Title
PLN210268 - YEUNG GABRIEL M TR
Public hearing to consider recommending that the Zoning Administrator approve a Combined Development Permit to allow alterations to an existing 2,153 square foot single family dwelling and associated site improvements, including enclosing an existing patio to create a 160 square foot bathroom addition, demolition of a 292 square foot garage, construction of a 772 square foot detached garage and a 633-square-foot detached non-habitable writing studio, and installation of a 685 square-foot ground-mounted solar system. The project involves development within 750 feet of known archaeological resources.
Project Location: 62 Yankee Point Dr., Carmel (Assessor's Parcel Number 243-152-005-000), Carmel Area Land Use Plan, Coastal Zone
Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the County of Monterey Historic Resources Review Board (HRRB) adopt a resolution recommending that the Zoning Administrator:
1) Adopt an Initial Study/Mitigation Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15074;
2) Approve a Combined Development Permit consisting of: a) Coastal Administrative Permit and Design Approval to allow alterations to an existing 2,153 square foot single family dwelling and associated site improvements, including enclosing an existing patio to create a 160 square foot bathroom addition, demolition of a 292 square foot garage, construction of a 772 square foot detached garage and a 633-square-foot detached non-habitable writing studio, and installation of a 685 square-foot ground-mounted solar system; and b) a Coastal Development Permit to allow development within 750 feet of known archaeological resources; and
3) Adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
DISCUSSION:
The subject property is currently developed with a single-family dwelling, guesthouse, detached garage, driveway, and fencing. The existing single-family residence, known as the “June Hass House,” was designed by Mark Mills and constructed in 1979. It was listed on the Monterey County Register of Historic Resources in accordance with Monterey County Code (MCC) Chapter 18.25 on October 24, 2024 (Exhibit C, Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 23-454).
The Applicant/Owner propose alterations to the existing 2,153-square-foot single-family dwelling, demolition of a 292-square-foot garage, and construction of a 772-square-foot detached garage, a 633-square-foot detached non-habitable writing studio, and associated site improvements. Alterations to the existing residence include an internal remodel, enclosing an existing patio on the south wing of the residence with a glass dome to create an approximately 160-square-foot bathroom addition, and installation of an exterior door on the southern façade. The proposed site modifications include installation of 260 feet linear feet of landscaping walls, fencing and gates, 685 square feet of ground-mounted solar, and new driveway materials to replace an existing driveway. Grading associated with the project would involve approximately 207 cubic yards of cut and 215 cubic yards of fill. The existing 249-square-foot guesthouse would remain on site and not be modified or altered as part of the project. Project plans are attached as Exhibit B.
A Phase I and Focused Phase II Historical Assessment (Exhibit D) was prepared by Kent Seavey to evaluate whether the project would impact the historic resource onsite. The Project Historian describes the home as significant historically under the California Register of Historic Resources Criterion 2, “Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history” for its association with the noted architect Mark Mills. Mark Mills studied under Frank Lloyd Wright as one of his Taliesin fellows between 1944 and 1948. The Phase I report describes the residence’s design as being a product of adopting and expanding “on Wright’s idea of Organic design, exploring upon the masters free-form possibility of the concept.” Mark Mills constructed more than 40 homes in the Monterey Bay area, and is known for his employment of materials native to their sites such as wood, glass, and stone. A 2009 issue of Architectural Digest referred to him as one of the world’s top architects.
Additionally, Project Historian describes the home as significant under the California Register of Historic Resources Criterion 3, “Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values”, as a high-quality representation of Mills Organic design. The design of the 1969 June Haas House was a response to a client’s request for a structure “which carried the memories of the traditions of a Greek island”. With a limited budget, the design solution employed was a lightweight barrel-and groin-valuated structure, with the stark white coloring of white stone housing from some Greek islands. The structure employs the organic style by appearing to emerge from the earth. It retains a high degree of physical integrity, and is representative of a theme of organic modern architecture in Monterey County. Its period of significance is 1969, and its character defining features include:
• its cruciform plan;
• barrel-and groin-vaulted building envelope;
• the use of gunite sprayed over an elastomeric webbing, then coated with a preservative mixture containing rough-ground walnut shells, for texture as a wall-cladding;
• Large lancet shaped window openings with sculptured hoods;
• round arched doors; and
• small porthole windows, sited at the sea's edge in the natural coastal landscape setting.
