Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council
July 9, 2024

WHEREAS, on December 13, 2023, a conceptual design of the project was presented to the Planning Commission, and feedback was received from the public and the Commission some of which was incorporated into the project; and
WHEREAS, on December 18, 2023, the Historic Resources Board issued a Determination of Ineligibility for the Hofsas House Hotel, finding it did not meet the criteria for listing as a historic resource; and
WHEREAS, also on December 18, 2023, the Historic Resources Board issued a Determination of Eligibility for the Donna Hofsas House, finding it met the criteria for listing as a historically significant building; and
WHEREAS, on March 29, 2024, a notice of the public hearing scheduled for April 10, 2024, was published in the Carmel Pine Cone in compliance with State law (California Government Code 65091) and mailed to owners of real property within a 300-foot radius of the project indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on or before March 31, 2024, the Applicant posted the public notice on the project site and hand-delivered a copy of the public notice to each property within a 100-foot radius of the project site indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on or before April 5, 2024, the meeting agenda was posted in three locations in compliance with State law indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing and adopted Resolution 2024-026-PC approving a Design Review, Lot Line Adjustment, and associated Coastal Development Permit for the Carmel Legacy Hotel and Resolution 2024- 027-PC approving a Use Permit for the Carmel Legacy Hotel, the historic Donna Hofsas House and associated accessory uses; and
WHEREAS, on April 24, 2024, Neal Kruse, on behalf of the Carmel Preservation Association, filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval, citing a failure to adequately assess the environmental impacts of the project’s demolition and construction phase under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, on June 21, 2024, a notice of the public hearing scheduled for July 9, 2024, was published in the Carmel Pine Cone in compliance with State law (California Government Code 65091) and mailed to owners of real property within a 300-foot radius of the project indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on public notice was duly posted on the project site and a hand-delivered copy of the public notice given to each property within a 100-foot radius of the project site indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on or before July 5, 2024, the meeting agenda was posted in three locations in compliance with State law indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on July 9, 2024, the City Council did hear and consider all said reports, attachments, recommendations, and testimony herein above set forth and used their independent judgment to evaluate the project; and
Attachment 1
Resolution 2024-061

WHEREAS, this Resolution and its findings are made based upon the analysis and evidence presented to the City Council, including, without limitation, the staff report and attachments submitted by the Community Planning and Building Department; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”), together with State Guidelines (14 California Code Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”) and City Environmental Regulations (CMC 17.60) require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, The City Council has analyzed the proposed Carmel Legacy Hotel Project and has determined, based on its independent judgment and review of the record, including but not limited to the staff report and attachments thereto, that: (1) the Project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Sections 15302 (Class 2 Replacement or Reconstruction), 15303 (Class 3 New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), 15331 (Class 31 Historical Resource Preservation) and 15332 (Class 32 Infill Development) of the CEQA Guidelines; and (2) that the project does not entail any unusual circumstances and that none of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply to negate the applicability of any of the above-referenced categorical exemptions; and
WHEREAS, the facts set forth in the recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Carmel-ByThe-Sea does hereby deny the appeal by Neal Kruse, dated April 24, 2024 (APP 24118), determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, and uphold the Planning Commission’s April 10, 2024 approval of a Design Review (DR 24059) and associated Coastal Development Permit and Use Permit (UP 24060) for the Carmel Legacy Hotel project which entails the demolition of the 38-room Hofsas House Hotel and construction of the 38-room Carmel Legacy Hotel located San Carlos Street 2 northwest of 4th Avenue (APN:
010-124-001-000 and 010-124-014-000).

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BYTHE-SEA this 9th day of July 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED: ATTEST:

Attachment 1
Resolution 2024-061

_________________________ _________________________
Dave Potter Nova Romero, MMC
Mayor City Clerk
Attachment 1
CITYOFCARMELͲBYͲTHEͲSEA
PLANNINGCOMMISSION

PLANNINGCOMMISSIONRESOLUTIONNO.2024Ͳ026ͲPC

ARESOLUTIONOFTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSIONOFTHECITYOFCARMELͲBYͲTHEͲSEA APPROVINGADESIGNREVIEWANDASSOCIATEDCOASTALDEVELOPMENTPERMITFORTHE CARMELLEGACYHOTELLOCATEDONSANCARLOSSTREET2NORTHWESTOF4THAVENUE APN:010Ͳ124Ͳ001Ͳ000and010Ͳ124Ͳ014Ͳ000

WHEREAS, on March 12, 2024, Eric Miller Architects, Inc. (“Applicant”) submitted a Design Review application DR 24Ͳ059 (Hofsas House, Inc.) described herein as (“Application”) on behalf of Hofsas House, Inc. (“Owner”) for the Carmel Legacy Hotel, conversion of the historic Donna Hofsas House from a manager’s unit to two apartments, and the addition of accessory uses both within the hotel and the historic house; and
WHEREAS, the Application has been submitted for two legal lots of record totaling 36,200 square feet located on San Carlos Street 2 northwest of 4th Avenue in the Residential and Limited Commercial (RC) District (Block 34, Lots 1, 3, 5, por. of 7, por. of 8, 9, 10, por. of 11, 12, 14); and WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting to demolish the Hofsas House Hotel, an approximately 15,762ͲsquareͲfoot 38Ͳroom hotel, and construct the Carmel Legacy Hotel, a 32,466ͲsquareͲfoot 38Ͳroom hotel, convert the historic Donna Hofsas House from a managers unit to two apartments, and establish hotelͲrelated accessory uses; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Carmel Municipal Code (CMC) Section 17.58.030 (Commercial Design Review), new construction, alterations, rebuilds, additions, and demolitions require approval of a Residential Track Two Design Study by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, a Coastal Development Permit is also required in accordance with CMC

17.52.090 (Coastal Development Permit Required); and
WHEREAS, on January 26th and October 18th, 2023, the applicant and the hotel owner/operator hosted two meetings with the community, and on May 17th and May 25th, 2023, hostedtwo meetings with the Carmel Chamber of Commerce to present the project to the community and solicit feedback; and
WHEREAS, on February 2, 2023, the applicant submitted Conceptual Review application CR 23Ͳ097 (Hofsas House, Inc.) for the demolition of the Hofsas House Hotel and construction of a new hotel known as the Carmel Legacy Hotel; and
WHEREAS, on December 13, 2023, a conceptual design of the project was presented to the Planning Commission, and feedback received from the public and the Commission was incorporated into the project; and









 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

WHEREAS, on December 18, 2023, the Historic Resources Board issued a Determination of Ineligibility for the Hofsas House Hotel, finding it did not meet the criteria for listing as a historic resource; and
WHEREAS, also on December 18, 2023, the Historic Resources Board issued a Determination of Eligibility for the Donna Hofsas House, finding it met the criteria for listing as a historically significant building; and
WHEREAS, on March 29, 2024, a notice of the public hearing scheduled for April 10, 2024, was published in the Carmel Pine Cone in compliance with State law (California Government Code 65091) and mailed to owners of real property within a 300Ͳfoot radius of the project indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, on or before March 31, 2024, the Applicant posted the public notice on the project site and handͲdelivered a copy of the public notice to each property within a 100Ͳfoot radius of the project site indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on or before April 5, 2024, the meeting agenda was posted in three locations in compliance with State law indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive public testimony regarding the commercial design review, including, without limitation, the information provided to the Planning Commission by City staff and through public testimony on the final design of the project; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”), together with State Guidelines (14 California Code Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”) and City Environmental Regulations (CMC 17.60) require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that pursuant to CEQA regulations, the Application is categorically exempt under Section 15332 (Class 32) – Infill Development Projects, and no exceptions to the exemption exist pursuant to section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution and its findings are made based upon the evidence presented to the Commission at the hearing date, including, without limitation, the staff report and attachments submitted by the Community Planning and Building Department; and 








 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said reports, attachments, recommendations, and testimony herein above set forth and used their independent judgment to evaluate the project; and
WHEREAS, the facts set forth in the recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.
NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of CarmelͲ ByͲTheͲSea does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding the CommercialDesignReview:
FINDINGSREQUIREDFORDESIGNSTUDYAPPROVAL
For each of the required findings listed below, the staff has indicated whether the application supports adopting the findings, either as proposed or with conditions. For all findings checked "no," the staff report discusses the issues to facilitate the Planning Commission’s decisionͲ making. Findings checked "yes" may or may not be discussed in the report, depending on the issues.

CMC17.58.060DesignReviewApprovalFindings YES NO
Conforms to the applicable policies of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program.
ط
Complies with all applicable provisions of Carmel Municipal Code. ط Is consistent with applicable adopted design review guidelines. ط NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of CarmelͲ ByͲTheͲSea does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding the Coastal DevelopmentPermit:
FINDINGSREQUIREDFORCOASTALDEVELOPMENTPERMITS
For each of the required findings listed below, the staff has indicated whether the application supports adopting the findings, either as proposed or with conditions. For all findings checked "no," the staff report discusses the issues to facilitate the Planning Commission’s decisionͲ making. Findings checked "yes" may or may not be discussed in the report, depending on the issues.

CMC17.64.010.B,CoastalDevelopmentPermits YES NO

1. The project, as described in the application and accompanying materials, as modified by any conditions of approval, conforms with the certified City of CarmelͲ byͲtheͲSea Local Coastal Program.
 ط

2. If the project is located between the first public road and the sea, the project conforms with the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act of 1976 (commencing with Sections 30200 of the Public Resources Code).   ط

BEITFURTHERRESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of CarmelͲbyͲtheͲSea does hereby APPROVE the Commercial Design Review application DR 24Ͳ059 (Hofsas House, Inc.) 








 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

to demolish the Hofsas House Hotel, an approximately 15,762ͲsquareͲfoot 38Ͳroom hotel, and construct the Carmel Legacy Hotel, a 32,466ͲsquareͲfoot 38Ͳroom hotel, convert the historic Donna Hofsas House from a managers unit to two apartments, and establish hotelͲrelated accessory uses located on San Carlos Street 2 northwest of 4th Avenue (Block 34, Lots 1, 3, 5, por. of 7, por. of 8, 9, 10, por. of 11, 12, 14, APN 010Ͳ124Ͳ001 and 010Ͳ124Ͳ014), subject to the following Conditions of Approval:

CONDITIONSOFAPPROVAL
No. StandardConditions

1. Authorization. This approval of Design Review application DR 24Ͳ059 (Hofsas House, Inc.) authorizes the demolition of the 38Ͳroom Hofsas House Hotel, construction of the 38Ͳ room Carmel Legacy Hotel, and conversion of the historic Donna Hofsas House from a manager’s unit to two apartments. The project site is located on San Carlos Street 2, southwest of 4th Avenue in the Residential and Limited Commercial (RC) District as depicted in the plans prepared by Eric Miller Architects approved by the Planning Commission on April 10, 2024, and stamped approved and on file in the Community Planning & Building Department unless modified by the conditions of approval contained herein.

This Design Review approval does not include any exterior modifications to the historic Donna Hofsas House. Any exterior change to the historic Donna Hofsas House shall be submitted under a separate Design Review application to the Community Planning and Building Department and shall comply with Carmel Municipal Code Chapter 17.32 (Historic Preservation).

2. Codes and Ordinances. The project shall be constructed in conformance with all requirements of the Residential & Limited Commercial (RC) District and Archaeological Significance (AS) Overlay District. All adopted building and fire codes shall be adhered to when preparing the working drawings. If any codes or ordinancesrequire design elements to be changed, or if any other changes are requested when such plans are submitted,such changes may require additional environmental review and subsequent approval by the Planning Commission.

3. PermitValidity. In accordance with CMC Section 17.52.170 (Time Limits on Approvals and Denials), a commercial design review approval remains valid for 18 months from the date of action. The project must be implemented during this time, or the approval becomes void. Implementation is effected by erecting, installing, or beginning the installation of the improvement authorized by the permit, as determined by the Director. Extensions to this approval may be granted consistent with CMC 17.52.170.C.

