Historical Advisory Commission - Regular Meeting

So I heard that. Chair. Oh, there it is.

So do we want to Yes, right. So we'll just go through our normal process and then when we get to item one, it will be true.

Okay.

Okay.

And she called to order the Thursday, July 2. 2026, maybe even the Monterey County Hostel of Resources Committee Board. They're both called.

John Smorkies?

Here.

Kelly Morgantini? Here. Michael Billet?

Here.

Judy McCleeland? Present. Sheila Lee Prater? Present. Salvador Munoz?

Present.

Belinda Talubin? Here. I was going to say Absinthe.

Okay, so this time I'll open the floor to public comment on non-agenda items that are under the purview of HRV, if anybody would like to speak. I just don't have anything. Anybody online? Okay. Okay, I'll close the floor to public comment. agenda additions solutions and corrections.

There are no additional agenda additions deletions are fresh.

So move on to approval of the minutes for June 4th.

I have just one small comment. The bottom of the page under other matters very bottom line. Sal Munoz, the Library AMAC Presentation of Historic Preservation Award. Presentation of Historic Preservation Award. It was the presentation of an award. Yes. I have two comments. Under approval of minutes at the very end, it says Sal recused himself. That should be moved into item number one because he's recused himself only from item one, I believe. So it should be put under scheduled matters. Then he recused himself. We opened it under the public, under scheduled matter one, under the motion. It says it was moved by Kelly. The very last sentence, it was like to allow the applicant time to provide additional information and clarifications. And it says on the following. So it should be one sentence. It shouldn't be broken. It should just read clarification on the following. And those are my two comments. Where is she going?

You have the comments? Okay.

Just maybe it's the way it's different because others to go with the service, but you've got mover and seconders should be moved by and seconded by and said we're in second or. That's just on the motions.

And so. Yeah, that was that's right.

Make motion to approve the minutes with these minor typographical errors. I'll second that.

Okay. Any discussion? Motion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay. Minutes are approved.

I'm not. I wasn't at the meeting. I can't comment.

Okay. So we're going on to scheduled matters with item number one. We're going to trail that. We're getting some printouts. The

Should we do the Zoom protocol first?

Oh, yeah. Excuse me. Yes, please.

Only staff and board member videos should be on. Members of the public should have their video turned off unless they are presenting. This helps with bandwidth and helps reduce distractions. Staff will help monitor and turn off videos as needed. We do ask that you keep yourself muted unless you are presenting. To mute yourself on Zoom platform, there's a mute button at the bottom of the screen that looks like a microphone. To mute yourself, if you call, press star six. To participate during public comment on Zoom platform, you can raise your hand by opening reactions at the bottom of your screen and clicking on the raise hand icon. If you've called in, you can raise and lower your hand by pressing star 9. Another way you can participate is by sending an email to the HRRB Hearing Commons at countymonterey.gov email. This email address can also be found on the agenda for today's meeting. Staff are monitoring that email, so if you have a question, comment, or document, staff will do our best to respond in time.

Okay, thank you. So if I remember one. We're getting some refreshed information from the package as some of the information was the old information. So we're going to travel after we get that information and move on to item number two. Right now it's just the to force it up to 9. Ernest and Martha. Well, if you're going to consider recommending that chief planning approval. After the fact, design approval to clear code enforcement for the painting of an historic residence and the repairs of the dilapidated detached storage shed to include an additional 150 square foot and non-habitable accessory structure. Serena's over garage. Polar system system 407 carbon block. I sent an HLS 4 to 6 3 hammered pewter grayish from the House materials. I think that's the vertical with signing. Properties look it's just one of your streets parties.

