments from the. 00:46:33
Public. 00:46:36
And. 00:46:37
It seems to me that. 00:46:39
Not that we could. I don't think it would be my place to to mandate that it be. 00:46:43
Moved, but certainly I want to just provide my personal comment that it might be a neighborly thing to do. It seems like there is 00:46:48
a lot of space that it could be pushed back. 00:46:54
But I'm not sure. 00:47:01
What the considerations are there, but I wanted to at least state that that. 00:47:03
I think that if if there is an ability to. 00:47:07
Push it back. 00:47:10
Away from both of the. 00:47:12
North and East. 00:47:15
Property lines. 00:47:17
That would be a, in my opinion, neighborly thing to do. 00:47:19
The most managers jump in real quick, and let's just say that that is entirely. 00:47:22
And I know you're you're missing that, but I just want to reiterate that would be entirely up to the applicant since they do meet 00:47:28
the state requirements for an Adu. 00:47:31
For ministerial approval, I've just, I'm not right. I know that. I said yeah, I just want to. I'm just reiterating just for our 00:47:35
sake. Thank you. Thank you. 00:47:39
I I think the. 00:47:45
Central. 00:47:47
Question and that I have. 00:47:48
And it has been, I think, appropriately raised by the public and I've. 00:47:52
I've read through the Phase one assessment. 00:47:57
And and I reached the same conclusion and and I I just have to say I'm a little confused. 00:48:00
Umm. 00:48:06
Page 11 The final paragraph of the report of the written report. 00:48:07
Does. 00:48:12
That. 00:48:13
960 Bayview Ave. does appear to meet criteria on H. 00:48:14
Now set aside the criteria on C which. 00:48:19
I I think. 00:48:23
Subjectively, there's there's valid points to be made there. It's not something that I have the expertise to decide upon. 00:48:25
But. 00:48:32
Regardless criterion age of PG. 00:48:34
Municipal code 2376025. 00:48:38
Appears to have been met and by the. 00:48:42
By the assessments own. 00:48:46
Statement earlier on in the assessment on page. 00:48:48
9. 00:48:52
It says if it is determined that a resource is eligible. 00:48:54
For listing under one or more of the above sources than a phase two. 00:48:59
Historical resource assessment is triggered. 00:49:03
And that is. 00:49:06
Verbatim or very close there too. 00:49:08
To the actual. 00:49:11
City of Pacific Grove Guidelines for Historic Assessments. 00:49:13
On page two of that. 00:49:17
Document says. 00:49:20
If it is determined that a resource is eligible for listing or under one or more of the above sources, than a phase two assessment 00:49:23
is triggered. 00:49:27
So my first and. 00:49:31
Primary question that I have is. 00:49:34
It doesn't. It doesn't seem like this is appropriately before us. It seems like a phase two assessment. 00:49:36
Is required here. 00:49:41
And so that's just my initial question. It seems like there's a hurdle that a phase two assessment should have been done or or 00:49:44
needs to be done and then. 00:49:47
Quite frankly, I'm, I'm. 00:49:51
Now forgive me for my ignorance here, but I'm. 00:49:53
I'm not entirely sure the procedure for. 00:49:56
Whom would? 00:49:59
Would receive and evaluate that phase two assessment, whether it would be the ARB or whether it would be the HRC. 00:50:00
Who would then determine? 00:50:09
And evaluate it. 00:50:11
Evaluate the recommendations and the comments provided in this assessment and then determine whether the property should be on the 00:50:12
HR I. 00:50:16
So that was my. 00:50:20
That's my primary concern and comment. 00:50:22
I also have some comments with respect to the. 00:50:27
The UP I was, I was a little kind of. 00:50:30
I was a little confused there in terms of. 00:50:32
Umm. 00:50:36
In terms of just? 00:50:38
Guidance for for how we determine. 00:50:39
Whether. 00:50:42
What I guess, what guidelines to follow, whether to determine? 00:50:44
Uh. 00:50:47
Whether that should be approved or not, the the 20% of the site of the site with. 00:50:49
Essentially from my read of that meaning that. 00:50:56
It would be 12 feet total, 6 feet times 210 to 20% and then that would essentially be we'd be able to. 00:50:58
They're asking for use to. 00:51:06
I guess. 00:51:09
Lessen some of the side setback. 00:51:10
Uh. 00:51:13
And then? 00:51:14
Increase. 00:51:15
The other setback, So that is all within 12 feet. 00:51:16
But I was confused on what guidelines. 00:51:20
To to evaluate that on so that was a a side. 00:51:22
Subsequent question that I had, Scott, can I get clarity on that? Are you asking is the 12 feet for the AU or for the house? Thank 00:51:26
you. Great question. I didn't know that that was another question that I had. I wasn't entirely sure what the AUP was for, what 00:51:32
setbacks it was it was in it was referring to so. 00:51:38
Thank you. 00:51:44
Do you want to you want to comment on that? 00:51:45
Yes, thank you, Chair. First we. 00:51:48
I apologize that it doesn't, I think in staff. 00:51:53
Part We just make the assumption that because it's ministerially approved at the Adu that all of this is regarding. 00:51:56
The the the primary structure. 00:52:05
So and I believe that it's 14 1/2 feet total for those sides or when you do the 20%, it's 14 1/2 feet since I think it's 73 feet. 00:52:08
Width of the lot. 00:52:22
Just sorry to interject, but sure that that's that's great and very helpful. Just the first sentence. 00:52:25
First part of that first line. 00:52:32
And the report just says the required side yard setback is 10% of site with. 00:52:33
Or 6 feet for each side. So that's where I got the 12 feet, but. 00:52:39
So. 00:52:43
OK, so yeah, so it's. 00:52:45
That's one section if you're going to go with the the 10%. 00:52:49
Then you have. 00:52:55
That's 10% for each side. 00:52:56
So it's right now it's a 73 foot lot. So if you use the 10% it would be. 00:52:59
7.3 feet. 00:53:05
Minimum. 00:53:08
Side yard. 00:53:11
So you'd go to the next standard which needs a use permit is to use the 20%, which is an aggregate of the two. 00:53:12
With a minimum of the three feet. 00:53:19
So it's you take the 20% which is the 14 1/2 feet. 00:53:22
Total. 00:53:26
And you can go 3 feet on down to three feet on one side with approval from the use permit and then 11 1/2, yeah. 00:53:27
Great. That all makes perfect sense. 00:53:36
The. The. 00:53:38
The final point I guess to that is. 00:53:40
What's the guideline? How do I? How are we supposed to determine whether or not? 00:53:43
That. 00:53:48
What's the criteria there for determining whether we should approve? 00:53:49
That. 00:53:53
I I couldn't find it in the code when I looked. 00:53:54