4. WaterUse. Approval of this application does not permit an increase in water use on the projectsitewithout adequate supply. Should the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District determine that adequate water is unavailable for this site, this permit will be scheduled for reconsideration, and appropriate findings will be prepared for review and adoption by the Planning Commission.









 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

5. SetbackandHeightCertifications.A State licensed surveyor shall survey and certify the following in writing:
x The footing locations are in conformance with the approved plans prior to footing/foundation inspection;
x The roof heights and plate heights of each building are in conformance with the approved plans prior to the roof sheathing inspection. Roofs and plates shall not exceed the elevation points as identified in the approved project plans, and the roofs include an appropriate allowance for roofing material thickness. Written certifications prepared,sealed, and signed by the surveyor shall be provided prior to footing/foundation inspection and roof sheathing inspection. In the event that multiple footing/foundation pours are required, a survey letter shall be submitted for each separate section.

6. ServiceLaterals.Prior to final inspection, all electrical service laterals to any new building or structure, or to any building or structure being remodeled when such remodeling requires the relocation or replacement of the main service equipment, shall be placed underground on the premises upon which the building or structure is located.

Undergrounding will not be required when the project valuation is less than $200,000, or the City Forester determines that undergrounding will damage or destroy significant trees(s) (CMC 15.36.020).

7. UtilityMeterLocations. The placement of all utility meters shall be screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Community Planning & Building Director. Before changing the location of any utility meter, the Community Planning and Building Director or designee must give written approval.

8. Modifications. The Applicant shall submit in writing, with revised plans, to the Community Planning and Building staff any proposed changes to the approved project plans prior to incorporating those changes. If the Applicant changes the project without first obtaining City approval, the Applicant will be required to submit the change in writing, with revised plans, within two weeks of the City being notified. A cease work order may be issued at any time at the discretion of the Director of Community Planning and Building until a) either the Planning Commission or Staff has approved the change, or b) the property owner has eliminated the change and submitted the proposed change in writing, with revised plans, for review. The project will be reviewed for its compliance with the approved plans prior to the final inspection.

9. ExteriorRevisionstoPlanningApprovalForm.All proposed modifications that affect the exterior appearance of the building or site elements shall be submitted on the “Revisions to Planning Approval” form on file in the Community Planning and Building Department.

Any modification incorporated into the construction drawings not listed on this form shall not be deemed approved upon issuance of a building permit.

10. ConflictsBetweenPlanningApprovalsandConstructionPlans.Itshall be the responsibility of the Owner, Applicant, and Contractor(s) to ensure consistency between the project plans approved by the Planning Staff, the Planning Commission, or the City Council on appeal and the construction planssubmitted to the Building Division as part of the Building Permit review. Where inconsistencies between the Planning approval and the 








 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

construction plans exist, the Planning approval shall govern unless otherwise approved in writing by the Community Planning & Building Director or their designee.

When changes or modificationsto the project are proposed, the Applicantshall clearly list and highlight each proposed change and bring each change to the City’s attention.

Changes to the project incorporated into the construction drawings that were not clearly listed or identified as a proposed change shall not be considered an approved change.

Should conflicts exist between the originally approved project plans and the issued construction drawings that were not explicitly identified as a proposed change, the plans approved as part of the Planning Department Review, including any Conditions of Approval, shall prevail.

11. ExteriorLighting. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall include in the construction drawings a comprehensive lighting plan including all exterior light fixtures and the manufacturer’s specifications, including illumination information. All fixtures shall be shielded and downͲfacing.

ExteriorwallͲmounted lighting shall be limited to 25watts or less(incandescent equivalent or 375 lumens) per fixture and shall be installed no higher than 10 feet above the ground or walking surface.
Landscape lighting shall not exceed 18 inches above the ground nor more than 15 watts (incandescent equivalent or 225 lumens) per fixture and shall be spaced no closer than 10 feet apart. Landscape lighting shall not be used as accent lighting, nor shall it be used to illuminate trees, walls, or fences. The purpose of landscape lighting is to safely illuminate walkways and entrances to the subject property and outdoor living spaces.

12. Stone Facades (including chimneys). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall identify the masonry pattern for all stonework in the construction drawings. Stone facades shall be installed in a broken course/random or similar masonry pattern. Setting the stones vertically on their face in a cobweb pattern shall not be permitted. All stonework shall be wrapped around building corners and terminated at an inside corner or a logical stopping point that provides a finished appearance. Termination of stonework shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Director or their designee.

13. Wood FrameWindows. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall include the manufacturer’s specifications for the approved wood frame windows in the construction drawings. Window material shall be consistent throughout the project.

Windows approved with divided lights shall appear to be true divided lights, including internal and external mullions and muntins on insulated windows. Any window pane dividers that are snapͲin or otherwise superficially applied are not permitted. The painted finish shall be matte or low gloss.

14. Indemnification. The Applicant agrees, at his or her sole expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its public officials, officers, employees, and assigns from any liability; and shall reimburse the City for any expense incurred, resulting from, or in 








 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

connection with any project approvals. This includes any appeal, claim, suit, or other legal proceedings to attack, set aside, void, or annul any project approval. The City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any legal proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense.

The City may, at its sole discretion, participate in any such legal action, but participation shall not relieve the Applicant of any obligation under this condition. Should any party bring any legal action in connection with this project, the Superior Court of the County of Monterey, California, shall be the situs and have jurisdiction for resolving all such actions by the parties hereto.

15. Hazardous Materials Waste Survey. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall submit a hazardous materials waste survey to the Building Division in conformance with the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District.

16. Archaeological Report. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit an archaeological reconnaissance report prepared by a qualified archaeologist or another person(s) meeting the standards of the State Office of Historic Preservation. The Applicant shall adhere to any recommendations set forth in the archaeological report. All new construction involving excavation shall immediately cease if materials of archaeological significance are discovered on the site and shall not be permitted to recommence until a mitigation and monitoring plan is approved by the Planning Commission.

17. CulturalResources. Throughout construction, all excavation activities shall immediately cease if cultural resources are discovered on the site, and the Applicant or his/her agent on the site shall immediately notify the City of Carmel Community Planning & Building Department within 24 hours. Work shall not recommence until such resources are properly evaluated for significance by a qualified archaeologist. If the resources are determined to be significant, prior to the resumption of work, a mitigation and monitoring plan shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist and reviewed and approved by the City of Carmel Community Planning and Building Director.
If any human remains are found at any time during construction, work shall stop, and the applicant or his/her agent on the site shall immediately notify the Monterey County Coroner in compliance with applicable State requirements (California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98).

18. TruckHaulRoute. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Director, in consultation with the Public Works and Public Safety Departments, a truckͲhaul route and any necessary traffic control measures for the grading activities. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring adherence to the truckͲhaul route and implementation of any required traffic control measures.

19. USA North 811. Prior to any excavation or digging, the Applicant shall contact the appropriate regional notification center (USA North 811) at least two working days, but not more than 14 calendar days, prior to commencing that excavation or digging. No digging or excavation is authorized to occur onͲsite until the Applicant has obtained a 








 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

Ticket Number and all utility members have positively responded to the dig request. (Visit USANorth811.org for more information)

20. ConditionsofApproval. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall print a copy of the Resolution adopted by the Planning Commission and signed by the property owner(s) on a fullͲsize sheet within the construction plan set submitted to the Building Safety Division.
LandscapeConditions

21. LandscapePlanRequired. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a landscape plan for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Department and the City Forester. The landscape plan shall be included in the construction drawings and will be reviewed for compliance with the landscaping standards contained in the Zoning Code, including, but not limited to, the following: 1) All new landscaping shall be 75% droughtͲtolerant; 2) Landscaped areas shall be irrigated by a drip/sprinkler system set on a timer; and 3) The projectshall meet the City’srecommended tree density standards unless otherwise approved by the City based on onͲsite conditions.
The landscape plan shall identify the location where new trees will be planted when new trees are required to be planted by the City code, the Forest and Beach Commission, or the Planning Commission.

22. TreePlantingRequirements.Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall identify on the landscape plan the location, size, and species of required tree plantings.

All new trees shall be installed prior to the final inspection. Trees shall be recorded and monitored for at least five years to ensure their establishment and growth to maturity.

Trees that do not survive or are removed shall be replaced with new trees that are equivalent in size to the measured or projected growth of the original trees and shall be planted in the same location unless otherwise directed by the City Forester or Forest & Beach Commission.

23. TreeRemovalProhibited. Throughout construction, the Applicant shall protect all trees identified for preservation by methods approved by the City Forester. Trees on or adjacent to the site shall only be removed upon the approval of the City Forester or Forest and Beach Commission.

24. TreeProtectionMeasures. Requirements for tree preservation shall adhere to the following tree protection measures on the construction site. x Prior to grading, excavation, or construction, the developer shall clearly tag or mark all trees to be preserved.
x Excavation within 6 feet of a tree trunk is not permitted. x No attachments or wires of any kind, other than those of a protective nature, shall be attached to any tree.
x Per Municipal Code Chapter 17.48.110, no material may be stored within the dripline of a protected tree, including the drip lines of trees on neighboring parcels.









 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

x Tree Protection Zone. The Tree Protection Zone shall be equal to dripline or 18 inches radially from the tree for every one inch of trunk diameter at 4.5 feet above the soil line, whichever is greater. A minimum of 4ͲfootͲhigh transparent fencing is required unless otherwise approved by the City Forester. Tree protection shall not be resized, modified, removed, or altered in any manner without written approval. The fencing must be maintained upright and taught for the duration of the project. No more than 4 inches of wood mulch shall be installed within the Tree Protection Zone. When the Tree Protection Zone is at or within the drip line, no less than 6 inches of wood mulch shall be installed 18 inches radially from the tree for every one inch of trunk diameter at 4.5 feet above the soil line outside of the fencing.
x Structural Root Zone. The Structural Root Zone shall be 6 feet from the trunk or 6 inches radially from the tree for every one inch of trunk diameter at 4.5’ above the soil line, whichever is greater. Any excavation or changes to the grade shall be approved by the City Forester prior to work. Excavation within the Structural Root Zone shall be performed with a pneumatic excavator, hydroͲvac at low pressure, or another method that does not sever roots.
x If roots greater than 2 inches in diameter or larger are encountered within the approved Structural Root Zone, the City Forester shall be contacted for approval to make any root cuts or alterations to structures to prevent roots from being damaged.
x If roots larger than 2 inches in diameter are cut without prior City Forester approval or any significant tree is endangered as a result of construction activity, the building permit will be suspended, and all work stopped until an investigation by the City Forester has been completed, and mitigation measures have been put in place.

25. FoundationWorkNearSignificantTrees. All foundations within 15 feet of significant trees shall be excavated by hand. If any tree roots larger than two inches (2”) are encountered during construction, the City Forester shall be contacted before cutting the roots. The City Forester may require the roots to be bridged or may authorize the roots to be cut. If roots larger than two inches (2”) in diameter are cut without prior City Forester approval or any significant tree is endangered as a result of construction activity, the building permit will be suspended and all work stopped until an investigation by the City Forester has been completed. Six inches (6”) of mulch shall be evenly spread across the inside the dripline of all trees prior to the issuance of a building permit.
EnvironmentalComplianceConditions

26. DrainagePlan.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building and Public Works Departments a drainage plan that meetsthe requirements of the City's drainage guidance, SOG 17Ͳ07. At a minimum, new and replaced impervious area drainage must be dispersed around the site rather than focused on one corner of the property; infiltration features must be sized appropriately and located at least 6 feet from neighboring properties. The drainage plan shall include information on drainage from new impervious areas and semiͲ 








 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

pervious areas.

27. BMPTrackingForm.Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building and Public Works Departments a completed BMP Tracking form.

28. SemiͲPermeableSurfaces.Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicantshallsubmit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building and Public Works Departments crossͲsection details for all semiͲpermeable surfaces.

29. ErosionandSedimentControlPlan.Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building and Public Works Departments an erosion and sediment control plan that includes locations and installation details for erosion and sediment control BMPs, material staging areas, and stabilized access.

30. ErosionControlintheRightͲofͲWay. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall identify on the landscape plan any natural slope within the rightͲofͲway immediately adjacent to the property where parking is not practical. Jute netting and a droughtͲ tolerant ground cover to manage postͲconstruction erosion control shall be installed.