Yes, good morning. Chair score this and HR be committee members, Elizabeth Gonzalez project planner for the aid to 4, 3, 2, 9, 4, well up. The property is located at 21st Street and Spreckles in the greater Salinas area plan. Before you is an after the fact design approval to clear code enforcement case for the painting of an historic structure and complete repairs of a dilapidated detached storage shed to include an additional 150 square foot addition. And to the non-habitable accessory structure serving as a work garage. The residence is a 2126 square foot, two-story L-shaped Victorian cottage house, which was constructed in 1857. In 1954, a detached 450 square foot garage and storage structure was built on the rear left side of the property, according to the Monterey County Assessor's Records. According to Monterey County building records, in 1995, the county approved a design approval for a 72-square-foot addition to the front of the house. In 1999, a building permit was filed for repairs to the foundation of the single-family dwelling and showed the garage shop to be 342 square feet. In 2003, a building permit was final for the interior bathroom remodel, new 20-square-foot mechanical room addition, and new 220-square-foot uncovered deck, new stair rails, and the replacement of windows in the bathroom and stairs. On June 5, 2025, the Varela application went before the HRRB to consider the application before them. However, the application was continued to a date uncertain due to the confusion caused by the lack of legible clear plan set and potential inconsistencies of the proposal with the SPRECL's design guidelines. An HRRB member recommended revising the plan set for clarity and suggested the applicant work with the draft person or professional designer to do so and consider working with staff and the HRRB site design committee, subcommittee on ways to bring the project into alignment with the Spreckels design guidelines. On April 21st, 2026, the applicant submitted revised plans to address the lack of legible clear plan set of the 1954 detached garage. These are the plans that are really light. It says that Mr. Varela prepared them but I'm going to let the applicants expand on that, how they came about submitting these plans. Let's see. Okay. So here are, these are the, site photos of the subcommittee's site visit that was done approximately May 2025. Guideline R1.10 states that accessory buildings should use the same materials and finishes finished in the same or compatible colors as a main structure. Accessory buildings should be smaller than the main building and can be a maximum height of 15 feet. The proposed repairs of the dilapidated 450 square foot detached storage shed with an additional 150 square feet brings it to a 600 square foot proposed garage. Existing roof structure will remain at 15 feet in height. Colors and materials will match the existing single family dwelling and the proposed siding is horizontal consistent with the existing horizontal siding of the historic structure. So let's talk about the color of the house. Appropriate materials, colors, and finishes in Policy 4 states colors and finishes that complement the existing building site and materials and the surrounding environment should be used. The homes and sprinkles are simple structures and should be painted using simple schemes. Monochrome or polychrome color schemes using white, light, pastel, and earth tone based colors with one or two compatible trim colors as appropriate. Hammered pewter, dark gray, and carbon black are actually considered earth tone based colors. The two blend into a monochrome scheme and there are other houses in the neighborhood that have color schemes of a similar character. If the HRRB wishes, staff would be amenable to requiring the trim To be the same color as the roof accent, the Tudor tan accent is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. The applicants maintain the colors used on the historic main house are compatible with the material of the historic structure, historic character of the district, the style of the building, and compatible with adjacent structures. There is a home around the corner with the same dark gray base, but with white trim. Actually, I couldn't find that photo, but these are photos of the neighborhood. And the one below looks very similar to the applicant's color, base color, at least. And with that, we can bring that picture back up. Staff recommends that the Monterey County Historic Resources Review Board adopt a resolution recommending that the Chief of Planning find the project qualifies for a Class 31 exception pursuant to Section 15331 of the CEQA guidelines and approve an after-the-fact design approval to clear Code Enforcement Case 24CE00. 295 for the painting of an historic residence and complete the repairs of a dilapidated detached storage shed, as well as to include an additional 150 square feet to the non-habitable accessory structure and convert back to a garage. And this concludes that presentation.

OK. Before we bring it to the board, would the applicant like to explain the drawings that Yeah, you present it so we can better understand since they're so light.

Yeah, so originally, so siding is going to be matching the front. It's horizontal. The roof is going to stay the same. Everything's the same. The only addition is coming out. That other shed part with the slanted roof, it's only added 150 square feet. So total altogether is not 600. It's like 440 or something total. Siding's gonna be the same, window's the same, that door is the same. And it was just falling apart. So started replacing the wood, some of it. Majority of it, it's the same wood. If you look at it inside, it's the same wood that was there. Siding was falling, rain was getting in there. And yeah, that's it.

Did you say your name for the record?

Oh, Ernest Morella. Also, I would like to add that the word garage was used. It's not a garage, it's a shed and it remains to be used as a shed. And the smaller portion also of the shed It was probably built in the 60s. It has a metal roof, and it looked like they added it on just later without permits probably, but it does show up on the permit.

I mean, you're talking about the addition to the structure, right, on the back? So, Liz, do we have the date that that was built, period?

Yeah, you did mention it.

I don't know, although it pains me to say it, if it was built in the 60s, it's Over 50, like many of us in this room. Yeah, I just like, I know. It was built in 1954. The house was built in 1857.

97. 97. 1897? Yeah. I don't know where you're getting 150 square feet.

I mean, they're adding eight by 12 to the front of it, right? Yeah. I don't know. That's 96 square feet.

Yeah, exactly. So yeah, when a total is like 440 total of the whole thing. So it wasn't 600.

And the reason to add that 96 square feet is in order to retain that smaller building on the left and have a slope for the roofs. So it's not... drained water.

You don't have to, but would you like to add your name for the record as well?

Sure. My name is Ash Youssef.

The original structure is 216 square feet. The addition that was a flat top was 94, no, 144 square feet. They are adding 96 square feet to make it a total of 456. Sandra. But so 96 is the only addition to it. Less than exciting. Don't know where my head was. I'm just sitting there going. And hard to read, but you can just enough to. OK.