And so I'm not entirely sure how to evaluate that. 00:53:58
Through the chair. Are you asking about approving the administrative use permit? Correct. So that's a staff approval that's not. 00:54:01
Air B approval. 00:54:08
Very good. And we do have findings that we meet to approve it and it's the directors decision. 00:54:10
OK, so then. 00:54:16
And they are. 00:54:18
If I'm wrong, they are meeting the guideline. They're meeting that yes, yes. 00:54:20
If it's not. 00:54:24
OK. That makes sense. That's very helpful. Thank you for the clarity. 00:54:26
Perfect. 00:54:31
Check off that box for me at least. 00:54:32
And then yeah. 00:54:35
The main issue just to. 00:54:37
Loop back is for me. My question is, is that phase two assessment? I'm just. 00:54:39
Confused on why that. 00:54:43
Wasn't done. 00:54:45
And whether it needs to be done, and then to whom it is presented to, to which committee? 00:54:48
So if. 00:54:54
If a phase two. 00:54:56
A historic assessment, yes, was done. 00:54:59
Then would that, would it be dependent on what the phase two result would be, whether it would go to HRC or ARB? No, no. So phase 00:55:03
two is only done of it is actually on the historic resources inventory? 00:55:10
Of phase one is done, if it's questionable, it's basically triggered by age, is that correct? It's a phase 1A. Phase one is 00:55:18
triggered by age, but a phase two is that you already are on the the Historic Resources Inventory and what you're proposing meets 00:55:24
the Secretary of Interior standards for a historic home. 00:55:31
That. 00:55:38
That wasn't my read of the. 00:55:40
Guidelines. So my read of the guidelines was that. 00:55:43
A phase two is automatically triggered if it's on the HR HR, I understood. 00:55:47
But if it's not on the HRI and then there is a phase one assessment and the phase one assessment. 00:55:53
Determines that a resource is eligible. 00:55:59
Then it triggers a phase two. 00:56:02
Yes, but it was determined in the phase one that it's not eligible. 00:56:05
But that's. But no, it wasn't. 00:56:09
But that's the other whole point, is that the phase one assessment in the final paragraph? 00:56:11
Apology for for my confusion if I if I'm misreading this, but it seems mostly that's eligible. 00:56:17
But it does not merit designation eligibility and historical designation it's not. 00:56:23
If then. 00:56:30
So it can meet the criteria for, you know, based on its age, but based on. 00:56:33
The addendum there too it's it's not the best in class example of a home of that style and age. There are other, better 00:56:39
representative. 00:56:43
Examples. 00:56:47
So you can be eligible. Does that make more sense just based on? 00:56:48
Age alone. 00:56:52
But. 00:56:53
Please. Yeah, yeah, I'm. I'm still not. 00:56:55
Convinced there. And that doesn't really seem to make sense to me. So yeah, appreciate more clarity. Yeah, I'll, I'll, I'll do my 00:56:58
best. Sure. So. 00:57:02
Again, when I looked at the house, when I look at any house I look at. 00:57:06
When it was built. 00:57:10
I look at. 00:57:11
The characteristics of the House and the alterations of the House. 00:57:13
I did exactly that and I found that, you know, as I looked at the house more closely, I found more alterations. 00:57:17
I didn't realize the front porch had been altered. I didn't realize the extent of the back you could see when you go inside the 00:57:24
house. 00:57:27
And the other thing that you have before, that was before you is the Paging Turnbull study. 00:57:30
And the Pigeon Turnbull study laid out of context. 00:57:37
And in the study, they have one criterion. It's called significant without integrity. 00:57:40
Basically what that's getting at is that you could have a house. 00:57:45
That may have value, but architecturally it's been altered. 00:57:49
And what has been designed by Hunter at least. 00:57:53
In my opinion, you know. 00:57:57
Takes that house to maintains its historic feeling of a Spanish survival house. 00:58:00
And you know, allows for the individuals to do something more. 00:58:06
In keeping what they desire to do. 00:58:11
Because the house already doesn't have integrity. 00:58:13
So it's sort of a. 00:58:16
It's sort of a catch 22 a little bit, but in this case. 00:58:17
I felt the house. 00:58:20
Still looks like a Mediterranean house, but it's had a lot of alterations. 00:58:22
And you know what? A phase two make a difference. 00:58:27
It it may not because I I if I were to do it, I would argue that the house has already been altered. 00:58:31
Dramatically over the years. 00:58:37
And and maybe not during this period significance because it was Bill 1925. 00:58:39
And what they're doing is sort of taking it and bringing it back to some degree because the porch has been changed. 00:58:43
And then they're pushing it out a little bit in the front, but it won't look dramatically different. 00:58:49
So it's kind of a. 00:58:53
It's an appropriate. 00:58:55
You know, I think you know method to preserve the house, but to enhance the house. 00:58:57
Your question about. 00:59:02
And this is what the falls with the city in terms of. 00:59:04
They're protocol for a house. That's sort of borderline. It's not listed. 00:59:07
And there are other people that I talked to, but I won't name names that felt it shouldn't be listed either. 00:59:13
That are very knowledgeable about the history of Pacific growth. That doesn't mean that it isn't emblematic of. 00:59:19
Mediterranean architecture. It's just that it's lost a lot of its. 00:59:25
Character over the years. 00:59:29
As you said, it's not pristine. 00:59:32
It's definitely not pristine. Yeah, I that that's clearly the case. 00:59:33
Yeah. 00:59:38
Does that. That helps. Unfortunately, unfortunately it doesn't. 00:59:39
I don't disagree at all again that I think the plans look beautiful and I agree with everything you said in terms of if it was, 00:59:44
if, if I thought it was up to me to determine whether or not. 00:59:50
The plans were appropriate and. 00:59:57
Added added value and were in keeping with. 01:00:01
The. 01:00:05
The historical integrity, you know, that's a separate question. And and. 01:00:07
I just don't think that it is. This is the. 01:00:11
It doesn't appear to me that this is the proper form for That appears to me the proper form for determining whether or not the 01:00:14
house. 01:00:18
Whether or not these plans. 01:00:22
Are in our support the historical integrity and are are in line with it. That's the determination it seems to me and I apologize, 01:00:26
