04/22/2015 Historic Heritage Committee Special Meeting Adopted 06/17/2015Historic Heritage Committee Meeting
April 22, 2015 at 4:30 P.M.
I. OPEN MEETING
Chair Nicole Robinson called the meeting to order at 4:35 p.m.
II. REPORT ON POSTING THE AGENDA AND ROLL CALL
Planning Technician Kelsey Heyd reported that the agenda for the Special Historic Heritage
Committee meeting of April 22, 2015 was posted on April 17, 2015 at 10:20a.m.
Roll Call:
Present: Committee Member Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Chair Nicole Robinson, Committee Member
Toby Echelberry, Committee Member Steve Ashford
Absent: Vice Chair Edith Edde
Staff Present: Planning Division Manager Sue Martin, Planning Technician Kelsey Heyd,
Planner I Valerie Negrete
III. OLD BUSINESS:
Committee Member Steve Ashford recused himself due to owning property within 500 feet
of the subject property.
A. The applicant requests Architectural and Site Review approval to modify a two-story
4,689 square foot URM (unreinforced masonry) building and a one-story 3,289 square foot
URM building located within the Downtown Historic District at 7525 Monterey Street a nd
7517 Monterey Street. Both buildings are located on one lot (APN 799 -06-069). The
proposed project includes the re-establishment of approximately 5,300 square feet of retail
and commercial space on the first floors and two (2) apartment units on the second floor of
7525 Monterey Street, along with a series of architectural modifications to the Monterey
Street facades, such as new storefronts and new windows/doors. Proposed Gourmet Alley
improvements include installation of new windows and doors, a new trash enclosure, and
various at-grade improvements and landscaping details. (AS 14-26 architectural and site
review); Akshar LLC, Applicant
Planner I Valerie Negrete presented the project.
Committee Member Peter Leroe-Muñoz asked staff if the project as proposed would bring
the structures up to building standards for URM buildings.
Planner Negrete confirmed that this was correct.
Chair Robinson opened the Public Comment period.
Carol DeSantis stated that she was quite impressed with the project as proposed. She did
emphasize the importance of “contributing” and “non-contributing” buildings based on
historical standards. She stated in her opinion that the one-story building had retained
enough of its historical characteristics and would therefore be considered as a contributing
building. She stated she did not believe the two-story building would be considered as a
contributing building, but the proposed project was well designed. She encouraged that the
committee take the secretary of interior standards as well as contributing and non-
contributing design into consideration as more projects are presented to them for review.
Steve Ashford stated that he liked the project as proposed. He asked Reid Lerner, the
Architect, if the windows on the second story will open.
Lerner confirmed that the windows will open as required by the Fire Marshal since they’re
bedrooms and need to be rescue windows.
Ashford stated that he did not wish to see trash enclosures blocking potential storefront in
the alleyway and was happy to see the amendment to Condition 11, that should a
centralized trash area program be created in the future the subject property could potentially
be involved with the program.
Lerner stated that he felt the applicant would be more than willing not to have an individual
trash enclosure but that it is a requirement at this point. He stated that the applicant did
accept Condition 11 as proposed and would be willing to get involved in the program should
the City decide to centralize the trash enclosures in the future.
Ashford asked how many businesses and residences were proposed.
Lerner confirmed that there were two residences proposed upstairs and six businesses
proposed on the lower level.
Chair Robinson closed the public comment period.
Committee Member Edith Edde joined the meeting at 4:55 p.m.
Chair Robinson asked Staff if there was a certain percentage the structures were required
to have in terms of historic significance and materials.
Planning Division Manager Sue Martin stated that there was no set percentage but that
each historic building is evaluated as a whole. She went on to say that Staff had worked
with the applicant closely to retain as much as possible and maintain the historic character
of the building.
Lerner confirmed that they had maximized the retainable materials.
Committee Member Peter Leroe-Muñoz commented that the general shape and size of the
building had been maintained and that he felt it could even be considered as a contributing
building. He went on to say that the project as proposed had met the overall intent of
maintaining the historical appearance and significance. He stated the tile and other accents
that had been maintained were important as well and the project as proposed fit with the
historic district.
Chair Robinson asked about the interior of the structures.
Planning Division Manager Martin stated that for these structures there was n’t anything on
the interior to be maintained as historic.
Committee Member Edde asked if there was any clarification about the difference in
addressing that had been listed on the plans.
Planning Division Manager Martin stated that any discrepancy on the plans was most likely
a typo.
Lerner stated that the addressing on the plans was based on the Assessor’s records for the
parcel. He stated that as there will be more tenants in the future, addressing will be
reassessed as necessary to accommodate for these new tenant spaces.
Planning Division Manager Martin clarified that for future addressing and as Gourmet Alley
becomes more of a focus that it would be an opportunity for some businesses to be
addressed from Gourmet Alley. She clarified that regardless, the Assessor’s Parcel Number
is correct and that is what sets the project location.
Steve Ashford stated there were multiple buildings downtown, including his own, that had
an address off the alley.
Chair Robinson asked if there were any further comments on the item.
Planner Negrete stated that she wanted to clarify that this project in particular would be
decided on at the Planning Commission meeting and did not require City Council review.
She clarified that this project did not involve any demolition and would therefore not require
City Council review per City Code requirements.
Motion: to recommend the Planning Commission approve AS 14-26
Moved by Vice Chair Edith Edde, Seconded by Committee Member Peter Leroe-Muñoz
Vote: Motion carried 4-0-1-0
Yes: Vice Chair Edith Edde, Committee Member Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Committee Member
Toby Echelberry, Chair Nicole Robinson
No: None
Recused: Committee Member Steve Ashford
Absent: None
Committee Member Ashford asked about the January 21, 2015 minutes that had been
continued at the previous regular meeting.
Planning Technician Kelsey Heyd confirmed that the minutes from the January meeting had
been continued to the next regular meeting
Committee Member Ashford asked if they could be reviewed at this meeting.
Planning Technician Heyd stated that the minutes had not been agendized as this was a
Special Meeting but that the minutes would be agendized for the next regular meeting.
IV. ADJOURNMENT at 5:03 p.m. to the Next Regular Meeting of May 20, 2015 at 4:30 p.m.
_____________________________
Kelsey Heyd, Planning Technician