Well, I guess, is that considered historic or not? I know we talked about that. And it has a really interesting roof to it. You can't see it, but it's an interesting construction where the roof is actually curved up.

It was kind of like a lanai design, right?

Yeah. an interesting roof structure.

It's how they used to do it in the early 30s.

Yeah.

So it's building 50. It was probably built by a builder who was like 50, 60 years old in 1950. So that would be my guess. Because those are pretty essential Queen Anne's when you do the flare on the roof like that. They frame the rafters into inside the Inside the wall framing. So it doesn't even hit the top of the roof and they actually put little riggers out to make that flare and those flares sit on top of the top way or What is now we call it a plate and they want Let's frame a little different but They're quite a few like that down off of Metz road going to 146

I think it might be the same builder. He's got a clump of construction. Right at the corner, there's quite a few.

What you have on there for siting now is that T111 pilot vertical. Are you taking that off then? Are you going to match the siting? Correct.

It was redwood. It may not be redwood when we get

And what is this? What's your proposed color scheme for this shed?

We're hoping to match the house.

Then I guess with the house, the issue is, I guess the trim, right? Color?

I still have a problem with it, as for the color. One thing, and this is, you haven't proposed it, but, and it got lost somehow before you, I'm sure, owned it. There's a lot of these that have the representative kind of stylized sugar beet on that top roof. Have you seen that in Spreckles? Yeah. So in the future, if you ever wanted to do that, it would be kind of a nice effect, but...

Oh, that is it. But it wasn't this style because there's only like six or seven of these ones.

Yeah.

That sugar beet window you're talking about.

Not a window. It's just like a little.

Yeah. Some of them have it. Yeah. I think that one does. That green looking one I think has it.

Yeah. On one side. And so. I'm glad you're doing all this. And like I said, it's like, it's not, it's just, this is my opinion that the, it's not the colors. Like it's not, it's not like I don't like tan and I don't like black. So it's not really the colors that have that for me have an issue as to how they fit into the guidelines, but the use and where they're at. I mean, it's a, it's a really striking house. I walked by there. So it's a really nice looking striking house, but the Sprinkles guidelines, it's as Liz says on page number four, I mean, the, policy number four, those three sections say that what you're supposed to do is to keep in mind the surrounding areas, the surrounding type of design and color. And so that's where I still have an issue, like the one in the middle, you know, like that's tan. And that's, it's a newer color, but it's been there for a while, the gray ones. And it's just this one in that nice new kind of a stark Again, not bad looking, but it doesn't fit the character. So for that reason, at least in my opinion, this proposal doesn't meet the policy number four in the guidelines that are considered in this breakfast guidelines. So I would just, that would be the one recommendation that I would say is that it would be to, again, form the design and the, I mean, form the colors to actually fit what is called for in policy number four.

Okay, let me take a break here and open this to the public. Anybody from the public would like to speak on this project right now? I have a question. Wait a second. I just opened the floor to public comment. So if anybody in the public would like to speak this time.

I don't see anything else.

Okay, nobody's here.

So I'll close the floor to public comment. I'm sorry. When you're saying to match the surrounding neighborhoods, would it be okay to adjust the trim to kind of, because I see a lot of the houses in that block or that area with a white trim or a lighter color trim, which might, you know, take away a little bit of the darkness of the overall scheme.

When it says that it's in that, like you said, that policy, it talks about appropriate materials, which is okay, but the colors and finishes And it says I'm reading from policy. Number four, it does. And Liz actually touched on these. It says when using Paint colors and color schemes, they should be compatible to the material historic character of the district, the style of the building and to adjacent structures. And then the ways you can do that with the guidelines to avoid using too many colors. You've got two, so you're good. Two strong colors may be effective on a house, but if you use more than two, they have to be diminished. Select the base color carefully. Muted tones for base is the best choice. Don't overlook the roof, which you're doing, but it does say it should be compatible to the historic nature. And again, you go from what the guidelines say, And they are guidelines and it says should, and it would be better it's not you shall use a specific color you're not tied down like in some places. So you get into sometimes a subjective discussion, but that can be more objective when you look at a specific house and its surrounding neighbors. And you're kind of caught in a catch-22 because if you've got neighbors who have certain colors, are you saying that now my color of my house that I own is going to be directed by somebody else who has a different house in a different street? So I get that. And so that's when we have to look at your specific colors. proposal as to whether or not it meets the surrounding character. And even if it didn't, even if we didn't see what some of the surrounding houses would be, that large use of a black expanse is something that does not Somebody just reading the specific speckles guidelines and seeing what they say about the different colors and what the houses are like, what speckles is like, would probably come to some of the same conclusion that this looks like it's on the outskirts of what the norm would be for how the houses were painted when they were first constructed. Gingerbread's a nice touch, by the way, the gingerbread man. And so that's just my comment. And that would be my recommendation is to ask for that to be a condition, but I'm also just one vote.