I'm I I'm not. I could be ignorant here but it seems to me that's a determination for the HRC and it's at least it seems to me. 01:00:34
That it's a that they phase two assessment. 01:00:41
Should be conducted here. I I certainly think if phase two. 01:00:45
Assessment. 01:00:50
Should be required it seems. 01:00:51
That seems to be just by the flat, plain reading of this phase one assessment. 01:00:55
And by my read of the. 01:01:00
Historical. 01:01:02
Umm. 01:01:04
Pacific Grove Guidelines for Historic Assessments. 01:01:06
So I I've. I've been, I've heard. 01:01:10
Conflicting thoughts here. 01:01:13
But. 01:01:15
Quite frankly. 01:01:16
That's not what I'm reading. 01:01:18
And. 01:01:20
I what what the historical assessment says is. 01:01:23
If the and what your report says. 01:01:26
Is that if it is determined that a resource is eligible doesn't mean that it? 01:01:29
It. 01:01:33
There's a question there and there's an ambiguity ambiguity there in terms of whether it. 01:01:34
It is actually. 01:01:38
Umm. 01:01:40
A historical resource or not, but whether it's. 01:01:41
You can determine whether it potentially could be eligible. 01:01:44
And then your your report says. 01:01:46
It does appear to be eligible to meet that criterion. 01:01:49
So then phase two seems to me that it should be triggered and should be conducted and I would encourage. 01:01:53
Not only phase two, but. 01:02:00
I would encourage. 01:02:02
In the phase two assessment. 01:02:03
That there is a deeper dive and evaluation. 01:02:05
Not only of all the criterion of. 01:02:10
23.76.025. 01:02:12
But specifically of? 01:02:15
Subdivision C. 01:02:16
Because I do think it's not for me to determine, but I do think there are certainly credible arguments here. 01:02:19
That another forum should decide of whether or not. 01:02:25
The home qualifies under that subdivision. It might not. It might be irrelevant. I mean, if it qualifies under age, presumably. 01:02:30
Then it should be under the HRI. 01:02:36
It should be under the Historic Resources inventory, just under that alone. 01:02:40
That we we just need to determine well we just had. 01:02:44
We we had an overabundance of homes on the on the HRI so Page and Turnbull. This is going years back Page and Turnbull was hired 01:02:48
as a consultant. 01:02:53
To go through our historic resources inventory. 01:02:59
And look at all the homes that were on the inventory because back in the 70s it was a very popular thing to. 01:03:02
Have your house be on the historic registry SO page and Turnbull. 01:03:09
And the Historic Resources Committee. 01:03:14
Um went, went through, let me back up Page and Turnbull went through and looked at the homes. 01:03:17
Umm. 01:03:27
That were questionable. There were some that were obviously. 01:03:29
Should not have been on there. 01:03:34
Umm. 01:03:36
The ones that were questionable. 01:03:37
Were brought in front of. 01:03:40
The HRC and they were either kept on or removed from the HRI. 01:03:43
This House, however. 01:03:49
Was never on the HRI. 01:03:51
So that's where this. 01:03:54
Conundrum is. 01:03:56
And in my. 01:03:58
Knowledge and I always say staff. If I am out of line please tell me. 01:04:00
What we are here to do is to look at the. 01:04:08
Architectural. 01:04:13
Guidelines. And it's not our place to determine whether or not this is. 01:04:15
A historic home it is not. 01:04:22
It is. That's what I'm saying. Yes, right. And and years and years and years ago. 01:04:26
Actually when I first started on a RB. 01:04:30
We did see. 01:04:35
Umm. 01:04:38
Historic homes. 01:04:39
And. 01:04:41
I don't know. What do you call them? Regular houses? Non historic homes? 01:04:43
And. 01:04:47
Just within the last probably 5-6 years, Laurel, is that about right? Yeah, it was about four years ago that we started having 01:04:48
that. We split it, yeah, to take some of the load off of the ARB. So then the HRC would then see. 01:04:55
These homes that were on the HRI. 01:05:03
So it's it's a conundrum. 01:05:06
That were in the midst of. 01:05:10
And I can see where you're. 01:05:12
Having a hard time with this. 01:05:14
But. 01:05:17
To me, the if you're gonna, you know, take all this. 01:05:18
Wonderful. 01:05:22
Broth and simmer it down. 01:05:24
The bottom line is. 01:05:28
And this is my opinion. We are here today not to determine whether or not this home. 01:05:30
Should or should not be on the Historic Resources Inventory. 01:05:38
We are supposed to be looking at. 01:05:43
And not even the 80U. 01:05:46
We are supposed to be looking at the plans before us. 01:05:49
And. 01:05:52
Making a determination. 01:05:54
Up to. 01:05:56
Ohh no, we're making, we are making an approval or. 01:06:00
What have you? 01:06:04
Based on our architectural review guidelines. 01:06:06
And I. 01:06:11
New Pat Hathaway. 01:06:13
I bought pictures from him, thought he was a really wonderful person. 01:06:15
And and I think there is a place. 01:06:20
That we should honestly have a. 01:06:23
A permanent. 01:06:27
Display of the things that he curated and collected and. 01:06:29
Umm. 01:06:33
But. 01:06:34
I have to agree with the. 01:06:36
The report that I'm reading. 01:06:39
I I I think I don't mean to just monopolize the time. And I'm here and I appreciate. 01:06:43
All of those comments. 01:06:50
The the only. 01:06:53
Point. 01:06:54
And I apologize if I haven't been clear. 01:06:55
So I I do take. 01:07:00
Issue with the underlying. 01:07:02
Assertion that. 01:07:06
That the plans are properly before us in whether we have proper standing is is how I would phrase it and and I just I I framed 01:07:08
that. 01:07:14
Only because. 01:07:20
The phase one assessment. 01:07:22
Says. 01:07:26
That it does appear to meet a criterion. 01:07:27
And then the phase one assessment and our guidelines say that if it does appear to meet a criterion. 01:07:30
It requires a phase two assessment, so. 01:07:37
If, if, the assessment said. 01:07:40
It doesn't appear to meet any criterion. 01:07:43
Then I would. 01:07:46
Agree with you that this would be properly before us to evaluate. 01:07:47
But it doesn't say that, and so I. 01:07:53
I could not. 01:07:56
I could not. 01:07:58
Approve it. 01:07:59
Under the under these circumstances I suppose it I hope that makes sense and and again I I follow your lead also Sarah in terms of 01:08:01
saying. 01:08:05
If I'm out of line, please let me know. 01:08:09
You know, I've only been here for for half a year, so I'm. 01:08:12
If I'm if I'm missing something, that's what I'm I would. I would like to be informed about it. 01:08:16
Please Madam Chair, can I ask a quick question and maybe this might help since you have the person who wrote the report the if you 01:08:21
