City of San Juan Bautista

Special Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes

November 5, 2007

 

  1. Call to Order at 7:32 p.m. by Chairman Reuben Garza

      A.  Roll Call

Members Present: Reuben Garza, Jeff Bagley, Dan McMath, Erika Spencer and Wanda Guibert.

Staff Present: Jan McClintock, City Manager; Matthew Sundt, City Planner; and Trish Paetz, Deputy City Clerk.

 

  1. Public Comment (limited to items on the agenda)

No comments were made.

 

  1. Consent Items

A.  Approval of Affidavit of Posting November 5, 2007 Agenda

B.  Approval of Affidavit of Posting Public Hearing

C.  Approval of Minutes of October 2, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting

D.  Approval of Minutes of September 4, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting

E.  Approval of Minutes of August 7, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting

 

Commissioner Bagley asked that Item E, Approval of August 7, 2007 Minutes be pulled from the consent agenda for discussion.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner McMath and seconded by Commissioner Bagley to approve Item A, the affidavit of posting the agenda, and Item B, the affidavit of posting hearing.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner Guibert and seconded by Commissioner McMath to approve Item C, the October 2, 2007 meeting minutes.  The motion passed 4-0-1-0 with Commissioner Spencer abstaining because she was absent from that meeting.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner Bagley and seconded by Commissioner Spencer to approve Item D, the September 4, 2007 meeting minutes.  The motion passed 3-0-2-0 with Commissioners Guibert and McMath abstaining as they were not present at that meeting.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner Bagley and seconded by Commissioner Spencer to approve Item E, the August 7, 2007 meeting minutes.  The motion passed 3-0-2-0 with Commissioners Guibert and McMath abstaining as they were not present at that meeting.

 

 

 

 

 

  1. Public Hearing Items

A.  1 Polk Street – TOPS Rock Shop Sign

Commissioner Bagley left the dais because the applicant is his direct supervisor.

City Planner Sundt presented a staff report stating the owner of TOPS Rock Shop, Janice McClintock, was requesting a permit for a sign that would be painted on the exterior wall of the Rock Shop.  (The building is the Odd Fellows Hall).  The City Planner further stated that the Planning Commission, acting as the Historic Resources Board, had approved the sign at their meeting earlier today.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner McMath and seconded by Commissioner Guibert to approve a historic district sign permit for 1 Polk Street (APN 002-014-006).  The motion passed 4-0-0-1 with Commissioner Bagley absent.

 

      B.  313 Third Street – La Poblanita Mexican Restaurant Sign

City Planner Sundt presented a staff report stating the owner of La Poblanita Mexican Restaurant, Irene Teruel, was requesting approval of a permit for a hanging sign.  The proposed sign, 5 feet by 2 feet with scalloped edges and made of solid wood, was custom made in the early 1970’s and was the sign the owner used at her restaurant in Mountain View.  The lettering is red and three inches tall.  The proposed sign would hang over the sidewalk in front of the business entrance and would be hung from the existing metal hardware.  The City Planner further stated that the Planning Commission, acting as the Historic Resources Board, had approved the sign at their meeting earlier today.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner Guibert and seconded by Commissioner McMath to approve a historic district sign permit for 313 Third Street (APN 002-017-002) with the stipulation that the sign be hung securely but without making any new holes in the building.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

C.     406 Sixth Street – Design Review Permit

City Planner Sundt presented a staff report stating the applicant and architect, Allen Robinson, proposes to remodel an existing residence that will include modifications to the interior (not pertinent to Planning Commission review) and additional living space.  Changes to the first floor include the addition of a 114 sq. ft. new front porch, changes to the second floor include a new dormer window above garage facing Sixth Street.  Additionally, a decorative dormer window will be placed above the downstairs living area facing Sixth Street.

 

After reviewing a sketch of the finished home, Commission Spencer commented that the proposed changes were aesthetically pleasing.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner Spencer and seconded by Commissioner McMath to approve the design review for alterations to an existing single-family dwelling located at 406 Sixth Street (APN 002-037-017).  The motion passed unanimously.

 

 

 

 

 

D.    Site Plan and Design Review – Amendment – Title 11. Chapter 11.18 – Consider

City Council Comments

City Planner Sundt presented a staff report stating the City Council reviewed this chapter of the municipal code and agreed with the Planning Commission’s changes.  Additionally, the Council recommended that the Planning Commission review all second story additions/remodels, regardless of size.  The Council requested that staff return this

matter to the Planning Commission for review and consideration and then remand this matter to the Council.  City Planner Sundt then pointed out for Commissioners the changes proposed by the City Council. 