So Melissa, did you say there was another house that was close to that color?

Right below it. The one right there. It's got more.

Yeah, I saw it. I don't know where that picture came from, that bottom one, but it's actually darker than what that blue looks like on there.

Yeah, it's right around the corner.

Yeah, it's a little darker. Like that top part is actually more of the whole color of the house with the white trim. It's much more similar to here. Yeah.

And that's where we get into the problem sometimes, too. The whole reason we're sitting here with these ordinances is because there has been, in the past, a lot of... It's always easier to ask... forgiveness and permission. And what you were doing was not on purpose, but there are other houses and other areas of Spreckels that just said, we're just going to do what we want to do. It's Saturday. It's Saturday. We don't need a permit. So we're also having to struggle with attempting to focus the development that goes forward in the correct way versus what's gone on in the past that we haven't caught or hasn't come to our attention.

So let's kind of break this down into two. Are we close to the bubble? Yes. Okay. I wasn't sure. Yeah, I'm not close to the bubble. So we got two issues here, right, or two concerns. One is the back shed. And then the other is the paint color, right? So are we good with what's going on in the back? Does anybody have any comments? Yeah, I do have a couple comments.

On the elevations, the original house had a horizontal, more than likely redwood siding. I don't know the dimension. I'm not really too concerned. If it's a four, if it's a six or an eight, I believe the house is larger. The back one, according to the photos, had both very narrow and a little bit wider on the original building. wider on the original, more narrow on the edition kind of thing. So I think we should pick a size to it. That would be great. But he also has like, I'm gonna call it an attempt at a water table and a bad board. I don't know why you have these horizontal one by threes One by four is running horizontally. They give an image of a, I don't know what the attempt is to do. They're not on the original building, but they're put on every elevation. They have a horizontal and they have verticals. I would suggest leaving the redwood siding and or any siding that you put on there that's horizontal, let it earn its own capacity as an architectural finish and only put the edge boards on. If you want to run a batter board or put a water table on like the house has, it's up about, I don't know, maybe what, 30 inches at max. If you wanted to delineate that on this building to match it to the main structure, then I wouldn't put it. mid-height under the windows, I would drop it down to like an original water table, usually at 20 to 30 inches off the ground. If you wanted to make that decision, the original building had none. So I would think you would want to keep just the corner boards, the window boards, the door trims, but let the redwood siding do its job and be horizontal redwood siding. So I would recommend taking off all that extra trim and let the building stand as it originally did and your house. Your house don't have those features either. So it's just extra material I think you're adding to the building. I don't know why. I think the building would look perfectly fine with horizontal siding, with the trims at the end because that's where you almost have to trim them at the end to finish the siding and at the windows and doors. That's just my thought. That's existing, so yeah.

It's just getting dressed up. I think the siding on there now matches the siding on the house. This one? Yeah.

Yeah.

So I would keep the siding that, you know, that matches the house, yeah. The thicker. The wider board that matches. Trying to find the node for the siding.

And whatever plywood you have on there now, you need plywood. Might as well leave it on and just cover it. Because horizontal bagging doesn't pick up your lateral loads very well. You can have it pick up some, but not a lot. And since the building is 4x4, and I don't know if they're re-studying it, it's going to lose it because you don't have the studding that's appropriate for it. You know the thickness of the horizontal siding that you're proposing? Is it four, six, eight?

I think it's four. Our goal was to match the front of the house. Okay. Okay. I think that's what's available. Okay.

And where's the windows going to be? You couldn't read it.

I know that they have two by window by Anderson. They obviously up and down. I don't see the trim size, but I'm thinking it's going to be three inch. Because that's what all the other trims are called out as.

Anderson's pretty heavy window, I think.

Yeah. You're resetting the existing building too? putting two by fours at 16 inches on center in between all that.

A little code in but some of the wood was damaged in termites so it had to be removed but everything that was removed is being replaced and then I think they're adding more studs in just to reinforce.

Yeah because it used to be like four by fours at four feet. Four feet. The old building style yeah so. You don't have to replace them if you put two by four. If you went in and studded it every 16 inches on center, there's no reason to put the four by four back. Because their plates will be supported every 16 inches. It'll actually be stronger.

Okay, so we've recovered the back. I had a question. On the window material, can that be vinyl these days, or does that have to be wood?

Those two original front ones used to be wood, but I don't know if the ones in the back were.

Here's a picture of that. So metal finished windows should be avoided. Wood window sashes are okay. Wood or vinyl-clad frames are appropriate as long as the original size, shape, operations, and designs are replicated. That's under Policy 2 R2.5. Yeah.