Plants installed within the drip line of trees shall be selected from the City’s “List of Compatible Plants Under and Around Native Trees” in the Forest Management Plan. The Public Works Director, or their designee, may waive this requirement. SpecialConditions

31. PreͲConstruction Meeting. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the contractor overseeing the project shallschedule a preͲconstruction meeting with the Project Planner to review the approval conditions and expectations during construction.

32. Conditions of Approval Acknowledgement. Prior to the issuance of a building permit revision, a completed ConditionsofApprovalAcknowledgmentform shall be included in the construction drawings. The form shall be signed by the Property Owner, Applicant, and Contractor prior to the issuance of a building permit.

33. CopperGutters&DownspoutsNotPermitted. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall identify the material for gutters and downspouts in the construction drawings. The use of copper for gutters and downspouts is prohibited.

34. ConstructionManagementPlan. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Management Plan for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Director.

35. Public Way Improvements. Development projects involving substantial new or replacement construction shall include improvements in the public rightͲofͲway adjacent to the building site to coordinate the design of the development with the design of City streets, sidewalks, walkways and infrastructure improvements and to enhance the overall appearance of the community. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Department and Public Works Department a design for public way improvements on San Carlos Street.

36. Landscapingwithin Required Setbacks. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building 








 






Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

Department a final landscape and irrigation plan that includeslandscaping within required setbacks.

37. GarageVentilation.Garages shall be ventilated to avoid the buildͲup of exhaust gases.

When mechanical ventilation is used, noise mitigation measures shall be incorporated such as lowͲnoise fans, insulated ductwork and vibration absorbing mounting systems.

Ducts shall not exhaust toward any building openings or open space on any adjoining property nor toward any onͲsite or offͲsite open space, pathway, street, place or park accessible to the public. Venting to the roof is generally preferred. Plans for underground garagesshall be reviewed to ensure accessibility for Police and Fire Department personnel during emergencies. To the extent possible, utility meters, vaults and connections should be located within garages or driveways and away from pedestrian walking surfaces.

38. KitchensorSimilarFacilitiesforCooking. No hotel units shall contain kitchens or similar facilities for cooking. A kitchen is defined as, Any room or any part of a room designed, built, equipped, used, or intended to be used for the preparation of food and dishwashing, whether or not said room contains a cookstove or any other cooking appliance. A dining room, alcove, or similar room adjacent to or connected with a kitchen in which toasters, grills, percolators, and similar appliances are used shall not be deemed a kitchen. (CMC

17.70)

39. LotLineAdjustment. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare a final record of survey map and submit it to the Community Planning and Building Department for review and recordation with the Office of Monterey County.

40. BuildingCoverageAnalysis. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare a comprehensive building coverage analysis including diagrams and submit it to the Community Planning and Building Department for review and approval.

41. FloorAreaReduction. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit revised plans for review and approval by the Community Planning and Building Department that demonstrate a reduction in the building square footage on Lot 1 to comply with maximum floor area standards or submit revised plans with an alternative lot configuration that complies with maximum floor area standards.

Acknowledgment and acceptance of conditions of approval:
______________________________ ___________________________ __________ Property Owner Signature  Printed Name   Date
______________________________ ___________________________ __________ Applicant    Printed Name   Date

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARMELͲBYͲTHEͲSEA this 10th day of April 2024, by the following vote: 








 









 



 
Attachment 2
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ026ͲPC

AYES: ALLEN, DELVES, KARAPETKOV, LEPAGE
NOES:
ABSENT: 
ABSTAIN: LOCKE
APPROVED:    ATTEST:
_________________________ _________________________
Michael LePage   Leah Young
Chair     Planning Commission Secretary










 






Attachment 2
CITYOFCARMELͲBYͲTHEͲSEA
PLANNINGCOMMISSION

PLANNINGCOMMISSIONRESOLUTIONNO.2024Ͳ027ͲPC

ARESOLUTIONOFTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSIONOFTHECITYOFCARMELͲBYͲTHEͲSEA APPROVINGAUSEPERMITFORTHECARMELLEGACYHOTEL,THEHISTORICDONNAHOFSAS HOUSE,ANDASSOCIATEDACCESSORYUSESLOCATEDONSANCARLOSSTREET2NORTHWEST OF4THAVENUEAPN:010Ͳ124Ͳ001Ͳ000and010Ͳ124Ͳ014Ͳ000 
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2024, Eric Miller Architects, Inc. (“Applicant”) submitted Use Permit application UP 24Ͳ060 (Hofsas House, Inc.) described herein as (“Application”) on behalf of Hofsas House, Inc. (“Owner”) for the Carmel Legacy Hotel, conversion of the historic Donna Hofsas House from a manager’s unit to two apartments, and the addition of accessory uses both within the hotel and the historic house; and
WHEREAS, the Application has been submitted for two legal lots of record totaling 36,200 square feet located on San Carlos Street 2 northwest of 4th Avenue in the Residential and Limited Commercial (RC) District (Block 34, Lots 1, 3, 5, por. of 7, por. of 8, 9, 10, por. of 11, 12, 14); and WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting to demolish the Hofsas House Hotel, an approximately 15,762ͲsquareͲfoot 38Ͳroom hotel, and construct the Carmel Legacy Hotel, a 32,466ͲsquareͲfoot 38Ͳroom hotel, convert the historic Donna Hofsas House from a managers unit to two apartments, and establish hotelͲrelated accessory uses; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Carmel Municipal Code (CMC) Section 17.14.030 (Land Use Regulations), Hotels and Motels in the RC District require a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, on March 29, 2024, a notice of the public hearing scheduled for April 10, 2024, was published in the Carmel Pine Cone in compliance with State law (California Government Code 65091) and mailed to owners of real property within a 300Ͳfoot radius of the project indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, on or before March 31, 2024, the Applicant posted the public notice on the project site and handͲdelivered a copy of the public notice to each property within a 100Ͳfoot radius of the project site indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on or before April 5, 2024, the meeting agenda was posted in three locations in compliance with State law indicating the date and time of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive public testimony regarding the Use Permit, including, without limitation, the information provided to the Planning Commission by City staff and through public testimony on the project; and









 






Attachment 3
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ027ͲPC

WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”), together with State Guidelines (14 California Code Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”) and City Environmental Regulations (CMC 17.60) require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that pursuant to CEQA regulations, the Application is categorically exempt under Section 15332 (Class 32) – Infill Development Projects, and no exceptions to the exemption exist pursuant to section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution and its findings are made based upon the evidence presented to the Commission at the hearing date, including, without limitation, the staff report and attachments submitted by the Community Planning and Building Department; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said reports, attachments, recommendations, and testimony herein above set forth and used their independent judgment to evaluate the project; and
WHEREAS, the facts set forth in the recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of CarmelͲByͲ TheͲSea does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding the Use Permit:

FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR USE PERMIT APPROVAL (CMC 17.64.010 & 17.64.020) For each of the required findings listed below, the staff has indicated whether the application, either as proposed or with conditions, supports adopting the findings. For all findings checked "no," the staff report discusses the issues to facilitate the Planning Commission's decisionͲ making. Findings checked "yes," depending on the issues, may or may not be discussed in the report.

MunicipalCodeFindings:CMC17.64.010 YES NO

1. That the proposed use will not be in conflict with the City’s General Plan. ᤯ 

2. That the proposed use will comply with all zoning standards applicable to the use and zoning district.
᤯ 

3. That granting the use permit will not set a precedent for the approval of similar uses whose incremental effect will be detrimental to the City, or will be in conflict with the General Plan.
᤯ 

4. That the proposed use will not make excessive demands on the provision of public services, including water supply, sewer capacity, energy supply, communication facilities, police protection, and fire protection.
᤯ 

5. That the proposed use will not be injurious to public health, safety or welfare. ᤯ 

6. That the proposed use will be compatible with surrounding land uses and will not conflict with the purpose established for the district within which it will be located. ᤯ 









 






Attachment 3
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ027ͲPC

7. That the proposed use will not generate adverse impacts affecting health, safety, or welfare of neighboring properties or uses.
᤯ 
MunicipalCodeFindings:CMC17.64.020 YES NO
A. That allowing the proposed use will not conflict with the City’s goal of achieving and maintaining a balanced mix of uses that serve the needs of both local and nonlocal populations.
᤯ 
B. That proposed use will provide adequate ingress and egress to and from the proposed location.
᤯ 
C. That the capacity of surrounding streets is adequate to serve the automobile and delivery truck traffic generated by the proposed use.
᤯ 
MunicipalCodeFindings:CMC17.64.120 YES NO
A. That the motel or hotel was in existence and lawfully established prior to April 1988 and has remained in operation since that time. That the proposed use will not increase the number of lodging units in existence as of that date. ᤯
B. That the proposed use will be operated as a commercial business offering transient lodging for guests and visitors. That the use will maintain living quarters occupied by a fullͲtime manager onͲsite, if such occupancy was previously established as part of the use.
᤯
C. That the minimum number of units on the site is five. That, except for the manager’s unit, no units shall contain kitchens or similar facilities for cooking food. ᤯
D. That, when reconstruction is involved, a site plan has been approved through the design review process that maximizes usable open space, minimizes unrelieved expanses of pavement devoted to parking and conforms in all respects to the commercial design requirements in Chapter 17.14 CMC, Commercial Zoning Districts.
᤯
E. That the use meets all parking requirements for all uses on the site established by Chapter 17.38 CMC, OffͲStreet Parking Requirements.
᤯
F. That incidentalservice uses provided by the motel, that are not otherwise allowed within the land use district, will be limited to use by motel occupants only and will not be made available to the general public.
᤯
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of CarmelͲbyͲtheͲSea does hereby approve the Use Permit application UP 24Ͳ060 (Hofsas House, Inc) for the demolition of the 38Ͳroom Hofsas House Hotel and construction of the 38Ͳroom Carmel Legacy Hotel, conversion of the historic Donna Hofsas House from a manager’s unit to hotel rooms, and the addition of accessory uses both within the hotel and the historic house located on San Carlos Street 2 northwest of 4th Avenue (Block 34, Lots 1, 3, 5, por. of 7, por. of 8, 9, 10, por. of 11, 12, 14, APN 010Ͳ124Ͳ001 and 010Ͳ124Ͳ014) subject to the Conditions of Approval below:

CONDITIONSOFAPPROVAL
No. StandardConditions

1. Authorization. Approval of Use Permit application UP 24Ͳ060 (Hofsas House, Inc) authorizes a 38Ͳroom hotel, two apartments, and associated hotel accessory uses ᤯









 






Attachment 3
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ027ͲPC

located on San Carlos Street 2 northwest of 4th Avenue, in the Residential & Limited Commercial (RC) District as depicted in the application, plans and associated documents prepared by Eric Miller Architects approved by the Planning Commission on April 10, 2024, stamped approved and on file in the Community Planning & Building Department, unless modified by the conditions of approval contained herein.

2. Codes and Ordinances. The project shall conform to all Residential & Limited Commercial (RC) District requirements. All adopted building and fire codes shall be adhered to when preparing the working drawings. If any codes or ordinancesrequire design elements to be changed, or if any other changes are requested when such plans are submitted,such changes may require additional environmental review and subsequent approval by the Planning Commission.
᤯

3. WaterUse. Approval of this application does not permit an increase in water use on the project site without adequate supply. Should the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District determine that adequate water is not available for this site, this permit will be scheduled for reconsideration, and appropriate findings prepared for review and adoption by the Planning Commission.
᤯

4. Modifications. The applicant shall submit in writing, with revised plans, to the Community Planning and Building staff any proposed changes to the approved project plans prior to incorporating those changes. If the applicant changes the project without first obtaining City approval, the applicant will be required to submit the change in writing, with revised plans, within 2 weeks of the City being notified.