notice the criterion A through H are all inclusionary. 01:08:27
I. 01:08:34
Is exclusionary. 01:08:35
And I think the question you might want to pose to our historian is why? 01:08:37
And, and I, by the way, for those at home, whether a resource with historic or cultural significance retains historic integrity. 01:08:45
So the question might be, why didn't that end up on the report? 01:08:53
That could be. 01:08:57
Because that that would be like you meet these, all of these, and it says at the end there's no integrity. 01:09:00
So that's the question that I think that. 01:09:06
You might want to. 01:09:08
Pose if you're so inclined because. 01:09:10
There is one exclusionary. 01:09:13
Item. 01:09:16
I'll I'll one more and I'll I'll concede time. 01:09:20
Just intuitively, I'll just close on this point for for now, just intuitively. 01:09:25
It seems. 01:09:30
This would seem to make sense to me that. 01:09:31
How it would work? 01:09:35
Would be. 01:09:36
You would conduct a phase one assessment. 01:09:37
And what that phase one assessment is trying to do is determine hey is are, are there some potential. 01:09:39
Concerns here. 01:09:45
Do we have some potential? 01:09:47
Issues. 01:09:50
That could make this home, could could say that this home is should be on the HRI and if that is. 01:09:51
If if there is something there, there is an inkling. 01:09:58
Then we should delve deeper. 01:10:01
And ensure. 01:10:03
And to determine whether or not that is in fact the case. 01:10:05
And that would be a phase two assessment and that's what the seems to me what the historical guidelines say. 01:10:09
Umm. 01:10:16
But that's that's just my read of it and I apologize if I'm being obtuse and. 01:10:17
Not not correctly. 01:10:22
Assessing the situation, for lack of a better word. 01:10:25
No, I appreciate that. 01:10:28
OK. If we have more questions, we may call you back though. 01:10:30
Thank you. 01:10:33
I will politely disagree. I don't think a phase two would be necessary. I think there are enough findings and information here to 01:10:37
make a decision both here and. 01:10:41
Really. 01:10:47
The Historic Resources Board of So inclined. 01:10:49
I think the report's pretty clear that it it's it's eligible, but it's lost so much integrity that it's not a good example, and it 01:10:51
wasn't found to be eligible. 01:10:56
Under the criteria of an important person. 01:11:01
And that doesn't diminish Mr. Hathaway's contributions. I personally had not heard of him before, but I really enjoyed learning 01:11:04
about him. 01:11:08
And and I. 01:11:11
I think we should be grateful we don't often have physical. 01:11:13
Materials that represent notable people's contributions to this city and in this case we do, we have a really large collection 01:11:17
that the community. 01:11:21
Banded together to preserve. 01:11:26
And so there is an area that you can go and and see his materials and all of his photos digitally and then physical prints as 01:11:28
well. 01:11:32
So we don't need to tether it to the House. 01:11:36
Right. And if there are three other locations, you know, every every place can't be historic. 01:11:39
So we. 01:11:44
I concur with the historians report that that the House. 01:11:46
Just by nature would not be historic and. 01:11:51
Relationship to Mr. Hathaway. 01:11:56
Umm. 01:11:58
And I do have a couple comments on the actual design. 01:12:00
Umm. 01:12:05
Specifically the tree removal, I think we covered through Mr. Ono's report, there was concern. 01:12:07
We did get public comment on the tree. 01:12:14
But but Mr. Owners report was pretty clear that it was diseased. 01:12:16
Parking appears adequate. It's a very long driveway and. 01:12:22
Street parking there. 01:12:27
In regards to the positioning of the AD U, with the understanding that it's ministerially approved, I'm not sure if the 01:12:28
positioning is. 01:12:32
Umm. 01:12:36
Up for debate or not but? 01:12:38
My my comments. I know we have received comments from the Westerly neighbor about privacy concerns. 01:12:41
Umm. 01:12:47
The AD is actually on the furthest. 01:12:48
Side opposite of their property. 01:12:50
And I I feel that the way the design is laid out, the view impacts are kind of buffered by that patio and you're looking into the 01:12:53
living space not necessarily a. 01:12:59
A private bedroom. So for the Westerly neighbor, it does seem to be the most neighborly design and positioning. 01:13:05
And then the easterly neighbor with concerns about the three foot setback. I would like to hear Mr. Eldridge's design strategy for 01:13:13
for that. 01:13:16
Placement. It does seem logical. 01:13:21
Although. 01:13:25
I'm and I'm not sure how much. 01:13:26
This project would benefit from scooting it over a couple feet. 01:13:29
And then finally, it really is a conservative design that Harkins back to the original. 01:13:35
Design and feel and very modest. 01:13:42
For the for the property. 01:13:46
And. 01:13:48
Also with the AU it does contribute to the to the housing goals for this community and we do need to absorb housing units across 01:13:49
the city, so therefore I fully support this project. 01:13:54
I'm gonna echo what what? Anna said. Thank you. Made my job easier. 01:14:07
I think the design is. 01:14:11
Is fantastic. I really like it. I. 01:14:13
Yes, I hear neighborhood good neighborly concerns. We certainly have all been there. 01:14:16
Umm. 01:14:21
But I'm respecting what I'm hearing from the city that we're here to to vote on the design. 01:14:24
And to understand the historic decisions have been made. 01:14:30
And then? 01:14:34
As Pat's wonderful contributions can be can be taken in with in other locations. 01:14:35
I don't have any other comments. 01:14:42
Maybe we could ask the architect to come up and just. 01:14:44
Just share with us because you talked, didn't talk a whole heck of a lot about the design, but I would love to hear. 01:14:49
About the side yard setback and. 01:14:57
You know there's always a method to your madness. If you could just share with us your thoughts. Can you share the OR screen share 01:14:59
the site plan? 01:15:04
Thank you. Helpful. 01:15:08
That's believe the existing site plan. 01:15:24
Existing. 01:15:29
You're gonna need to get into the proposed sheets. 01:15:30
Keep going. 01:15:33
There you go. 01:15:35
Yep. 01:15:36
Stop right there. 01:15:37
So this this is actually the proposed floor plan, but we can start here. 01:15:39
When I started working for the new owners of this property. 01:15:45
They had the objective of creating a three bedroom home and to do that we. 01:15:50