That's an update also. That one's been modified.

So we'd use a wood clad. Mm-hmm. Yes. Sure.

Yeah, this picture is not.

Is a little will know that looks.

But I'm not sure that this picture is that of yours or is that when we walked out to take a look at. Because it's kind of reversed.

Oh. Oh, that's, when I saw that, I just figured that. The bottom right corner was negative. No, that's a neighbor. Yeah. Oh. Down. Yeah, that's not his. Just this, yeah. Well, I thought the same thing a little reverse and I'm thinking, you know what I take pictures of my phone. I'm like, how the hell did I get it going that way? I don't know. I'll be honest. Yeah, so that's not like that's not that was wrong. It was the same roof.

It took it just to show that how close they were to the back alley. Okay.

Yeah, and how it was. Oh, yeah. You know, there was the main structure and then it was added on to. So the main structure.

So the only two windows are the ones in the front of the shed.

Yes, correct. Okay. There's one, but I think that was indicating that that form, you know the existing. storage or unit was. repeated right, you know as an element of those. homes. That side of the city. Let's move on to colors. Yes, our opinion exporters.

I'll make this statement. I understand what Kelly's saying about it, but we go into every subdivision, everything. I've seen a lot of historic speed converted and adaptive reuse. And I just think we can go to the, you know, If you go to a paint company and say, I need historic colors to give you a whole pamphlet of, these are the historics from this time and this time. I just think everything gets moved up and refreshed. And obviously a lot of the houses in that neighborhood are choosing the darker trim, the lighter body, the darker trim, which is similar to what they're doing. And even the one in the corner is a darker building. There's not a lot of them in Spreckles, to be honest. I drove around several blocks, but you do see them. And, but you're right, most of them have the lighter trim. I'm not really offended by the colors. It is, it's a change, but it's a modern, I mean, the house is cleaned up and it looks, it does look more modern because of it.

And it is, like I said, a very subjective discussion. And I don't dislike it. I think it looks nice. I just don't think it, to my reading of the guidelines.

So, I don't know why you agree. You said about the colors.

Yeah.

Well, you have two different opinions.

I'm thinking it's okay. She's like not sure if it meets the guidelines.

Yeah, that's true. I'm thinking it's okay as well.

I like it.

I think it's okay.

Okay. And I just realized I've got the same color I'm wearing. I'm wearing your house.

I just realized that.

Use a little balloon.

You'll be great.

I'm going to make a motion that we approve the project with the modification that these horizontal. And vertical battens that are being added to the elevations are not necessary. I think it over complicates a small structure. But if the owners are willing to take off the horizontal bat, the horizontal and their horizontal and vertical battens, but keep the ones on the corners because those are corner boards that you always see historically and around the windows and the doors. And if you wanted to add a horizontal something similar to a water table that you see on the front of your house. You see how it comes up a little distance. It's painted a different color than that water table. That water table isn't just a flat baton. It's usually a flat baton and one turned on top shape. But if you wanted to mimic that on your building, I wouldn't be offended. But I just think the other ones just make the building a little too busy for the size and type of the building. So with that modification, I would suggest we approve the application. How can I not second?

I guess that's really confusing me, Kelly. Did you have the same color?

It must have been subliminal. I'm sticking. That's my story.

I'm sticking to it. I just have one question. Why no windows? The idea is to keep them same proportion as the house. Correct. So you're not getting anything too wide or consistent with...

style of the little window in the front with that with the trim like that.

Well I think he's got he's got up and down yeah he's got over either single or double long which equivalent to what's at the top they don't have them graded but these windows aren't graded originally.

Yeah but like the ones on top if you kind of get that same width of the frame and everything yeah be consistent. Okay. Given that, we'll second the motion.

Okay.

Any further discussion on the motion?

Okay.

All in favor? Aye. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Are we good to go? Yes. Thank you guys so much.

Yeah, yeah. Last year, when I was not sure we take a brief break. So you guys can read the update. Yeah. Great stuff work that you can have. No, I didn't get those. I should pause it. We need to try there.

This is just one set.

We'll resume back on the recording.

Okay, you're on.

We are recording. Okay. But we're stating that we're going to go ahead and wait for Sal to come back. Yes. So that we can proceed forward. Yes.

Okay.

You want to read that? No? Okay.

But once we get going. Yes. Because then we can say, well, at least we heard it. We're not on ear balls.

Yeah. OK. So we decided to go ahead with the hearing. OK. Thank you. OK. So we're going to resume the hearing. And we have item number one. It's da two five zero nine. Public hearing considered recommending that chief planning approval to allow the exterior and interior modifications to historic house of day. Australia, single family residents constructed in 1920s, including removal of an existing window to be placed. This is your description. Anyway, Here's another one.