A cease work order may be issued any time at the discretion of the Director of Community Planning and Building until: a) either the Planning Commission or Staff has approved the change, or b) the property owner has eliminated the change and submitted the proposed change inwriting,with revised plans, forreview. The project will be reviewed for its compliance to the approved plans prior to final inspection. ᤯

5. Indemnification. The applicant agrees, at his or her sole expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its public officials, officers, employees, and assigns, from any liability; and shall reimburse the City for any expense incurred, resulting from, or in connection with any project approvals. Thisincludes any appeal, claim, suit, or other legal proceeding, to attack, set aside, void, or annul any project approval. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any legal proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate in any such legal action, but participation shall not relieve the applicant of any obligation under this condition. Should any party bring any legal action in connection with this project, the Superior Court of the County of Monterey, California, shall be the situs and have jurisdiction for the resolution of all such actions by the parties hereto.
᤯

6. ConditionsofApproval. All conditions of approval for the Planning permit(s) shall be printed on a fullͲsize sheet and included with the construction plan set submitted to the Building Safety Division.
᤯
SPECIALCONDITIONS









 






Attachment 3
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ027ͲPC

7. PermitValidity. In accordance with CMC Section 17.52.170.B (General Limits), the Planning Commission extends the time limit on the commercial use permit from 6 months to 18 months to run concurrently with the associated commercial Design Review application. In accordance with CMC 17.52.170.C (Time Extensions), the Planning Commission may grant one 18Ͳmonth extension of the commercial use permit if the conditionssurrounding the original approval have not changed, and the General Plan, Municipal Code, or Local Coastal Program has not been amended in a manner which causes the approval to be inconsistent with these plans or codes. ᤯

8. HotelOperations. In accordance with CMC 17.14.040.M (Hotels and Motels), hotels and motels may include minor accessory uses such as light meals and refreshments for guests only, with or without separate remuneration. If such accessory uses are available to the general public, they must be allowed uses within the underlying land use district and must meet all design, parking, and land use regulations established for the use.
᤯

9. HotelAccessoryUses. The following hotel accessory uses are approved for use by hotel guests only as part of this commercial business use permit:

Restaurant/Dining Room:
x Up to 50 seats for guests and their family/friends
x Hours of Operation: 7 am to 10 pm daily
Café/Bakery:
x 300 square feet (approximately)
x Hours of Operation: 7 am to 5 pm daily
Gym/Fitness Center:
x 500 square feet (approximately)
x Hours of Operation: 6 am to 9 pm daily
Business Center:
x 350 square feet (approximately)
Spa & Salon:
x 700 square feet (approximately)
x Hours of Operation: By appointment
Amendments: The Community Planning and Building Director shall have the authority to approve minor modifications to the accessory uses. Any modification that, in the opinion of the Director, has the potential to negatively impact surrounding uses shall be referred to the Planning Commission for review. ᤯

10. Apartments. Two apartments are permitted and shall contain complete living, sleeping, and bathing facilities.









 






Attachment 3
Resolution No. 2024Ͳ027ͲPC

11. HotelRoomKitchens. In accordance with the findingsfor approval (CMC 17.64.120), except forthe manager’s unit, no hotel unitsshall contain kitchens orsimilarfacilities for cooking food. CMC 17.70 defines a kitchen as, Any room or any part of a room designed, built, equipped, used, or intended to be used for the preparation of food and dishwashing, whether or not said room contains a cookstove or any other cooking appliance. A dining room, alcove, or similar room adjacent to or connected with a kitchen in which toasters, grills, percolators, and similar appliances are used shall not be deemed a kitchen.
᤯

12. Parking. The hotel shall provide onͲsite parking equal to 1 parking space per rental unit, including any manager's unit, plus 1.5 spaces per permanent residential use (apartment) for a total of 41 onͲsite parking spaces. No additional parking shall be required for accessory hotel uses that are limited to hotel guests. ᤯
Acknowledgment and acceptance of conditions of approval. ______________________________ ___________________________ __________ Property Owner Signature  Printed Name   Date
______________________________ ___________________________ __________ Applicant Signature   Printed Name   Date

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARMELͲBYͲTHEͲSEA this 10th day of April 2024, by the following vote: 
AYES: ALLEN, DELVES, KARAPETKOV, LEPAGE
NOES:
ABSENT: 
ABSTAIN: LOCKE
APPROVED:    ATTEST:

_________________________ _________________________ Michael LePage   Leah Young
Chair     Planning Commission Secretary









 









 



 
Attachment 3
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
Attachment 4
Carmel Legacy Hotel 1 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 Carmel Legacy Hotel Response to Appeal to the City
Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32
Categorical Exemption
On behalf of the applicant, EMC Planning Group staff conducted a review and evaluation of the project, the appeal to the City Council, conducted research regarding the applicability of the Class 32 categorical exemption, and presents the following:

Project Description
The project site is currently occupied by the Hofsas House Hotel, a 36,200 square foot building site comprised of two legal lots of record, an 8,000 square foot lot (Block 34, Lots 1 & 3, APN 010-124- 001) and a 28,200 square foot lot (Block 34, Lots 5, por. of 7, por. of 8, 9, 10, por. of 11, 12, 14, APN 010-124-014). The project site totals 36,200 square feet or 0.83 acres. The hotel, as it is known today, was constructed in 1957 and expanded in 1968. The Donna Hofsas House is located on the larger of the two parcels, fronting Dolores Street, and was constructed in 1960.

The project includes demolishing the 38-room Hofsas House Hotel and building a new hotel, Carmel Legacy Hotel. There would be no increase in the number of hotel rooms.

Response to the Appeal
Introduction
The appeal was filed on April 24, 2024, and includes Attachment A and Attachment B, with the appellant’s arguments that the project should not be categorically exempt under Class 32 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Section 21084 of the Public Resources Code requires the CEQA Guidelines to include a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and which shall, therefore, be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. In response to that mandate, the California Secretary for Resources has found that 33 classes of projects, which are listed in the CEQA Guidelines, do not have a significant effect on the environment, and they are declared to be categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents.

Therefore, the Secretary for Resources has found that the environmental impacts associated with projects that fall into these classes are not significant.

Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 2 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 The city has used the following categorical exemption associated with approval of the project:
15332. In-fill Development Projects
Class 32 consists of projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the conditions described in this section.
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. (c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

Response to Appeal’s Claim that Class 32 Exemption Does Not Apply The following are responses to the claims in Attachments A and B of the appeal. In summary, the appellant does not provide any support to the claim that the Class 32 exemption does not apply because there are unusual circumstances that qualify for an exception to the exemption.

Attachment A
Attachment addresses A what the appellant refers to as “unusual circumstances making the categorical exemption inappropriate, particularly in regard to the demolition and construction phase.” The appellant presents the following circumstances:

1. The proposed project is surrounded by residential dwellings which will be subjected to significant construction noise, and traffic, particularly during excavation for the parking structure, and air quality impacts from dust, diesel exhaust and potentially, asbestos.

2. Given the quantity of dirt to be removed for the parking structure, and the amount of cement needed to build the project, the truck traffic with attendant noise, traffic impacts, and air quality impacts, will be significant along the entire truck route through the town from the construction site to the highway. This could also adversely impact emergency vehicle traffic.

Response to 1 and 2. For clarification, the project site is surrounded by a residential neighborhood to the north; Svendsgaard’s Inn and 4th Avenue to the south; San Carlos Street, Pine Terrace Condominiums and Hotel Carmel to the east; and Carmel County Inn, Dolores Street, and a residential neighborhood to the west. There is nothing unusual regarding air pollutants, asbestos, other toxins, diesel exhaust, truck traffic and noise associated with demolition and construction activities associated with the project. Typical demolition activities Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 3 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 include all necessary actions to remove existing structures including parking lots from the site.

Typical construction activities include grading and the import or export of soil, and the use of cement in the construction of parking structures (above ground or below ground), and the construction of new buildings and associated infrastructure. Soil removal and the use of cement are typical activities that occur during demolition and construction activities.

Regarding hazards, the city’s standard condition of approval, which was applied to the project states, “Hazardous Materials Waste Survey. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall submit a hazardous materials waste survey to the Building Division in conformance with the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District.” This addresses the issues of asbestos and other toxins associated with demolition of the existing structures.

Regarding construction traffic, the city’s standard condition of approval, which was applied to the project states, “Truck Haul Route. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Director, in consultation with the Public Works and Public Safety Departments, a truck-haul route and any necessary traffic control measures for the grading activities. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring adherence to the truck-haul route and implementation of any required traffic control measures.” Regarding construction noise, the city’s General Plan/Local Coastal Plan includes policy P9-4 “Ensure that construction activities are managed to minimize overall noise impacts on surrounding land uses.” Additionally, Municipal Code section 15.08.180, limits the hours of construction to between 8:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m.

Therefore, there would be no significant impacts associated with air pollutants, asbestos, other toxins, diesel exhaust, truck traffic and noise and there are no unusual circumstances associated with the project’s demolition and construction activities.

3. The historic façade of the building will be lost unnecessarily. One more piece of Carmel’s history obliterated.

Response to 3. A review of the property was conducted by five separate qualified professionals:

Chattel Inc., Historic Preservation Consultants (October 16, 2023), Heritage Services Consulting (October 23, 2023), Modern Resources (October 16, 2023), Kent Seavey (November 12, 2023), and Dr. Anthony Kirk (September 11, 2023 and September 2022). All reports concluded the existing hotel is not a significant historic resource and is not eligible for listing in the City Inventory or the California Register. The City contracted with Ms. Margaret Clovis, a qualified professional to perform an intensive survey of the Hofsas House Hotel. The DPR report submitted by Ms. Clovis concluded that the Hofsas House Hotel does not meet any of the California Register criteria and is not eligible for listing in the Carmel Inventory of Historic Resources in a DPR report. Subsequently, on December 18, 2023, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Historic Resources Board determined that the Hofsas House Hotel does not constitute a historic resource. No appeal of that determination was filed within the time allowed by law.

Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 4 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024

4. The plan views are incomplete and fail to accurately portray the building as proposed. In this regard the height limit needs to be accurately assessed on this sloping site.

Response to 4. The height of the new building was determined to be consistent with the city’s zoning regulations. Therefore, there are no unusual circumstances associated with the height of the new building. The proposed height of the building projections was simulated with flagging.

Height measurements of (6) six points were measured and verified to accurately reflect the height proposed on the planset, by an affidavit signed by a licensed land surveyor, per the City’s Story Pole Certification Policy.

5. The west side proposes an increase in glass compared to that existing with consequences for the neighbors from increased reflective glare.

Response to 5. The use of glass in commercial structures such as a hotel is not an unusual circumstance.

6. The impact on parking opportunities during demolition and construction.

7. This project is located between two major streets which serve as ingress and egress to the Village. Where will the construction workers and construction vehicles park and how will they navigate through this very congested part of town. [sic] The traffic and circulation of these major demolition and construction vehicles, dump trucks, cement mixers, etc. has not been addressed. We have two inns sharing same the [sic] city block with Hofsas and two more on Fourth Avenue, one at [sic] intersection with San Carlos and the other at the intersection with Dolores. This area contains multiple inns and is also a residential neighborhood that will be heavily impacted by the project traffic.

Response to 6 and 7. It is not unusual for demolition and construction traffic to have a temporary effect on the availability of on-street parking. Additionally, the city’s Municipal Code section 15.08.190 Parking During Construction states, “The parking of construction vehicles in any posted time-limited zone is prohibited unless a construction parking permit has been issued by the City.” Municipal Code section 15.08.210, Use of Public Right-of-Way states, “When at any time any construction interferes with the use of any portion of the public right-of-way, a temporary encroachment permit therefor shall first be obtained and all necessary protection devices shall be installed. Such devices shall include, but may not be limited to: barricades, pedestrian walkways, guardrails, signs, lighting, etc. Said permit shall be obtained from the Department of Community Planning and Building and shall be approved by the Community Planning and Building Department in conjunction with the Director of Public Works. The fee for said permit shall be as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council.

Temporary encroachment permits shall be limited in duration to 48 hours unless a longer time period is specifically approved by the Directors of Planning and Building and Public Works.

Temporary encroachment permits shall not be issued to allow storage of construction materials Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 5 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 and/or equipment in the public right-of-way unless it can be demonstrated that a significant hardship exists that prevents material storage elsewhere on the site.” Additionally, the city has included the following condition of approval associated with construction: “Construction Management Plan. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Management Plan for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Director.”
Therefore, temporary impacts on the availability of parking opportunities does not constitute an unusual circumstance.