Split these 400 and some odd square foot additions half towards Bayview and half towards the rear yard. 01:15:58
As you can see in this plan, the the darker beige colour represents additions. 01:16:04
And then the lighter colors are the existing footprint. 01:16:11
Umm. 01:16:14
In the backyard, we were constrained by our desire to preserve the Redwood tree. That's. 01:16:18
Quite close to the. 01:16:26
Proposed. 01:16:29
Project. 01:16:30
Between the proposed deck and proposed master bedroom, Mr. Ono gave us a 7 foot. 01:16:31
Set back from the diameter of the tree and we respected that and. 01:16:38
So there's reasons that we are keeping the. 01:16:43
The master bedroom addition. 01:16:47
On the West side of the property because we're trying to protect this. 01:16:50
Protected Redwood tree in. 01:16:54
Moving those additions. 01:16:58
Towards any closer to the tree would be detrimental to the tree's health. So there's that's one of the reasons we asked for the 01:17:01
AUP. 01:17:04
It is administratively approved. 01:17:09
And we met the findings for that part of it that was also just to kind of maintain one consistent line with these additions front 01:17:13
and rear along that existing 4 foot, six side yard with the West property boundary. 01:17:20
It just looked clean that way to to us. 01:17:27
So that I think that speaks for the most part to the. 01:17:33
Kind of the, well, I would also say that, you know, we wanted to create a little bit more of an inviting portico to the front 01:17:37
door. 01:17:40
There was an addition. 01:17:45
Permitted edition. I believe it was circa 1975 where they. 01:17:47
Bumped out of very low and I would say oppressive. 01:17:52
Shed. 01:17:55
Roof over the front door, overhang with a with an. 01:17:58
Arched opening and. 01:18:01
If you look at any photographs of that, it it's very dark, it's very low and not particularly inviting. 01:18:04
And we felt that opening up this. 01:18:11
Gable and and giving it a little bit. 01:18:14
A little bit more pizzazz and. 01:18:17
We added some wrought iron details to it and and all of this is kind of trying to pay homage to the. 01:18:20
Spanish revival and Mediterranean style that that we were working with. We're not trying to deviate in any direction other than 01:18:28
just kind of celebrating what we really the best parts of this house. 01:18:33
You know, I've let my historian speak a little bit to the how, how he does his job because frankly that's why he's here. But I've 01:18:40
worked on a lot of historic properties and. 01:18:46
Usually when I step onto a property and it's historic. 01:18:53
It looks like a time capsule. It's all original it it's intact, at least the the majority of the structure. 01:18:57
Has been unmodified and that's what makes it significant. And. 01:19:07
This property is is an example of something that's really been chopped up over time and if you go up to the city and you pull the 01:19:11
permit file, you can see the record of permits. So there have been over time it's been added on to, it's been modified. The 01:19:18
additions in the back in my opinion are are very unattractive with this flat parapet roof. 01:19:25
We're trying to bring back the the. 01:19:32
Clay tile roof that is much more attractive we're. 01:19:35
We're embellishing upon a lot of the details that I think are appropriate for this style of a home and. 01:19:39
We've really worked hard to get it here and and I I think it's a nice looking project. I I realize a lot of members of the 01:19:46
community don't want to see any change here, but. 01:19:50
I have to respectfully. 01:19:57
Stick to my guns and try to. 01:19:59
Get this approved on behalf of my client because I I I just. 01:20:01
I don't feel bad about anything I've done here. 01:20:04
Umm. 01:20:07
But again, this is a this is a home that's been chopped up and modified. Again, the permits are all on file. They my historian 01:20:09
references them in his report. 01:20:15
Umm. 01:20:21
I've worked in a lot of historic homes and they've. 01:20:22
They it's just not the same thing. And. 01:20:25
I realized Scott this you're you're asking a lot of questions. 01:20:27
Some of them to me are just, in my opinion, having worked on a lot of historic homes. It's it's it's pretty obvious to me why, why 01:20:32
this is a different. 01:20:36
Situation. And again, I think we all agree. 01:20:40
Mr. Hathaway's collection is is important and it's it's being preserved. 01:20:44
This just doesn't seem like the most appropriate way to particularly. 01:20:51
For the public to enjoy that. 01:20:57
It's a private residence and a residential community that's full of private homes and and. 01:21:00
I. 01:21:07
I feel good about what I'm doing here, so. 01:21:08
Thank you. Do you have any other questions for me? 01:21:10
I I think just to address the the placement of the AD and I can see how it's aligned with the with the garage. 01:21:13
Again, is Mr. Anna's report. 01:21:22
Noted it. It is a seriously hazardous and diseased tree and. 01:21:24
As we all know, these Monterey Pines are dangerous and. 01:21:30
Once that was identified as as, I mean there's. 01:21:34
3 trees in the backyard and they're all large trees and and it and Mr. made it clear that this tree. 01:21:37
Was the one that was diseased and and most likely you know, to to be hazardous to the surrounding community so. 01:21:43
Once it was identified that that tree was. 01:21:50
Hazardous. 01:21:54
We looked at the property accordingly and that corner of the property became. 01:21:55
The the ideal place to to locate the AU. It's also the lowest point on the property. 01:22:01
And I think that's important to note because. 01:22:07
As we push it. 01:22:10
In any direction. 01:22:12
Either West or South, which is the only direction we can push it. It will increase in its height and the the windows that that 01:22:14
face. 01:22:19
The various neighbors we'll have, we'll be looking out at those properties from a higher vantage point. 01:22:24
And it's also important to note that. 01:22:31
On both of those property lines there's a six foot wooden fence and we plan on maintaining those fences. 01:22:34
And so when you really look out these windows, you're not looking directly into the neighbors yard, you're looking primarily at a 01:22:40
wood fence and then up towards the sky. 01:22:44
Umm. 01:22:49
I'd be happy to talk to my client about subtle adjustments to the location of it, but I still think it it belongs in that corner 01:22:52
of the property. 01:22:55
And again, it's really not subject to much discussion here based on state law, but I believe in being neighborly and and looking 01:23:00