Construction of a new covered walkway and other exterior site improvements, materials, and colors to match existing residents. Stucco, cream color, concrete tiles. Versailles, raven, porcelain tile, coffee cream, and dark brown, and window dark brown. OK. Thank you.

We have the final place. Yes.

Good afternoon. Elizabeth Ruiz presenting for DA 250339, the owner's 456 properties LLC. On February 5th of 2026, the application. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't even change. I'm sorry.

So we're soft.

Oh, that exists. No, but this one, yeah.

The property is located at 3322 17 mile drive Pebble Beach Del Monte forest. The zoning is LDR 1.5 design control opening in the coastal zone. The design provost to allow the exterior modifications of the historic Casa de la Estrella constructed in the importance. This is continued from February 5th of 2026 to an uncertain or date uncertainty. The applicant went before the HRRB to consider modifications to the historic Casa de la Estrella. However, the application was continued to a date uncertain due to the concerns with providing additional clarity with the plans and thoroughly evaluating each door and window to reflect the key characteristics identified to the fundamental detail of the structures in store. Based on the recent review, review of the revised plans by the subcommittee. The concerns have been addressed by providing additional elevations and details for clarification. A revised historic report addressing the changes and confirming consistency has been provided. Request for clarification for the identification of the construction. Periods of the house are in the report and not part of the drawing set. Including as a separate exhibit are pictures of the windows 13 through 18 as they are being replaced as non-original windows. Staff is recommending that the applicant provide further detail on the scope of work. This concludes the presentation. Or no, I still have to say that. Recommendation staff recommends that the Monterey County Historic Resource Review Board adopt the resolution recommending the chief of planning to find the project categorically exempt from the CEQA pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15331 and approve the design approval to allow the exterior and interior modifications to the historic Casa de Estrella, a single family residence constructed in 1920s, including the keeping the original window and adding two windows to match the existing, construct a new covered walkway and other exterior site improvements, materials and colors to match existing residence, stucco is cream color, concrete tiles, her saw, raven, porcelain tile, coffee cream and dark brown. The window is dark brown.

This concludes the presentation. Okay, thank you. And just to let the board know that they did go through the subcommittee with this project. So Sal and I were kept abreast of what they were doing and took some of our recommendations. So when they present, just know that it has been reviewed by the subcommittee, so. with the applicant. Eric, are you speaking for the applicant or ask the applicant?

Thank you, Chair. Am I at liberty to speak? Yes. Great. Thank you, Chair, members of the HRRB. I appreciate the opportunity to be in front of you today virtually, and thank you all staff for your hard work in getting this in front of the board today. We took the board's comments very seriously, and we appreciated the subcommittee's work on this. We definitely find that we have a much better project and much more clarity in the plans and in the historic resource evaluation and standards review. We actually took the time since February to meet with the historian on site and the contractor and go very systematically through every door and window and identify what was original and what warrants repair based on the current condition. And, you know, as you all can expect that based on its proximity to the sea, there's a lot of weather over the years that has created some effect on the condition of the windows and doors. And so, We wanted to meet with the historian and really understand what could be done and what couldn't be. And so you have a full window schedule with identification of each of those windows and doors in your report. It's just recently been presented to you in addition to this diagram that you're seeing on the screen, which was identifying where the additions have occurred in the years of those additions. I think there's three real components to this. I mentioned the windows and doors. The other consideration was the balcony that connects the or walkway that connects the garage to the main house. Previously, we had an arched And after working through the subcommittee, we resulted in a slightly different configuration that is a more rectangular shape that's keeping in character with the overall architectural context, which is a much better design. We're also doing some improvements to the back. porch area where there's a three inch step down as you come outside of the dwelling. And we're raising that by three inches. And in order to accommodate a more level transition from outside to inside. And in doing that, we met with the historian and identified, you know, what we needed to do in order to preserve the guardrail and handrail. And so you'll find some notes on the plan set reflecting the use of the historic building code in order to maintain the character of that guardrail and handrail.

Do you have drawings you could present?

Yes, yes, absolutely.

Can you share your screen so we could kind of understand?

Right. And I have it set up so I can share the difference in the plan sets. Let's do that here. So if you can confirm for me that you are seeing the screen, that would be great. Yes.

Mm-hmm.