Attachment B

1. Regarding inconsistency with the way similar past projects were analyzed in EIRs. The appellant argues that the city prepared EIRs for three projects that included demolition of existing and old commercial structures followed by construction of new commercial structures in their places. However, they don’t provide any evidence that those three projects were categorically exempt. Even if one or more of those projects were categorically exempt, preparing an EIR for those project(s) would not require the city to prepare EIRs on other projects that are categorically exempt. In summary, preparing EIRs on past projects does not affect the exempt status of other projects, include the Carmel Legacy Hotel project.

2. Regarding the definition of “infill development.” The appellant argues that the Office of Planning and Research defines infill development as follows: “The term ‘infill development’ refers to building within unused and underutilized lands within existing development patterns, typically but not exclusively in urban areas. Infill development is critical to accommodating growth and redesigning our cities to be environmentally- and sociallysustainable.” CEQA Guidelines section 15332 defines In-Fill Development Projects for purposes of this exemption, namely, that the project be substantially surrounded by urban uses. This project meets section 15332.

3. Regarding surrounding land uses. The appellant argues that an EIR should be prepared because the project site is surrounded by residential neighborhoods, including numerous residents that live in homes directly across the street.

They, as well as residents living along the truck routes will be subject to demolition and construction-related impacts. For clarification, the project site is surrounded by a residential neighborhood to the north; Svendsgaard’s Inn and 4th Avenue to the south; San Carlos Street, Pine Terrace Condominiums and Hotel Carmel to the east; and Carmel County Inn, Dolores Street, and a residential neighborhood to the west. By its very characterization of in-fill developments projects, CEQA Guidelines section 15332 states that the proposed development must occur within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. The are no unusual circumstances associated with the project being surrounded by existing commercial and residential uses.

Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 6 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024

4. Regarding public health and safety impacts. The appellant implies that residents in the vicinity could be exposed to air pollutants, asbestos, other toxins, diesel exhaust, truck traffic and noise. There is nothing unusual regarding air pollutants, asbestos, other toxins, diesel exhaust, truck traffic and noise associated with demolition and construction activities associated with the project. Typical demolition activities include all necessary actions to remove existing structures including parking lots from the site. Typical construction activities include grading and the import or export of soil, construction of parking structures (above ground or below ground), and construction of new buildings and associated infrastructure. These are typical activities that occur during demolition and construction activities.

Regarding hazards, the city’s standard condition of approval, which was applied to the project states, Hazardous Materials Waste Survey. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall submit a hazardous materials waste survey to the Building Division in conformance with the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District.” This addresses the issues of asbestos and other toxins associated with demolition of the existing structures.

Regarding construction traffic, the city’s standard condition of approval, which was applied to the project states, “Truck Haul Route. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Director, in consultation with the Public Works and Public Safety Departments, a truck-haul route and any necessary traffic control measures for the grading activities. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring adherence to the truck-haul route and implementation of any required traffic control measures.” Regarding construction noise, the city’s General Plan/Local Coastal Plan includes policy P9-4 “Ensure that construction activities are managed to minimize overall noise impacts on surrounding land uses.” Therefore, there would be no significant impacts associated with air pollutants, asbestos, other toxins, diesel exhaust, truck traffic and noise and there is nothing unusual about the demolition and construction activities associated with the project.

The replacement of the hotel will address structural and engineering issues with the existing hotel, as described in the attached report from KPFF Consulting Engineers.

Categorical Exemption and Recommended Evidence
The project appears to qualify under the following four exemption categories:
§ Class 32, In-fill Development
§ Class 2, Replacement or Reconstruction
§ Class 3, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures § Class 31, Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation The applicability of each class to the project is discussed below.

Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 7 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 Class 32, In-fill Development Categorical Exemption
The project qualifies for a categorical exemption under Article 19, Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

Evidence. The April 10, 2024 staff report to the Planning Commission provides the evidence that the project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and with applicable zoning designation and regulations. The project is consistent with the following General Plan Polices noted in the City’s Land Use Element:

G1-2 Preserve the residential village character and perpetuate a balance of land uses compatible with local resources and the environment.

P1-5 Preserve the development pattern established in the commercial area with a central core area of ground floor retail and service activities surrounded by a less intensive buffer area of residential, motels, offices and other uses.

The project is sited adjacent to the Commercial District in (RC) Residential and Limited Commercial Zoning.

O1-6 Recognize the natural resources and scenic quality of Carmel as a coastal community and allow uses in the community that are consistent with local needs, the Carmel Local Coastal Plan, and the California Coastal Act
P1-27 Continue to ensure that development, whether commercial or residential, does not diminish the village character by excessively blocking important public or private views and disturbing natural topography, mature trees, or native growth.

The project is lower in height, and expands surrounding viewsheds.

G1-3 Recognize the qualities and attributes that make up the unique architectural character of Carmel, retain these qualities in existing buildings, and encourage the use of them in new structures.

O1-10 Apply design regulations for the commercial district that will protect its established character while supporting the land uses contained therein.

The project’s design was evaluated and unanimously approved, by the Planning Commission who confirming the design is in alignment with the City of Carmel’s Commercial Design Guidelines Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 8 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 (b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.

Evidence. The project site is 0.83 acres, located within the city limits of Carmel-by-the-Sea, and is completely surrounded by urban uses. The project site is surrounded by a residential neighborhood to the north; Svendsgaard’s Inn and 4th Avenue to the south; San Carlos Street, Pine Terrace Condominiums and Hotel Carmel to the east; and Carmel County Inn, Dolores Street, and a residential neighborhood to the west.
(c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

Evidence. The project site is completely developed with structures and parking lots and within the developed city of Carmel-by-the-Sea. Janet Walther, MS, EMC Planning Group principal biologist reviewed the project site and the California Natural Diversity Database and concluded that the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. (d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality Construction Traffic), or water quality.

Evidence - Traffic. A vehicle miles traveled (VMT) study was conducted by Hexagon Transportation Consultants in November 2023 to determine if the project would result in significant traffic effects as defined by CEQA. In summary, the study concluded that the project would replace an existing hotel facility consisting of 38 rooms and on-site amenities with a proposed hotel facility consisting of 38 rooms and on-site amenities. The proposed hotel would presumably accommodate the same number of guests as the existing hotel. Therefore, it is anticipated that the proposed hotel project would generate no more than the number of vehicle trips currently generated by the existing Hofsas House Hotel. As a result of the project generating or attracting fewer than 110 net new trips per day, it can be presumed that the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact on VMT based on OPR’s VMT screening criteria. Therefore, approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic. Prior to construction, a Construction Mobilization plan will be prepared and submitted with construction plans. The plan will detail the following: shuttle schedule and off-site parking plans for construction worker transportation to and from the job site.

Noise mitigation measures, material delivery and removal, and hazardous waste removal will also be addressed.

Evidence – Noise. The project would be developed within the existing commercial and residential neighborhoods and would be required to comply with city noise regulations, which includes the city’s General Plan/Local Coastal Plan policy P9-4 “Ensure that construction activities are managed to minimize overall noise impacts on surrounding land uses” and the Municipal Code 15.08.180, which limits the hours of construction to between 8:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Therefore, construction of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to noise.

Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 9 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 Evidence – Air Quality. Construction-related air quality impacts are short-term in nature and therefore are not considered significant. Additionally, the project is required to comply with all applicable local, regional, state, and federal regulations associated with demolition and construction of buildings. Regarding long-term air quality impacts associated with vehicle use, the new Carmel Legacy Hotel project will have the same number of hotel rooms as the existing Hofsas House hotel and, as documented in the traffic report prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants (and discussed above). Therefore, there would be no increase in existing long-term air quality impacts.

Evidence – Water Quality. Development of the project will be required to comply with the city’s grading ordinance, which requires drainage and erosion controls be in place prior to, and during, all work (Municipal Code 15.08.200 Grading). The project will also comply with the State Water Resources Control Board’s applicable construction stormwater general permit. Therefore, demolition of the existing hotel and construction of the new hotel would not result in significant water quality impacts.

Therefore, the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

Evidence. The existing on-site hotel is adequately served by required utilities and public services, including but not limited to water, wastewater, gas and electricity, and fire and police protection.

Therefore, the Carmel Legacy hotel with the same number of guest rooms would also be adequately served by required utilities and public services.

Class 2, Replacement or Reconstruction Categorical Exemption The project also appears to be exempt under 15302, Replacement or Reconstruction, which states:

Class 2 consists of replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced, including but not limited to:
(a) Replacement or reconstruction of existing schools and hospitals to provide earthquake resistant structures which do not increase capacity more than 50 percent.
(b) Replacement of a commercial structure with a new structure of substantially the same size, purpose, and capacity.
(c) Replacement or reconstruction of existing utility systems and/or facilities involving negligible or no expansion of capacity.
(d) Conversion of overhead electric utility distribution system facilities to underground including connection to existing overhead electric utility Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 10 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 distribution lines where the surface is restored to the condition existing prior to the undergrounding.

Evidence. The project is the replacement of an existing hotel (Hofsas House Hotel) with 38 guest rooms, with a new hotel (Carmel Legacy Hotel) with 38 guest rooms. The replacement hotel will be located on the same site as the hotel replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced; i.e. a 38-room hotel. Additionally, the new hotel is substantially the same size (square footage and height) as documented in the supplemental FAR and Square Footage calculations document provided by Eric Miller Architect’s office. The purpose of the project remains consistent (hotel to hotel), and there is no change to room capacity (38 rooms to 38 rooms).

Class 3, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures Categorical Exemption The Donna Hofsas House component of the project is also exempt under 15303, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures which states:

Class 3 consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. The numbers of structures described in this section are the maximum allowable on any legal parcel. Examples of this exemption include, but are not limited to:
(a) One single-family residence, or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption.
(b) A duplex or similar multi-family residential structure, totaling no more than four dwelling units. In urbanized areas, this exemption applies to apartments, duplexes and similar structures designed for not more than six dwelling units. (c) A store, motel, office, restaurant or similar structure not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances, and not exceeding 2500 square feet in floor area. In urbanized areas, the exemption also applies to up to four such commercial buildings not exceeding 10,000 square feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use if not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary public services and facilities are available and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive. (d) Water main, sewage, electrical, gas, and other utility extensions, including street improvements, of reasonable length to serve such construction. (e) Accessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences.

Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 11 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 (f) An accessory steam sterilization unit for the treatment of medical waste at a facility occupied by a medical waste generator, provided that the unit is installed and operated in accordance with the Medical Waste Management Act (Section 117600, et seq., of the Health and Safety Code) and accepts no offsite waste.

Evidence: A portion of the project proposes to renovate the Donna Hofsas House by adding conference and exercise facilities to its interior. The project proposes minor modifications to the exterior, with the potential for no exterior changes at all. The conversion of the existing small house from residential use to multiple uses qualifies the project for this exemption.

Class 31, Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation Categorical Exemption The Donna Hofsas House component of the project is also exempt under 15331, Historical resource Restoration/Rehabilitation which states:

Class 31 consists of projects limited to maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer.

Evidence: The restoration and conservation of the Donna Hofsas House will be completed in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and therefore qualifies for this exemption.

Exceptions to Categorical Exemptions
Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines lists exceptions that would prohibit a project from qualifying for a Categorical Exemption, even if the project satisfies the requirements for one or more of the exemption classes. On behalf of the applicant, EMC Planning Group, conducted a review and evaluation of the project and conducted research. Based on its review, EMC Planning Group concluded that none of the exceptions listed in CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 (a-f) apply to the project (discussed below). Therefore, a Categorical Exemption is appropriate pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15302.
a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.

Discussion. The project qualifies for a Class 32 exemption and therefore, the location exception does not apply to the project. The project also qualifies for a Class 3 exemption, and the Donna Hofsas House renovation will not impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 12 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.

Discussion. There are no successive projects of the same type in the same place planned.