at that and I'd like to talk to my client a little bit more about about the concerns there, but. 01:23:06
Again, I also think if you push it towards a higher elevation. 01:23:13
It's only going to make it some. 01:23:18
And privacy issues? More of a concern in my opinion, so. 01:23:20
Yeah. 01:23:25
Any other questions? 01:23:26
No, that was wonderful. Thank you. If we need you, we'll call you back up. Thank you. 01:23:28
I have one please. 01:23:34
Just wait to talk until you get right up to your microphone. Pretty please. Thank you. Thank you. One of the other considerations, 01:23:38
and it's not ratified as I understand it, is this idea of character properties. 01:23:43
That are not listed properties on the HRI. 01:23:49
Is that correct? 01:23:53
There's been discussion, there's there's discussions, but there's not an existing character list, right, exactly. And that that's 01:23:54
kind of where I was going with this is it has character. It still feels Mediterranean, but I'm aware that there's been some 01:23:59
dramatic changes to it. 01:24:04
And they're not, want to say, sympathetic, but they're not. 01:24:09
Historically. 01:24:13
You know, a portrayal of the original property. 01:24:14
And the character issue is not ratified, so you can't. 01:24:17
You know, say, well, maybe it's a character property, but not worthy of listing. 01:24:22
So I just want to make that point and maybe someday there will be. 01:24:26
That official. 01:24:29
Character property as a as a second or third tier. 01:24:31
That makes sense. We're 4th tier I guess. 01:24:35
And then properties like this that have been altered but still kind of have a feel can be considered as character properties, but 01:24:38
not worthy of that but the listing. 01:24:43
Official listings. 01:24:48
Thank you. And I'm glad that he brought that up, because I actually sat on the. 01:24:49
Umm. 01:24:56
Historic Resources Inventory. 01:24:58
Panel. 01:25:02
With Page and Turnbull and we had lengthy discussions about creating. 01:25:04
Separate like sub lists of. 01:25:11
Character. 01:25:18
Character homes. 01:25:20
And that they wouldn't be subject to. 01:25:21
The same rules as a historic. 01:25:24
Umm. 01:25:29
Home. 01:25:30
But in having these very lengthy discussions, we realized. 01:25:32
We would be pigeonholing ourselves. 01:25:38
And creating a whole new set of. 01:25:41
Issues. 01:25:45
And so. 01:25:47
You know, discussing it ad nauseam, we decided against that and. 01:25:48
Umm. 01:25:53
But it's but but it's a valid it's a valid thing and and on paper it sure looks great. 01:25:54
To do that but. 01:26:01
Umm. 01:26:03
I. 01:26:04
Umm. 01:26:05
Quite frankly, I really like. 01:26:09
Um, what the Architect has done here? I I like the change of the entry. I feel like the. 01:26:12
The two. 01:26:19
Remodels that were done that are at least on record that have been done, I think did no favors. 01:26:22
To the home and I think that the. 01:26:30
The modifications. 01:26:36
And maybe subsequent undoing of. 01:26:38
You know some of the things that were done back in the. 01:26:42
Late 40s and mid 70s I think are going to. 01:26:45
Umm. 01:26:50
Bring back this house and make it. 01:26:53
Like it's. 01:26:56
You know, original glory. 01:26:57
Umm. 01:27:00
I just, I think it's a wonderful home. I think it's it's. 01:27:02
Unfortunate that we're. 01:27:07
That were put in this position of the. 01:27:08
The his historic. 01:27:11
A piece of it, I I don't think that the. 01:27:14
I think that. 01:27:20
Probably the. 01:27:23
Only thing that might make this. 01:27:24
This. 01:27:26
Home, a historic home, would be the fact that Pat Hathaway it was his family home, but I believe strongly that. 01:27:28
He was a wonderful person and he. 01:27:37
Collected. 01:27:41
Some amazing works, but I do not think that that you know based on my understanding and. 01:27:42
Umm. 01:27:50
Studies that that does not determine this to be. 01:27:52
Umm. 01:27:56
A historic home because of. 01:27:57
The person who? 01:28:00
Resided there. 01:28:02
That those are my comments. Does anybody else want to? 01:28:05
Comment and I'll conclude or won't be that presumptuous. I'll I'll just finish myself. 01:28:08
But again, reemphasizing that I think the plans are. 01:28:15
Beautiful. I would. 01:28:19
Love to have that as as as my personal home. 01:28:21
I just think my my. 01:28:27
Issue is an issue of procedure. The statute which is statutes here subject ones. 01:28:29
Which I deal with daily 23.76.03 O. 01:28:37
Says that the IT is the HRC's determination to decide whether or not a property should be listed on the HRI. So it's all 01:28:42
irrelevant on, in my opinion, of whether or not we think we. 01:28:49
Think this property should be on the HR I. It's not a determination for us to make. 01:28:55
I think that a phase two assessment is has been triggered should be done. 01:29:01
And then the HRC HRC should detect should determine whether or not the home is on an HR is on the HRI. 01:29:06
And then proceed accordingly. 01:29:14
OK, great. 01:29:17
Do you have any more comment? 01:29:21
I don't want to belabor this too much, but I'm I. 01:29:24
Maybe I shouldn't, but I'm not sure what you know. 01:29:28
This project or might gain from the from the phase two in my opinion and I do have experience with historical. 01:29:31
Properties and and procedurally so I I think I. 01:29:39
Would. 01:29:44
Yeah. 01:29:45
Not recommend that and leverage the. 01:29:48
Historians reports that we have and even his rebuttal. Thank you for providing a rebuttal. 01:29:53
That was nice. 01:29:58
To do to respond to public comment there. 01:30:00
I think we can probably. 01:30:04
Wrap this up and. 01:30:07
If somebody would like to make a motion. 01:30:10
I'll make a motion to approve this project as is. 01:30:17
No conditions. 01:30:21
I'll second that. 01:30:26
OK, so there's a motion on the table, and that motion would be. 01:30:28
To approve the. 01:30:35
APA UP and. 01:30:39
Uh. 01:30:42
Tree permit 22-0303 Subject to the findings, Conditions of Approval and Class 1 Sequoia Categorical Exemption. 01:30:43
We have a motion, We have a second. 01:30:51
Can we get a roll call vote please? 01:30:54
Yes, member Bornstein. 01:30:58
Aye. 01:31:00
Secretary Suppan. 01:31:01
Aye, chair Boyle. 01:31:02
Aye. 01:31:04
Member Brooks. 01:31:05
Motion passes 321 and 1 recuse. 01:31:07
Thank you. 01:31:13
All right, moving on to item. 01:31:17
8C. 01:31:25
I think I'm going to wait for a second and see if we're going to get our. 01:31:26
Vice chair. 01:31:31
Back and. 01:31:34