Wonderful. So what you have on the right side is this was the original design that was considered in February. And then on the left side of the screen is the design that's in front of you today. I mentioned the arched colonnade. That was February's design. What we have now is a more rectangular opening. And this is to prevent inclement weather from intruding upon the garage and the main house windows. as I mentioned, one parks in the garage and then they walk into the main house carrying groceries and their personal effects. The intent here is to protect and screen the residents as they transition from one building to the next building. If you were to look at, if you were coming in through the door on the opposite elevation, you would come through and you'd see this little peekaboo window, which provides a nice little outlet to the ocean. And then you have two openings together with the pedestrian opening that leads down to the backyard. Since we're looking at this elevation, you'll also notice the preservation of the Juliet balcony for the historic window. Our previous design was getting rid of that. This was a comment from the board, as you might recall, is that there was some desire to retain that Juliette balcony, which we are now doing. In addition to that, though, there has been some compromise in providing three windows, two to the left, one to the right, that would meet the owner's objective of providing a little bit more view from the dining room out to the ocean. We felt that that was a fair compromise. I'll slide over here. Before in the drawings, you can see that they were cut off and we didn't identify the full scope of the house. We took the added time to identify the particular elevation components on that side, which there are no changes on this particular elevation, but wanted to show the board the full context of the building. So let me move to the floor plan. Also, we took the time to track down the original maker of the tile. And there are some of the tile in the courtyard that will be replaced. And so we've identified those here on the plan in addition to the light sconces that will be replaced as well. Before I started showing this, I was mentioning the covered porch. So this is the back area of the covered porch that we're intending to raise when you leave the dining room. And again, it's to create a level patio or porch area. It's really looking at universal design so one can age in place so there's not trip and fall hazard. And in doing this, the existing railing will be removed and then reinstalled, as you can imagine, in order to increase that height by three inches so we're not affecting that existing guardrail. having to remove it and then raise it up. Aside from those things, really this is an exterior improvement. I would just call attention to the kitchen. There is an internal kitchen remodel, but I think for historic purposes, we're really looking at the exterior elevations. So I'll go back to them. One of the concerns of the board is that there was not a lot of depth and detail in the plans. And admittedly, you were absolutely correct. And so we wanted to provide that additional detail. And one of those elevations that was deficient before was this area that's inside of the this little alcove, which is part of the overall building. And we weren't showing the Juliet balcony on that particular elevation. It's shown now, which it will be retained. You did get a copy of the updated historical evaluation. There is conclusions and recommendations on, I think it's page 70, that indicate that the historian has reviewed the plans prepared by Infinity Residential Design, which I just showed you, and finds them consistent with the Department of Interior Standards as this building is potentially eligible for listing on the state registry. So with that said, if there's any questions that you have of me, I'm happy to answer those now. But again, I just appreciate the board's feedback and the subcommittee's diligence in working with us to protect these plans.

Thank you. We're here with you.

You know, as an official committee review, you could let us know about.

Well, I mean, the two main things, the three main things, one of the most brilliant about them is keeping those and they weren't identified on the original plan. And actually one was going to be closed off. And they kept both of those and they worked to keep both of those. John Gerstle, Because the when they raised the patio the question was about the John Gerstle, Handrail really great link and they're keeping that raising that and John Gerstle, And the front windows, you know, which was really important and John Gerstle, I think was a good solution that they mirrored that same size of the window, but kept the detail of the Julia balcony window and the others won't have that detail and so you'll be able to separate the historic Juliet versus the three, the additional three. And I think, you know, our goal was to try and give the owner as much view, you know, and kind of respect that want and still keep a historic image, you know? And I think we've created that. I think they worked hard to create that. And, you know, I think, you know, we had a different opinion on the walkway, but I think what's there is fine, you know, from the arches to the square form. I think all that works. So I think we can go to the steps committee. I think they took our direction and listened and came up with a good result. Let me open up the floor for public comment. Anybody would like to speak on this project?

There's nobody else there.

OK. close the floor to public comment. Bring it back to the board. Board have any questions?

I'm just glad to hear that that was open to our comments that we made and also to the subcommittees. And it does look like from the presentation and reading page 70 from the historic report that our concerns have been addressed.

Even the quality of the drawings and everything increased You know, amazingly, you know, for detail and information and with one new schedule. And, you know, because I think they, there was a note on there before that said replace all windows or something, you know. So they took all our advice and produced a good set of drawings, I think, so. Any other questions? Anybody like to make a motion?

Well, I'm a little confused about the resolution. It comes in and says he's applied for to replace it with one big window, which is true. But now we're coming back in, and I'm not sure where exactly it says he's adding these new windows, maybe under the third whereas on the second page. The proposed scope of work includes a remodel plus 94 square foot roof over the existing walkway, proposed 1,733 square foot exterior landscape improvements and replacement of existing windows and doors with wood. I think we're doing more than that. I do believe we're adding windows which are similar in character and style on the back. So I'm not sure if these existing windows are just windows on the west face They're not all of them, I would assume. But just the description is they're adding windows and doors. They're retaining features.

I recall that's identified on the window schedule, isn't it now?