Therefore, there is no cumulative impact that would be significant. In addition, because the impacts of replacing the Hotel with a similarly sized hotel are less than significant with this project, it is not expected that any future project to replace the new Hotel with another Hotel of similar size would be cumulatively significant.
c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.

Discussion. There is no reasonable possibility that the project would have a significant effect on the environmental due to unusual circumstances, based upon the following substantial evidence:
§ The project site is surrounded by a residential neighborhood to the north; Svendsgaard’s Inn and 4th Avenue to the south; San Carlos Street, Pine Terrace Condominiums and Hotel Carmel to the east; and Carmel County Inn, Dolores Street, and a residential neighborhood to the west. By its very characterization of in-fill developments projects, CEQA Guidelines section 15332 states that the proposed development must occur within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. The are no unusual circumstances associated with the project being surrounded by existing commercial and residential uses.
§ There is nothing unusual regarding air pollutants, asbestos, other toxins, diesel exhaust, truck traffic and noise associated with demolition and construction activities associated with the project. Typical demolition activities include all necessary actions to remove existing structures including parking lots from the site. Typical construction activities include grading and the import or export of soil, and the use of cement in the construction of parking structures (above ground or below ground), and the construction of new buildings and associated infrastructure. Soil removal and the use of cement are typical activities that occur during demolition and construction activities.

Regarding hazards, the city’s standard condition of approval, which was applied to the project states, “Hazardous Materials Waste Survey. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall submit a hazardous materials waste survey to the Building Division in conformance with the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District.” This addresses the issues of asbestos and other toxins associated with demolition of the existing structures. Regarding construction traffic, the city’s standard condition of approval, Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 13 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 which was applied to the project states, “Truck Haul Route. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Director, in consultation with the Public Works and Public Safety Departments, a truck-haul route and any necessary traffic control measures for the grading activities. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring adherence to the truck-haul route and implementation of any required traffic control measures.” Regarding construction noise, the city’s General Plan/Local Coastal Plan includes policy P9-4 “Ensure that construction activities are managed to minimize overall noise impacts on surrounding land uses.” Additionally, Municipal Code section 15.08.180, limits the hours of construction to between 8:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m.

Therefore, there would be no significant impacts associated with air pollutants, asbestos, other toxins, diesel exhaust, truck traffic and noise and there are no unusual circumstances associated with the project’s demolition and construction activities. § The height of the new building was determined to be consistent with the city’s zoning regulations. Therefore, there are no unusual circumstances associated with the height of the new building.
§ The use of glass in commercial structures such as a hotel is not an unusual circumstance. § It is not unusual for demolition and construction traffic to have a temporary effect on the availability of on-street parking. Additionally, the city’s Municipal Code section 15.08.190 Parking During Construction states, “The parking of construction vehicles in any posted time-limited zone is prohibited unless a construction parking permit has been issued by the City.” Municipal Code section 15.08.210, Use of Public Right-of-Way states, “When at any time any construction interferes with the use of any portion of the public right-of-way, a temporary encroachment permit therefor shall first be obtained and all necessary protection devices shall be installed. Such devices shall include, but may not be limited to:
barricades, pedestrian walkways, guardrails, signs, lighting, etc. Said permit shall be obtained from the Department of Community Planning and Building and shall be approved by the Community Planning and Building Department in conjunction with the Director of Public Works. The fee for said permit shall be as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Temporary encroachment permits shall be limited in duration to 48 hours unless a longer time period is specifically approved by the Directors of Planning and Building and Public Works. Temporary encroachment permits shall not be issued to allow storage of construction materials and/or equipment in the public right-ofway unless it can be demonstrated that a significant hardship exists that prevents material storage elsewhere on the site.”
Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 14 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 § Additionally, the city has included the following condition of approval associated with construction: “Construction Management Plan. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Management Plan for review and approval by the Community Planning & Building Director.”
§ Therefore, temporary impacts on the availability of parking opportunities does not constitute an unusual circumstance.
d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.

Discussion. According to the Caltrans Scenic Highway System Map website, the nearest scenic highway is State Route 1, which is located approximately ½ mile east of the project site. The project site is not visible from the highway. Therefore, no officially designated scenic highways, or scenic resources, would be affected as a result of the project. e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

Discussion. The project is not located on a site that is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. Each were checked and are discussed herein. The site is not listed on the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Cortese List (Health and Safety Code Section 25187.5). The State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker (Health and Safety Code Section 25295 and Water Code Sections 13273 and 13301) does not indicate any hazardous sites within the project site. The project site is also not listed on the California Environmental Protection Agency’s list of solid waste sites identified by the Water Board with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside the waste management unit (Health and Safety Code Section 116395).
f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

Discussion. A review of the property was conducted by Chattel Inc., Historic Preservation Consultants (October 16, 2023), and concluded the existing hotel is not a significant historic resource and is not eligible for listing in the City Inventory or the California Register. Subsequently, on December 18, 2023, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Historic Resources Board determined that the Hofsas House hotel does not constitute a historic resource. The Historic Resources Board’s determination was not appealed within 10 days of the Board’s decision and so that decision is now final and conclusive. (Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code § 17.54.010(B).) Attachment 5
Carmel Legacy Hotel 15 EMC Planning Group
Response to Appeal to the City Council and Recommended Evidence for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption May 3, 2024 With respect to the House, the renovation project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of this historical resource because it will not significantly affect the exterior of the House and the interior renovations will be conducted consistently with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer.

Attachment 5
7+)/225/27 
7+)/225/27
 

7$//$77,&63$&(%(7:((1/(9(/ 
5')/225/27 
5')/225/27
 
5')/225/27  5')/225/27 
$3$570(17
1')/225/27
 
1')/225/27
 
1')/225/27  1')/225/27  1')/225/27  %8,/',1*
/27
&29(5$*(287/,1(
1')/225/27

35(9,286/<81&2817('

)/2253/$7(287/,1(%8,/',1*
/27&29(5$*(

$77,&6725$*(
29(5

 6)
727$/(;75$)/225$5($ 
6)
&5$:/63$&(6725$*(
29(5

 6)
(;,67,1*)/225$5($ 6)
$'',7,21$/)/225$5($
6)
727$/(;,67,1*)/225$5($6)727$/352326(')/225$5($6) ',))(5(1&(
 
6)25
1')/225/27
 
6)
67)/225/27

67)/225/27 
67)/225
0((7,1*5220
/27
67)/225/27 
*$5$*(6
6)

&5$:/63$&(6725$*(
$77,&63$&(
$77,&63$&(
(438:19&39
/4'34)&9*8(&1*)7&<3
8-**94+
7*;.8.43 3T
$5&+,7(&7

(5,&0,//(5$5&+,7(&76,1&
+2))0$1$9(18( 0217(5(<&$


3+21(

)$;

:(%
HULFPLOOHUDUFKLWHFWVFRP
6*'«75'«1(«6*'5'«&4#9+0)5«#0&«52'%+(+%#6+105«+5«51.'.;«4'564+%6'&«61«6*'«14+)+0#.«5+6'«(14«9*+%*«6*';«9'4'«24'2#4'&«27$.+%#6+10«+5«':24'55.;«.+/+6'&«61«57%*«75'«4'241&7%6+10«14«27$.+%#6+10«$;«#0;«/'#05«+0«9*1.'«14«+0«2#46«+5«564+%6.;«241*+$+6'&«§«6+6.'«61«6*'5'«&4#9+0)5«#0&«52'%+(+%#6+105«4'/#+05«9+6*«6*'«#4%*+6'%6«9+6*176«24',7&+%'«8+57#.«%106#%6«9+6*«6*'5'«&4#9+0)5« «52'%+(+%#6+105«5*#..«%1056+676'«24+/#«(#5%+'«'8+&'0%'«1(«#%%'26#0%'«1(«6*'5'«4'564+%6+105 -RE1DPH

$VLQGLFDWHG
,
>«,QDU>«**.>4GPFGTKPI>4GXKV>CU§DWKNV«HKNG>*QHCUCU«*QWUG«&+#)4#/5«4'5+<'&«TXV « 
«2/ $
+2)6$6+286(/(*$&<
1:RIWK$YHRQ6DQ&DUORV6W
&$50(/%<7+(6($

(;,67,1*+27(/3/$16
$31
 
&6

 
  (;,67,1*+27(/)2857+)/2253/$1 
  (;,67,1*+27(/7+,5')/2253/$1
 
  (;,67,1*+27(/6(&21')/2253/$1
7+)/2253/$1
1')/2253/$1
 

/HJHQG
 
  (;,67,1*+27(/),567)/2253/$1
67)/2253/$1
 
  (;,67,1*+27(/522)3/$1
522)3/$1
0 0 5')/2253/$100 0

(
)$56FKHGXOH
7\SH $UHD 6LWH$UHD )$5
VW)ORRU/RW  6) 6) VW)ORRU/RW  6) 6) VW)ORRU/RW 6) 6) VW)ORRU0HHWLQJ5RRP/RW

6) 6) QG)ORRU/RW  
6) 6) QG)ORRU/RW 
6) 6) QG)ORRU/RW  6) 6) QG)ORRU/RW   6) 6) UG)ORRU/RW  
6) 6) UG)ORRU/RW  6) 6) UG)ORRU/RW  6) 6) UG)ORRU/RW   6) 6) WK)ORRU/RW  6) 6) WK)ORRU/RW   6) 6) $SDUWPHQW 6) 6) 5HVLGHQFH/RZHU)ORRU 6) 6) 5HVLGHQFH8SSHU)ORRU  6) 6) 727$/
 6) 

(
/27&29(5$*(

+2)6$6+27(/+2)6$6+286(727$/&29(5$*(


6)

6)
6)



(
$'',7,21$/)/225$5($
Visual Assessment and Evaluation
Hofsas House Hotel
Carmel, CA
Prepared by:

KPFF Consulting Engineers
San Francisco, CA
May 21, 2024
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 2
Table of Contents

1. Scope of Report ..................................................................................................................................3

2. Limitations ..........................................................................................................................................3

3. Building & Site Descriptions ...............................................................................................................3

4. Results of Structural Evaluation .........................................................................................................5

5. Results of Civil Engineering Evaluation ............................................................................................17

6. Appendix A – Materials Testing
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 3

1. Scope of Report
This report presents the findings of the visual assessment and evaluation of the Hofsas House Hotel, located in Carmel, California. The objective of this study was to perform a visual conditions assessment, noting deficiencies encountered, and a qualitative structural review of the buildings along with a civil assessment of the site.

The following tasks outline the scope of work that was performed for the structural evaluation of the building:

1. Review of available original structural and architectural drawings provided by the Client.

2. Walkthrough visual survey of the building exteriors to further understand and verify existing conditions, construction, systems, and finishes.

3. Walkthrough visual civil site survey of the exterior site including parking facilities, pedestrian access facilities, site amenities, and visible surface indications of utilities.

4. Prepare a letter report summarizing the results of the structural and civil evaluations.

2. Limitations
This report has been prepared for the sole and exclusive use of Eric Miller Architects (EMA) and shall not be relied upon by or transferred to any other party, or used for any other purpose, without the express written authorization of KPFF Consulting Engineers (KPFF).

In preparation of our evaluation and report, limited original structural drawings were made available to KPFF for review and use. A site investigation was performed to verify that visible existing conditions generally matched the limited available drawings; however, no finishes were removed and materials testing was limited to three concrete compression tests of one wall. The conclusions in this report were based on a review of the existing drawings, our experience with similar structures and sites. Evaluation of potential soils-related hazards have not been evaluated by KPFF.