 

Chairman Garza commented that he did not agree with the Council’s changes while

Commissioner McMath was agreeable to their input.

 

Commission Bagley, who was present at the City Council meeting, recalled that the Council was concerned with second story additions.

 

Commissioner Spencer suggested that perhaps remodels resulting in less than 50% change to a home, as opposed to less than 75% change, might be more appropriate for the administrative approval requirement.

 

Discussion ensued about the effects of a second story addition to a neighborhood.

 

During public comment Sheila Prader commented that the code changes address only the R-1 district where there are many historic structures.  To which City Manager McClintock stated the historic structures are addressed in City’s Historic Resource ordinance.

 

Tony Boch asked why the chairman objected to the City Council’s proposed changes as all second story additions must go through review.

 

Georgeana Gularte asked who would be responsible for the administrative review (appeal) process, and who would be responsible for paying the administrative review fee.  Whereupon City Planner Sundt explained the administrative review process and City Manager McClintock stated the person responsible for the appeal would pay the fee.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner McMath and seconded by Commissioner Guibert to recommend for approval amendments to Section 11.18 (“Site Plan and Design Review”) of Title 11 of the municipal code but that “and, or addition to a second story” be stricken from section 11.18.030(B).  The motion passed 3-2-0-0 with Commissioners Garza and Bagley voting against.

 

E.     Historic Preservation Ordinance Amendment

This item was continued to a future meeting.

 

F.      Underground Utility District Ordinance

This item was continued to a future meeting.

 

  1. Discussion Items

      A.  300 Third Street (Mission Café) Project Update

City Planner Sundt presented a staff report stating on August 7, 2007, the Planning Commission approved a resolution to allow three new windows be installed on the Mariposa Street side of the Mission Café building.  Upon review of the plans by the City’s building inspector it was determined that the existing wall was inadequate to

accommodate the windows.  Furthermore, it was found that the existing foundation was inadequate as a result of cracks and there was inadequate depth to support the wall, windows and roof.  Therefore, the applicant had the wall re-engineered and replaced in-kind.  Based on the City Planner’s site visit on October 19, it was evident that the existing timbers had been substantially weakened by termites and would have to be removed.  The end result is a new wall with a new exterior surface that will look similar to the old wall.  In addition, it was evident that the wall was insulated with mud, a building feature likely not unique in San Juan Bautista at the turn of the century.

 

City Planner Sundt went on to say that for future reference, when an applicant presents drawings for projects in the historic district similar in nature to that of the Mission Café, City staff would require an engineer’s report in order to determine if the project will ultimately be more involved and require replacement of structure components.  In addition, the City will require that a historic consultant review the project plans and engineering report to determine if the work will conform with the Secretary of the Interior standards for preservation of historic resources.

 

Commissioner Guibert commented that projects of this kind should be reviewed by an historic architect before being review by an engineer.  Whereupon, City Manager McClintock responded that it would be too costly to the City.

 

During public comment Sheila Prater agreed with Commissioner Guibert, stating that an historic architect should look at a building in the historic district proposed for renovation so as to eliminate the possibility of interior historic features getting destroyed by an unqualified person.

 

City Planner Sundt stated that the Mission Café building is a “contributing historical” structure, unlike the DeAnza Adobe or the Mission.

 

6.      Comments

A.  Planning Commissioners

Chairman Garza stated he was concerned with Third Street properties in the downtown that appear to be bowing out.  City Manager McClintock replied that the City’s building inspectors had looked at said structures and felt there was no imminent danger of collapse and that is all the City can do at this time because of reductions in the code enforcement budget.

 

No other comments were made by commissioners.

 

B.  City Manager

No further comments were made.

 

 

C.  City Planner

City Planner Sundt provided commissioners with a list of items pending in 2007, commenting he had some catching up to do.

      a.  Design Guidelines Amendments re: solar and drainage

            b.  Amended Fence Ordinance (re: agricultural zones)

 

            c.  Reclaimed Water Ordinance

            d.  CLG Grant re: National Register Historic Landmark District nomination   

            application

            e.  November election

            f.  Design Charette follow-up

 

7.      Adjournment

A motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:49 p.m. passed unanimously.