Item 8C. 01:31:38
Would be architectural permit 22-0320 for 170 Slope Ave. 01:31:44
Do we have a staff report? 01:31:52
Yes, we do. 01:31:56
Good afternoon Chair Boyle and board members. 01:32:01
The proposed project includes the remodel of an existing 1054 square foot two-story single family dwelling involving the 01:32:03
replacement of existing windows. 01:32:08
Replacement of the existing composition asphalt shingle roof. 01:32:14
And extending the main entry porch area and roof overhang. 01:32:18
The proposed proposed project also includes a 307 square foot wood deck in the rear at the basement level. 01:32:22
The resulting residents, including the basement, would have a gross floor area of 1065 square feet. 01:32:29
Which does not include the 163 square foot AU that has been proposed. 01:32:35
As proposed, the project complies with the zoning regulations set forth in Pacific Grove Municipal Code 23.28 R 4. 01:32:43
This includes, but is not limited to, height limits, setbacks, gross floor area, and allowable site and building coverage. 01:32:50
No exempt exceptions have been requested. 01:32:57
And staff has reviewed the guidelines, plans and zoning code and determined the project is consistent with the applicable 01:33:02
requirements. 01:33:05
CD staff determined the project to be exempt from the requirement to obtain a coastal development permit and forward this 01:33:10
determination to the Coastal Commission. 01:33:14
Staff recommends the IRB approved the architectural permit subject to the recommended findings, conditions of approval and a Class 01:33:20
1 Sequa exemption for existing facilities. 01:33:25
This concludes the staff presentation. I'm available for questions as is the applicant. Thank you. 01:33:30
Thank you for that report. 01:33:38
Does the applicant care to? 01:33:41
Give some testimony. 01:33:45
Let me see. 01:33:53
He got his hands raised, Mr. Innards. 01:33:54
Yes, hi there. Are you able to hear me? 01:33:59
Yes. 01:34:02
Great. I don't have any additional comments to add. I think the staff report is sufficient. Thank you for giving it. I just want 01:34:03
to make sure that I'm here for any questions if you have them. Thank you. 01:34:09
Thank you. 01:34:15
OK. We will go ahead and open this up for public comment. 01:34:20
Anybody in the audience here wish to speak? You can go ahead and go to the podium. 01:34:24
And our friends in. 01:34:30
Virtual land can raise their. 01:34:33
Virtual hands. 01:34:36
I have Miss Dahmer's hand raised. Great. 01:34:38
Thank you. 01:34:43
Of course, you know that the picture you're seeing up there of the project is absolutely. 01:34:45
Erroneous. 01:34:52
I hope you have received my letter with. 01:34:55
Pictures Ohh yes I'm a resident of this street. Slowed Ave. It's 3 Doors Down from me. 01:34:58
And. 01:35:05
It's an interesting thing that nothing was said of the fact that this is red tagged. 01:35:09
Because they violated. 01:35:15
A building without a permit. 01:35:17
And just far exceeding. 01:35:20
What they were legally able to do. 01:35:23
And this is this is very disconcerting. 01:35:27
Because of the process. Again, it's it's another process. 01:35:32
Like I first brought up this project at the HRI. 01:35:36
Because. 01:35:41
Because it was supposedly the only way that it was going, only public hearing it was going to have. 01:35:44
And yes, it was determined, not historical, which that's OK with me too. 01:35:52
Obviously I'm historical. 01:35:58
But. 01:36:02
The problem was this is a. 01:36:02
An LLC. 01:36:05
That bought the property actually has a homeowners exemption on it. 01:36:07
Though none of them have lived here. 01:36:12
And got an interior remodel permit. 01:36:14
And then decided to add a JDUADU on. 01:36:18
That had a door connecting to the STR with an active license, so I had to bring these things up in a roundabout way to the HRI. 01:36:22
HRC, Because that was the only public hearing it was going to have. 01:36:33
In working with Joe Sidor and the problems that it had with the connecting door. 01:36:38
And all these other ones, it was definitely. 01:36:43
Then scheduled. 01:36:47
For a hearing to get an architectural. 01:36:49
Permit itself. 01:36:52
It has an exemption from the CDP, which is the only way we found out about it anyway, was the CDP. 01:36:55
Application form which. 01:37:02
Miss Lisa Chiani was on the list. 01:37:04
They got it so that the plans were there. 01:37:07
OK, here we are. 01:37:10
At Mr. Joe Sidor, as you all know, is. 01:37:12
Not with us right now, I. 01:37:18
Certainly worked with him and with Chief Madalone and. 01:37:22
With Andrew Butler. 01:37:27
Because of these extreme violations. 01:37:29
Of our code. 01:37:34
Umm. 01:37:37
So here we go, Joe Sidor had said. Ohh yes, all of this would be in. 01:37:38
The report which the report you have right now is. 01:37:46
I consider it a fallacy. 01:37:51
Umm. 01:37:55
Unfortunately what happened was the also the construction workers of doing this illegal work not permitted work. 01:37:58
Outside. 01:38:07
Just going ahead with the plans that they've done, which from my photos I I hope you can see that they've already done it. 01:38:09
Umm. 01:38:18
The workers. 01:38:21
We have a residential parking permit program on our street, first set up in 1983 or 4 when the aquarium opened up because we are 01:38:22
the closest free parking to them. 01:38:29
So we have an agreement with the Coastal Commission. 01:38:36
And set an ordinance here. 01:38:40
That it's only a limited 2 hour public parking and all the rest must have permits. 01:38:43
And we do, we pay for our permits these. 01:38:50
Contractors or construction company decided they really didn't need them and their workers took over the public parking on our 01:38:54
street. 01:38:59
For all day. 01:39:04
Can you we We appreciate your testimony and gut Your time is up. Would you mind giving us about another 10 seconds? 01:39:07
Thank you. I don't have any particular problem. I don't like it now, but that's just personal. I think the. 01:39:19
It's it's kind of a ridiculous thing, but other than that, it's like whatever you change, you can change. 01:39:27
But one thing that needs to happen is that they buy a permit for their workers on the street. 01:39:34
Thank you. 01:39:39
Thank you. Appreciate you being here. 01:39:41
All right, we've got one more. 01:39:44
Hand up. 01:39:46
Bing. 01:39:49
Yes, we have Miss Chiani. 01:39:50
Thank you. 01:39:54
Well, the staff oral report was very incomplete. 01:39:55
Causing inga to. 01:40:02
You know to have to spend all her. 01:40:04
3 minutes. 01:40:07
Explaining the actual situation. 01:40:09