3. Building & Site Descriptions
The Hofsas House is a hotel on the west side of San Carlos Street near 4th Avenue in Carmel, California, on a site that has approximately 20 feet of grade change. Originally a collection of smaller buildings built prior to 1957, the site is a collection of interconnecting buildings built of wood, concrete masonry (CMU) and concrete. Figure 1 is an aerial view of the site with the different colors representing construction timeframes, as best as they could be determined using the available drawings. Buildings highlighted in green represent the single-story concrete and CMU structures with timber roofs built prior to 1957. Highlighted in yellow, the wood-framed construction from 1957 enveloped some of the original structures and contains the lobby and 25 guest rooms. Orange highlights in Figure 1 represent the 3-story wood-framed L-shaped building and single-story poolside building of an unknown vintage because drawings were not available for review. Online research hints that the structures were built circa 1957, and the visible framing of the 2-story building is similar though not identical to the yellow highlighted structure.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 4
Including the three structures, the site accessible to Hofsas House guests measures approximately 0.8-acres. The lobby and guest check-in is located along San Carlos Street. A pedestrian loading zone is located along San Carlos Street. Guest parking is available at the rear of the site, accessible through one-way drive-throughs under the building. Guest parking elevations vary, but are approximately 1- to 2-stories lower than the entrance along San Carlos Street. Guest amenities including a heated swimming pool and dry saunas are located adjacent to the lower parking lot.

Figure 1- Aerial View
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 5
Figure 2- West Elevation
Our office visited the site for visual assessment in July of 2022 and again in May of 2024. A partial set of drawings for the yellow highlighted building was available for review. Prepared by Robert R. Jones, AIA and Carter and Slattery Structural Engineers, the available drawings detail a 4-story, wood framed structure with lightly reinforced concrete grade beams. The gabled roofs consist of 5/8” thick plywood sheathing over 2x6 joists spaced at 16” on center in the southmost roof and 32” on center elsewhere. At the floor levels, 1” thick diagonal sheathing spans between 2x12’s spaced at 16” on center. At the units with the exposed exterior walkways, every other joist spans past the westmost perimeter wall to support 2x6 flat decking which carries the corridor loads.

When subjected to lateral loads, the plywood roof sheathing distributes inertial forces to diagonal sheathed shear walls. Similarly, the 1x diagonal floor sheathing distributes inertial forces to the same diagonal sheathed shear walls. The sheathed walls carry the inertial loads to the concrete strip footings.

4. Results of Structural Evaluation
Our limited field observations, the concrete core compressive tests, and our review of the partial drawings set highlighted a number of structural issues.

4.1 Inadequate Lateral System: The floor diaphragm and shear walls are sheathed with diagonal sheathing rather than plywood, and the current walls and floors very likely do not have the minimum capacity required by the current building code. The walls also likely do not have the adequate hardware (holdowns or tiedowns) required to resist overturning when subjected to large seismic loads. After a thorough quantitative seismic analysis, retrofit will likely involve removing floor and wall finishes and installing the requisite hardware and plywood sheathing.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 6

4.2 Floors at different elevations and no seismic separations between Buildings The 1957 framing included no consideration for seismic separation of the various uniquely-framed segments of the building. For example, if built today, there would be a seismic separation between the portion of the building containing the lobby and the portion that contains guest rooms directly north of the lobby. The floors in these areas do not align, as seen in Figure 2. In the event of a major earthquake, it is likely that the building will be damaged at the locations where floors do not align.

4.3 Interface with pre-1957 building: The 1957 structure was built over one of the original structures located on the site. The drawing sheet with the east wall section was not available for review; however, Figure 3 below shows the interface between the original structure with the flared foundation and the 1957 structure. The 1957 structure was excavated below the original foundation, so underpinning was shown in the section. No positive attachment between the structures is shown, and without is the 1957 structure is likely to shift on the original structure in the event of a major earthquake. Such a shift will cause substantial damage and may be irreparable.

Figure 3- Interface Between 1957 Structure and Pre-1957 Structure

4.4 Condition of the pre 1957 retaining wall: The pre-1957 structure that was incorporated into the 1957 structure has an 8’ tall concrete retaining wall within 8’ of San Carlos Street. The wall is in poor condition and has a large void vein running through it (See Figure 4). Beach sand and Carmel stone appear to have been used as aggregate in the wall concrete. Because of this, and because water Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 7
appears to have been leaking through the wall for some time, the average concrete core compressive strength was tested to be 1290 psi, with a low value of 790 psi tested where shown in Figure 4. Two other samples were taken away from the void vein, and the compressive strengths were 1050 psi and 2020 psi, as seen in the materials testing report in Appendix A. The tested concrete is quite weak, and the weakened wall is critical for the support of both the 1957 structure above and the adjacent San Carlos Street. Replacement is recommended, though it may prove cost prohibitive as it will require shoring both the roadway and the entire building, plus reattachment. The work will also likely trigger a full seismic retrofit. Due to the potential impact on the adjacent street, further detailed study is warranted, including a geotechnical investigation. Traffic, including truck traffic, is potentially surcharging a weak and decaying retaining wall in its current configuration.

Figure 4- Void Vein in East Wall of Pre-1957 Structure
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 8

4.5 Attachment to Pre-1957 Structure At East Wall: Although the structural drawing showing the attachment between the 1957 structure and the east wall of the original structure was not available, the connection appears tenuous in the field and appears to have been repaired at one location in the past. The repair also does not appear to be rugged. Failure of this connection will lead to substantial damage.

Figure 5- Resupport of 1957 Structure at East Wall of Original Structure Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 9

4.6 Efflorescence and Weak Concrete in South Wall of Pre-1957 Structure: As shown in Figures 6 and 7, there is visible efflorescence on the surface of the south wall of the pre-1957 structure, indicating that water has been migrating through the wall. Additionally, the surface concrete at the efflorescence crumbled easily by hand. The concrete condition is likely similar to the tested concrete of the east wall.

Figure 6- Efflorescence and Weak Concrete in South Wall of Pre-1957 Structure Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 10
Figure 7- Additional Efflorescence and Weak Concrete in South Wall of Pre-1957 Structure

4.7 Exposed Deck Joists: Figure 8 shows a typical condition of cantilevered 2x12 joists on the west and south sides of the hotel buildings. The 2x12 joists at 32” on center specified on the historic structural drawings do not have the capacity to carry 100 psf corridor loading required by the building code.

Although they don’t extend to the ground, the intermittent posts will help share load between floors; however, corridor framing is typically designed to carry load at the level it is applied. In addition, the cantilevered joists are prone to dry rot, and we noted locations in the exposed walkway framing where the original members have been replaced with pressure treated lumber, presumably because the original elements rotted. We also noted signs of weathering on some exposed timber elements, plus some rot in in the exposed framing in the northmost building.. All rotted elements should be removed and replace Additionally, the joists are a conduit for moisture to enter the building if not flashed properly. No finishes were removed to examine the supporting west wall framing, but there may be rot in some locations due to water intrusion. The cantilevered joist condition has been singled out as the cause of the infamous balcony collapse in Berkeley.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 11
Figure 8- Typical Exposed Framing at Walkway
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 12
Figure 9- Example of Weathering in Exposed Framing
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 13
Figure 10- Dry Rot in Exposed Framing at Northmost Building Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 14
Figure 11- Dry Rot in Exposed Landing Framing at Northmost Building

4.8 Corroded Base Plate and Anchors: At the Southwest corner of the northmost building, there is a column to support the two stories of hotel space above. Although painted, the paint is blistered on the base plate and the anchor bolts are corroded. The finish should be removed for further investigation, and the base plate and anchor bolts may require replacing. Figure 12 shows the condition.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 15
Figure 12- Corroded Base Plate and Anchors

4.9 Fractured CMU at Cantilevered Beam: There is a 6x12 beam than cantilevers off the CMU wall at the north end of the building highlighted yellow in Figure 1. This beam supports the elevated walkway framing and the stair landings. The CMU support wall has cracked underneath beam and should be repaired.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 16
Figure 13- Fractured CMU Support Wall at Cantilevered 6x12 Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 17

5. Results of Civil Engineering Evaluation
The following sections note a variety of field observations made upon our May 2024 site visit. The comments listed below are primarily focused on site accessibility, but also cover other site features including site structures, drainage, and utilities. The key map below, Figure 14, provides the general location of the following listed items.

Figure 14 – Civil Site Observations Key Map
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 18

5.1 Pedestrian Loading Zone: An approximate 30-foot length of San Carlos Street is marked white for “Hotel Loading Zone Only”. Immediately adjacent to the loading zone is a shallow curb, painted white, limited landscaping/bushes, and a brick/wood decorative wall. No direct access is available to the adjacent pedestrian walkway. While the location is generally appropriate, the loading zone is missing several features to provide pedestrian accessibility. A 5-foot wide, striped and hatched area is required adjacent to the loading zone. A direct connection to the walkway is also required, with a detectable warning surface located between where the loading zone interfaces with the walkway. While removing the existing curb, landscaping and wall appear feasible, it does not appear that sufficient space is available to provide the required accessible elements. In order to provide an accessible pedestrian loading zone, the area may need to be relocated and/or other significant improvements made to create a new location to serve the function.

Figure 15 – Existing Pedestrian Loading Zone

5.2 Lobby Entrance: The lobby entrance is located near the pedestrian loading zone, adjacent to the south driveway. The entrance is located near, and directly visible from, the public right-of-way along San Carlos Street. To enter the lobby, a pedestrian is required to take two steps up to the level of the lobby. No handrail is provided along the steps in the direct from the right-of-way. At the top of the steps, an in-swinging door provides access to the lobby. The threshold is in excess of ½”, and an adequately sized landing space is not provided at the door. Access from the rightof-way to entry also requires a pedestrian to traverse the primary driveway entrance to the onsite parking; no separate, protected walkway is provided.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 19
Figure 16 – Lobby Entrance

5.3 No Accessible Parking Stalls: Heading west from the lobby entrance brings users down a steep driveway into the on-site parking area. Approximately 30 parking spaces are provided on-site, but there are no accessible parking stalls identified. For the quantity of on-site parking provided, two accessible parking stalls are required: 1 van accessible stall and 1 standard accessible stall.

The stalls would require appropriate signage and striping, grading improvements to provide a level area, and adjacent accessible improvements to connect the parking with the site (See Items

5.4 and 5.5 below).

5.4 Pool Accessibility: A heated swimming pool amenity is located adjacent to the lowest parking area. An accessible lift is provided in order to enter the pool itself. To enter the pool area, a gate is located at the southeast corner. The gate latch is located at the top of fence and the area immediately outside of the gate lacks the required landing space. A gate is also located at the northwest corner of the pool area; the gate is located on a run of stairs, without adequate clearances around the gate or at either the top or bottom of the stair run. In addition, the deck area around the pool has areas which exceed 2%. To provide accessibility to the pool area, the southeast gate would need to be replaced, the landing area would need to be expanded, detectable warning would need to be added to separate the pedestrian zone from the parking lot, and the pool deck would need to be re-graded to provide level access.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 20
Figure 17 – Southeast Pool Entrance
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 21
Figure 18 – Northwest Pool Entrance

5.5 Non-Accessible Pedestrian Ramps: Pedestrian ramps are located in the lowest parking area, connecting parking and the pool area with the lowest level of rooms in the main building. The ramps lack detectable warning at the interface with the parking lot. The ramps lack appropriate handrails. The ramp slopes exceed 8.33%, and no intermediate landings are provided where the elevation change exceeds 30”. All of these deficiencies would need to be corrected in order to provide accessibility. Given the total elevation change between the parking lot/pool and the building level, the ramp lengths would need to be extended. It is unclear if space is available for the extended length to be accommodated.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 22
Figure 19 – Pedestrian Ramp

5.6 Site Stairs: Given the elevation change across the site, the multiple stories of guestrooms, and the lack of interior corridors, site stairs are provided throughout the site. With the exception of stairs constructed as a part of the 1957 building, numerous issues were identifiable across the approximately dozen stairs observed on-site. In general, all stairs lacked handrails with appropriate gripping areas; handrails were frequently only provided on one side of the sitars; handrails did not extend sufficiently beyond the length of the stair run. In addition, a stair located at the north end of the main building, extending down from San Carlos St, has a handrail obstructed by an emergency fire access ladder from a higher level.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 23
Figure 20 – Stairs
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 24
Figure 21- Stairs
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 25
Figure 21 – Stairs
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 26
Figure 22 – Stairs

5.7 No Pedestrian Egress to Public Right-of-Way: Site users in the off-site parking lot and at the pool amenity have no egress path to the public right-of-way. In order to reach San Carlos St, a user would need to either walk up a steep driveway on either side of the site, or use various runs of stairs. An accessible path, separated from the driveway is needed from these lower site areas.