To allow alterations to a designated resource a finding must be made that the proposed work is found to be consistent with the purposes of MCC Chapter 18.25 and will neither adversely affect the significant architectural features of the designated resource nor adversely affect the character of historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the designated resource and its site (MCC section 18.25.170.D.1).
The Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties is used for this review and has four primary treatment approaches to historic buildings: 1) Restoration, 2) Preservation, 3) Reconstruction, and 4) Rehabilitation.” Rehabilitation is defined as the act or process of making a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. The Applicant/Owner proposes rehabilitation of the subject residences, as described in more detail below.
The Secretary's Standards encourages "placing a new addition on a non-character-defining elevation" and locating alterations to historic properties in areas where previous alterations already exist. The 1992 National Park Service Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, states that "The Standards are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility." As proposed, the Project’s rehabilitation work is to a secondary elevation; no changes to the primary elevation or façade (east [front] elevation and north-side façade) are proposed. The proposed rehabilitation work involves enclosing the walled open courtyard of the South wing of the cruciform plan with a glazed dome (bathroom addition) and replace an exterior porthole window with a door to access the proposed outdoor sitting space. The glazed dome bathroom addition would involve connecting a steel-framed dome-like window to an enclosed patio space. As proposed, an existing original door would be repurposed for exterior access, or a new door, matching in kind, an original would be installed.
Consistent with Rehabilitation Standards #2 and #5, all proposed rehabilitation work would be compatible with the size, scale, proportions, and massing to protect the integrity of the subject property and its environment. Further, the glazed dome addition would visually resemble the semicircular form of other windows found at the terminus of the cruciform wings of the residence, but would be more spherical or dome-like in appearance to differentiate the old from the new, as called for in Rehabilitation Standard #9. The Project Historian concluded that “The proposed work on the subject property will be executed consistent with the Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation, with the least possible loss of historic material so that the remaining character-defining features of the resource will not be obscured, damaged or destroyed.” As proposed, the rehabilitation project would have a less than significant impact on a listed historical resource and would not adversely affect the significance of the historical resource.
The subject zoning district establishes a side setback of 20 feet for main structures. Although the proposed enclosure of the patio (addition to the single-family dwelling) would be located within this required 20-foot side setback, Title 20 (the zoning ordinance) section 20.64.300 allows the Chief of Planning to grant an exception to zoning district regulations, including site development standards (e.g. setbacks), when such exception is necessary to permit the preservation or restoration of or improvements to a structure designated as historically significant. As described above, the existing residence retains historical significance and is listed on the local historical resource registry. The Proposed Project involves an improvement to a historically significant structure and therefore would be allowed to encroach into the required setback, subject to the granting of the proposed Combined Development Permit.
CEQA
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15063(a) and 15063(b)(2), Monterey County as Lead Agency completed environmental review to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The County prepared a draft initial study and mitigated negative declaration (IS/MND) for this project (Exhibit B). County staff filed the draft IS/MND with the County Clerk on July 24, 2024, and circulated the draft IS/MND for public review and comment from July 24 through August 24, 2024 (SCH No. 2024070922; Exhibit E).
The draft IS/MND identified potentially significant impacts on cultural (specifically archaeological) resources and tribal cultural resources. Staff has proposed two mitigation measures to reduce the identified impacts to a level of less than significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Nos. 1 would require that the Applicant/Owner retains a qualified archaeological to conduct a Cultural Awareness Training and monitor initial ground disturbing activities. Mitigation Measure No. 2 would require that the Applicant/Owner retains a tribal representative traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site to monitor initial project-related grading and excavation. Impacts on a listed historical resource were determined to be less than significant impact. All other standard topics of environmental analysis were found to have less than significant impacts or no impacts.
CEQA Guidelines section 15074(a) requires that advisory bodies consider the prepared environmental document when making a recommendation to a decision making body, in this case the Zoning Administrator. Therefore, staff recommends the HRRB consider the prepared Draft IS/MND, find the analysis adequate, and recommend approval of the project as proposed.
Prepared by: Fionna Jensen, Senior Planner x6407
Reviewed and Approved by: Phil Angelo, Senior Planner
The following attachments are on file with Housing and Community Development:
• Exhibit A - Draft Resolution
• Exhibit B - Project Plans, Colors, and Materials
• Exhibit C - Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 23-454
• Exhibit D - Phase I and Phase II Historic Assessment
• Exhibit E - Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
• Exhibit F - Site Photos
cc: Tai Tang, Studio Schicketanz (Agent); Project File PLN210268