And and the and the. You know, the written report wasn't complete. 01:40:12
So it's really disappointing the process. 01:40:17
For this one, I also was at the HRC. 01:40:20
Hearing and and they came very close, actually to putting it on the HRI. 01:40:24
Umm. 01:40:30
But. 01:40:32
In any case. 01:40:33
There's been a real. 01:40:35
Lack of genuine. 01:40:40
Umm. 01:40:42
Responsibility for this project. 01:40:43
And. 01:40:46
Umm. 01:40:47
I I wish I could suggest some mitigation. 01:40:49
Other than finally getting a a parking permit. 01:40:53
But. 01:40:57
I. 01:40:59
It. 01:41:01
It's too much for me, this one. 01:41:02
This is too convoluted. 01:41:04
And. 01:41:06
And it should should not have. 01:41:07
It should have been. 01:41:09
Stopped, and it should. 01:41:11
I don't know. 01:41:13
Been required to do. 01:41:18
Something. 01:41:20
To. 01:41:21
Make up for for all that they have done that was not in cordance with their permits. 01:41:23
Thank you. 01:41:31
Thank you. 01:41:35
I see no other hands raised. 01:41:38
OK. We can go ahead and close public comment and I. 01:41:43
I'm just going to. 01:41:51
Say my one little thing. 01:41:54
My. 01:41:56
Be in my bonnet is that it is a. 01:41:57
Huge. 01:42:00
Umm. 01:42:02
Disappointment to me when people. 01:42:03
Go above and beyond their. 01:42:06
Permits and their scope of work. I'm in this industry. 01:42:08
It takes more time to go. 01:42:12
Along with what the rules, regulations and laws are, and it's the right thing to do. 01:42:16
And. 01:42:21
Unfortunately. 01:42:23
What these people did before? 01:42:24
Umm. 01:42:27
Is sort of none, in my opinion, none of our business. We are looking at it now. We're trying to. 01:42:31
Basically right or wrong? 01:42:37
And. 01:42:40
Uh. 01:42:42
I. 01:42:43
My apologies, I usually try to go last but. 01:42:47
I'll just leave it be in my bonnet right now. 01:42:51
Umm. 01:42:54
I am I also completely? 01:42:55
Feel I live on a narrow St. I've got construction next door to me. I've got construction across the street from me. I have 01:43:00
construction going on at my own home. Parking is an absolute nightmare. So I can I I can feel for. 01:43:07
What Inga is going through? 01:43:15
I did talk to. 01:43:18
The building inspector and. 01:43:23
He basically said that. 01:43:26
It is. 01:43:30
Umm. 01:43:32
Something that is gonna need to be. 01:43:33
Brought up the whole parking permit thing is going to need to be brought up with the Police Department. 01:43:35
And essentially. 01:43:41
We can't scold these people. 01:43:46
Anymore than I just did, but. 01:43:49
We just have to, I think, look at. 01:43:53
What they're doing now and try and. 01:43:55
You know, on the exterior. 01:44:02
Apply our guidelines and see if it's something that we're. 01:44:05
We're OK with so that we can all. 01:44:08
Move forward and. 01:44:11
Move ahead. 01:44:12
Umm. 01:44:14
I don't know, but you guys go ahead and I'll get off my soapbox. 01:44:17
Well, can I ask for clarity because I'm one here we are trying to approve those who are following the rules and laws and. 01:44:22
And getting permits ahead of time. 01:44:29
So what happens in this case when they move forward? 01:44:31
Without the permits. 01:44:35
I mean it's red tagged but. 01:44:37
Yes, through the chair that that's what happens. There's been a stop work order put on there by. 01:44:39
Code enforcement and the building official. 01:44:45
OK. 01:44:47
And and yes, the Chief of police has gotten involved with the parking and all the all all of engage concerns are being addressed. 01:44:48
OK, there's really your purview, so I tried to keep the report. 01:44:56
For you to help these people come into compliance with their architectural permit with their minor. 01:45:02
Exterior proposals, OK, thanks for your clarity. Sure. 01:45:08
Really. Is this on? Yeah. 01:45:12
If let's just say they did a major. 01:45:15
Change to the front. 01:45:19
And they brought it to ARB and we could see the picture before as we did. 01:45:21
On the front page of the plans. 01:45:27
And then? 01:45:29
We do our drive by. 01:45:30
And if we are just like, absolutely not. 01:45:32
We're not going to approve it. 01:45:36
Then they're gonna have to. 01:45:37
Rip it out. 01:45:40
So that I mean that would be worst case scenario. 01:45:41
If that makes sense. 01:45:46
Is anybody else? Did you have more comments Christy? 01:45:49
Is the applicant available to speak or? 01:45:53
Said questions aren't. 01:45:57
Yes, Matt. 01:45:59
And then once that's. 01:46:01
I'll unmute myself. 01:46:04
First of all, I'd like to apologize on behalf of my client for the parking issues caused and for the work that was done beyond 01:46:07
permit. The work that was done beyond permit was the beginning of this lower deck in the backyard. 01:46:13
Umm. 01:46:19
And so both, you know, that's what caused the stop work order. I'm sorry for the inconvenience that it's caused for our to the 01:46:20
neighbors and we will, you know, act in accordance to Pacific Grove regulations in the future. 01:46:27
Um. 01:46:35
You know the work that was permitted on the interior. That's not. 01:46:37
Required to be reviewed, are reviewed by the IRB, was done with the building permit. The deck was beyond that scope and we 01:46:42
apologize for that. 01:46:47
And we're really, yeah, here to permit the work that we have proposed in this planning permit, which is the conversion of this AU, 01:46:51
the replacement of exterior windows. 01:46:56
And they're replacement of the garage door with those double French doors that you see there as an entry into the AU. 01:47:01
Thanks, Matt. 01:47:12
Do you mind if I ask them? 01:47:13
Just a few questions for you, Matt. Are the French doors the only? 01:47:15
Access doors for the Adu. 01:47:20
They are, yes. 01:47:24
OK. 01:47:26
Umm. 01:47:27
And the sunroom and storage room and hallway. There are those all conditioned spaces. 01:47:27
Those are not as shown on the plan. 01:47:35
Because they're those are existing spaces that are remaining intact. OK, I thank you. Sorry, the cross hatching is a little bit 01:47:44
light here. I see the key now, OK. 01:47:48
Umm. 01:47:53
OK. 01:47:56
I know that was kind of existing. I just find that area a little bit awkward. 01:47:57
But does look to be existing, so you're just kind of working in those constraints. 01:48:03
Umm. 01:48:09
That's all my questions for now. 01:48:12
Great. Thank you. Anybody else? 01:48:14
I do have a couple of questions. 01:48:19
It it seems to me that. 01:48:21
This proposed AD is just converting an existing garage. 01:48:24
Into an AD U correct? 01:48:28