It is, and thank you for calling attention to that. The date that's referenced for the plans is the old plan set date as well. So I was assuming that the resolution would be updated to mirror the plans that you're seeing here in front of you.

I will need to update that.

Yeah. Okay. And then, yeah, and then the updated historic report.

That was the old language, you know. But they did do the window schedule and identified all the windows now. And the windows identified, the schedule identifies which ones are. They just want to make sure that this is in agreement with it.

Yeah, I know. That's all. Yeah.

And any date of the plans. I don't have any of the new cards.

And the date of the historic review because it's been updated also.

But yeah, all the general notes that were there before then.

It seems like maybe that could be done with a motion.

Yes, we're working on that.

Oh, great. Thought I lost the audio. Thanks.

Do we I was just gonna say I would recommend approvals. With the addition of or the looking at the new new design, just knowing that we got this this morning. We had to put it looks like it taking the subcommittee's report that our concerns from before have been addressed.

and seeing the resolution has to be consistent.

So the first correction would be the second whereas on the second page, whereas a historic roof resource evaluation, HRE local assessment and secretary of interior standards for the treatment of historic properties. Exhibit C was prepared by Evans and DeFraso Inc. EDS on, and it was prepared on June 18th, 2025, updated June 8th, 2026. And I think that would address that correction. Then the third whereas, the proposed scope of work includes the 698 square foot remodel proposed 94 square foot roof over the existing walkway proposed 1,733 square foot exterior improvements. And that's where replacement of existing windows and doors with wood and the addition of additional windows and doors per the approved plans dated whatever the date is. How's that? That would resolve it? That would tie it to the plans?

Yes.

Yeah, I don't have bionic eyes. I can't read that. Yeah, I'll let you guys pick that revision date that's on these plans. Because there's also a warehouse, right? Right here.

It's supposed to be one of Which one? It's on page three.

They're at the top right corner. It's May 21st, 2026.

So everything that's referring to the drawings needs to be revised to that date. And then the information to those drawings I think pretty much

to me, I think. I'll make a motion. I make a motion that we go ahead and approve the project with the corrections to the resolution as we have discussed. I'll second that.

Any discussion on motion? All in favor? Aye. Okay, you're approved. Eric, thank you for all your work.

No, thank you. Appreciate it. See you next time. Thank you.

That would have been one of the first things.

Okay. Other matters. Yeah. Huge. There's a lot of training with OHP, I think.

You've sent some things out.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you guys. Thank you. I looked at it when it first came out.

I'm like, I circled the window like, what? And I just put it back in the binder. And I figure I'll talk today about it.

Okay. And we got. Coming up.

Presentation for the HR. Training the staff georgie made some really good comments and john has some really good comments so hopefully get that back for.

It going in the near future, so what do you think the schedule is.

Well, it's some as soon as you get your recommendations and put it all together and the best venue, I think, is the all and all staff meeting and Jordan knows better. Those are on Fridays. All staff is going in on Thursday mornings at 8 a.m. Okay. But I mean, do you think that would be the best place for this to be presented or something some other time?

If you want to include advanced planning, that would be a good idea.

But if you want it just card planning, our meetings are safe.

Okay. How would we do? I think advanced planning should know as well. So we'll work. We can work on it. So I'll talk to Jordan about when would be a best time that we need to do it. There's nothing against twice one for one group. We'll talk about that. That's all I have. CLG, do we have anything we have to do for that? The certified local government? I mean, I think we're good with that for now, right? Everybody's got all of our times and lots of, okay.

My only question is if we want to shoot for any grants this year. I think we have a desire, I'm not sure, Jess, if we as the board can do them.

I think it has to be a staff member to.

Upstairs, they do. This might use to write them. Next to the bar. Okay. Are we good? I have a question. What is the date to submit for the review of the red bar in the next meeting? What would be the date?

I should have brought that for you. There was a I downloaded the preservation briefs with metal kind of gives you an indication of when it's repairable non repairable what they consider repairable. Yes. Each they be in the secretary's standards.

I sent something to Jordan that I'd like to go to the news. An expanded kind of a discussion that we had. I can see that she was well. It conforms with what the minutes say. It just has more or less.

I just want to have the dates so that clients can submit. Because everything was a little different, right? Yeah.

Yes, I believe it's fully a little different.

The report would need to be to me by the 14th of July.

The 14th? Okay.

And they had that.

Okay.

Happy 4th of July, everybody. Hamburgers and hot dogs and fireworks. Well, not fireworks. Those are pretty much... Come to Greenfield. All I know is I've got grandkids who are so excited. They're running around in red and white sparkly clothes. I'm like... What the heck? Oh, they think it's going to be the best day in the world. I'm just so looking forward to that barbecue.

Okay. San Francisco.