The accessible path would need to be separated from the vehicular areas with a curbed walkway, likely with handrails. The walkway would likely require significant grading improvements and potential retaining walls; it may also severely impact vehicular access around the site.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 27
Figure 23 – Ramp at Primary Entrance Driveway

5.8 CMU Retaining Wall, Potential Movement: A CMU retaining is located at the southwest area of the site, supporting a parking lot for hotel users. The primary CMU retaining wall, located in the north-south orientation appears to be in good condition. The shorter CMU retaining wall, returning east-west and varying in height from approximately 4-feet high to flush appears to be out of plumb. The foundation of the wall is not observable, but it appears that the wall may be sliding and needs to be replaced/improved.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 28
Figure 24 – CMU Retaining Wall

5.9 Wood Retaining Wall, Structural Failure: Wood retaining walls are located around the parking at the southwest corner of the site. The parking lot is located lower than the adjacent site improvements. The wood retaining walls generally support landscape areas, with some concrete improvements. The wall is constructed of 2x12 planks with 6x6 posts spaced at 8’ on center.

Where the wall is the highest, approximately 4-feet, the wall is beginning to fail with plans being bowed out and posts beginning to rotate. Wall replacement is likely needed.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 29
Figure 25 – Wood Retaining Help

5.10 Sanitary Sewer Lateral: Relatively new sanitary sewer cleanout boxes were located throughout the parking lot at the rear of the site. Based on the cleanout box layout, it appears that sanitary sewer flows via gravity to Dolores Street. Given the appearance of the cleanout boxes and frequency of placement, we would expect that the sewer system may have been upgraded and is in relatively good condition. Further assessment could be done.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 30
Figure 26 – Sanitary Sewer Cleanout

5.11 Domestic Water Service: Several water meters were identified along the frontage on San Carlos St, located inline with both the main building and the 1957 building. Backflow preventers were located on the domestic service lines. The backflow preventers appeared to be in good condition.

No other observable notes on the water distribution.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 31
Figure 27 – Water Backflow Preventer

5.12 Gas Service Location, Limited Access & Ventilation: A gas meter was located on-site, in between the main building and the 1957 building. The gas meter is at a level that is approximately 2-stories beneath San Carlos St. The gas meter is located under site stairs, with limited access to the gas meter set. In addition, there are operable doors and windows located above the gas meter set.

This location would not currently be acceptable by gas utility agencies and may pose a potential fire hazard if a gas leak leads to trapped gas.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 32
Figure 28 – Gas Meter Under Stairs

5.13 Disconnected Drainage System: As noted previously, the site experiences significant elevation change. The site is also generally paved. During our site visit, the site was wet but did not display any clear indication of drainage issues. With that said, the majority of roof downspouts are “disconnected” from the storm drain system – they are not directly piped but rather discharge onto pavement areas. Concentrated flow from downspouts are a hazard to pedestrians and cannot be done across pedestrian paths of travel. In the current site configuration, with limited pedestrian paths of travel, this is not a concern; however, it may be more of a concern requiring storm drain additions where pedestrian accessible improvements are added to correct previously noted issues.

Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 33
Figure 29 – Downspout onto Driveway
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 34
Appendix A
Concrete Compression Tests
Attachment 5
Attachment 5
Attachment 5
Hofsas House Hotel Visual Assessment and Evaluation
KPFF Job No. 2400074
SITE & STRUCTURAL SCREENING and EVALUATION
May 21, 2024 35
Appendix B
Hazardous Materials Report
Attachment 5
S
TECH

CONSULTING
484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Survey Report
Commercial Property
Site: Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California

S Tech Project: 23116-2
Prepared for: Hofsas Legacy LLC
July 27, 2023
S Tech Consulting was retained by Hofsas Legacy LLC to conduct a limited assessment for asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint at the the Hofsas House, on San Carlos, 2NW of 4th Avenue, in Carmel, California. A retaining wall, connected to the hotel requires structural inspection. To create observation panels, the existing wallboard and siding must be disturbed in six rooms on the first and second floors.

Prior to disturbing building materials, the EPA and Cal-OSHA require sampling to determine whether asbestos is present.

When asbestos is identified, it must be handled and disposed of by trained and licensed personnel, to ensure an airborne asbestos hazard is not created. Lead paint is regulated by EPA and OSHA to prevent creating a lead exposure hazard for workers and especially children.

The site visit took place on July 25, 2023 by Sean Tillema, a DOSH Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC 07-4257) and California Department of Public Heath Certified Lead Related Construction Inspector / Risk Assessor (LRC-2901).

Scope of Work & Property Description
The scope of work was to conduct a limited asbestos and lead-based paint survey in the locations where access panels will be cut to facilitate the structural inspection. The asbestos survey was in compliance with the Monterey Bay Air Resources
District’s (MBARD) requirements. Lead testing was for
compliance for the Cal-OSHA Lead in Construction Standard.

The facility is a multi-building hotel constructed between the 1940s through 1960s. The subject building where access panels will be created was constructed in the 1950s.

The rooms selected for access panels are rooms and 1, 3, and 5 on the first floor and rooms 22, 24, and 26 on the second floor.

The panels will all be cut in the guest room closets.

The exterior of the building is clad in stucco siding. Interior walls are drywall with a skim coat.

Hotel Room #1 (Similar To Other Rooms In Scope)
Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California Asbestos Containing Materials
Asbestos-containing material (ACM) is defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as material containing more than one percent asbestos as determined by Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM). In California, for contractor licensing and employee protection, the California Department of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal-OSHA) classifies any material as having greater than one-tenth of one percent (>0.1%) asbestos as Asbestos-Containing Construction Material (ACCM). Asbestos containing material are divided into friable and non-friable classifications. Friability refers to the likelihood of the material readily releasing airborne fibers when disturbed. Materials which are non-friable in-situ have the potential to become friable when deteriorated or when renovation or demolition occurs.

The following conclusions were arrived at from the field inspection and the analytical results:
✴ The joint compound associated with the drywall system in the four-story hotel building contains less than (<) 1% Chrysotile asbestos. Joint compound cannot be separated from the non-asbestos drywall. The removal of the drywall must be handled as friable, Regulated Asbestos Containing Material (RACM).

Analysis was performed by Patriot Environmental Laboratories, a NVLAP accredited laboratory, on a twenty-four hour laboratory turnaround time. Seventeen samples were collected and submitted to the laboratory. Once at the lab, the submitted samples were further separated into thirty-two individual materials for analysis. The table below is a summary of materials identified to contain asbestos. Following the summary table, is a listing of all materials collected from the site, with samples in red containing asbestos. The laboratory report is provided in appendix ‘A’ of this document. See the summary for additional information.
484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Asbestos Summary Table
Asbestos Material Locations Analytical Results Classification Approximate
Quantity to be
Removed
Drywall Joint
Compound
4-Story Hotel Building
Throughout
Drywall: NAD
JC: Up To <1% Chrysotile Friable, RACM
To Be Determined
By The Scope Of
The Renovations
Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California Asbestos Containing Materials - continued
484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Asbestos Bulk Sample Table
Sample
Number Material Sampled Sample Location
Analytical Results
NAD = No Asbestos
Detected
116-2 - 1 Drywall / Joint Compound Guest Room #1 - Bathroom Drywall: NAD JC: <1% Chrysotile
116-2 - 2 Drywall / Skim Coat Guest Room #1 - Bathroom NAD 116-2 - 3 Drywall / Joint Compound Guest Room #3 - Bathroom NAD 116-2 - 4 Drywall / Skim Coat Guest Room #3 - Bathroom NAD 116-2 - 5 Drywall / Joint Compound Guest Room #5 - Bathroom Drywall: NAD JC: <1% Chrysotile
116-2 - 6 Drywall / Skim Coat Guest Room #5 - Bathroom NAD 116-2 - 7 Drywall / Joint Compound Guest Room #26 - Bathroom Drywall: NAD JC: <1% Chrysotile
116-2 - 8 Drywall / Skim Coat Guest Room #26 - Bathroom NAD 116-2 - 9 Linoleum Guest Room #25 - Bathroom, Top Layer NAD 116-2 - 10 VFT - 9’’x9’’ w/ Black Mastic Guest Room #25 - Bathroom, Bottom Layer NAD Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California Asbestos Containing Materials - continued
484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Asbestos Bulk Sample Table
Sample
Number Material Sampled Sample Location
Analytical Results
NAD = No Asbestos
Detected
116-2 - 11 Linoleum Guest Room #24 - Bathroom NAD
116-2 - 12 Drywall / Joint Compound Guest Room #24 - Bathroom Drywall: NAD JC: <1% Chrysotile
116-2 - 13 Drywall / Skim Coat Guest Room #24 - Bathroom NAD 116-2 - 14 Drywall / Joint Compound Guest Room #22 - Bathroom Drywall: NAD JC: <1% Chrysotile
116-2 - 15 Drywall / Skim Coat Guest Room #22 - Bathroom NAD 116-2 - 16 Stucco Four Story Building - Exterior NAD
116-2 - 17 Stucco Four Story Building - Exterior NAD
Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California 484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Lead-Based Paint & Glazings
Lead-Based Paint (LBP), as defined by EPA, is of concern both as a source of direct exposure through ingestion of paint chips, and as a contributor to lead interior dust and exterior soil. Lead was widely used as a major ingredient in most interior and exterior oil-based paints prior to 1950. Lead compounds continued to be used as corrosion inhibitors, pigments and drying agents from the early 1950's. In 1972, the Consumer Products Safety Commission limited lead content in new paint to 0.5% (5000 ppm) and, in 1978, to 0.06% (600 ppm). Today, for purposes of lead-based paint inspection, for childhood lead poisoning prevention, EPA defines LBP as paint containing greater than 0.5% (5000 ppm) lead by weight or greater than 1.0 mg/cm2 by surface area. This report applies the 1.0 mg/cm2 reference standard, which applies to X-ray Fluorescence (XRF) testing.

The State of California has enacted a number of regulations to minimize lead exposure in children and adults. Specifically, Title 17, California Code Of Regulations, Division 1, Chapter 8 Accreditation, Certification, and Work Practices For Lead-Based Paint and Lead Hazards and a number of California Civil and Health and Safety Codes, provide requirements for lead-safe housing and the prevention of lead hazards from developing in housing. A complete list of all State of California LBP regulations is available at the CDPH Childhood Lead-Poisoning Prevention Branch website. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) is the agency responsible for enforcing compliance with existing state LBP regulations.

For occupational lead exposure in the construction and building maintenance industries, lead is regulated below the threshold set by the EPA for lead-based paint. Additionally, OSHA does not limit lead health and safety requirements to paint. Many other building materials and manufactured items are known to contain lead. Adult occupational tasks may result in exposure to lead even when working with low lead concentrations. Tasks such as abrasive blasting, flame torch usage, and mechanical grinding are especially prone to occupational lead exposure. When lead is present in any concentration, Cal-OSHA, under Title 8 CCR Section 1532.1, requires employers to evaluate the task performed and conduct an exposure assessment. Based on the results of the exposure assessment, engineering controls and personal protective equipment may be necessary to reduce occupational lead exposure. Additional information is available from this Cal-OSHA fact sheet: http://www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/ dosh_publications/lead-fct-sheet-rev.pdf
Paint testing at this property was conducted by X-ray Fluorescence (XRF), which provides instant onsite analysis, penetrating all paint layers.

The following conclusions were arrived at from the testing:
✴ Exterior and interior, EPA defined Lead-Based Paint (>1.0 mg/cm2 by XRF) is NOT present in coatings anticipated to be impacted by the scope of the paint disturbance for the retaining wall inspection. ✴ For the purposes of compliance with the Cal-OSHA 8 CCR 1532.1 ‘Lead in Construction Standard’, when disturbing any amount of lead, in any material, the employer must ensure their employees are not exposed to lead in excess of the Action Level (AL) or Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL). Contractors must have historical exposure data on file for the task performed or they must conduct an exposure assessment on representative workers. Engineering controls and personal protective equipment (PPE) must be utilized where exposure data dictates. Tasks that are likely to create high lead exposure are abrasive blasting, flame torching, and mechanical grinding.

A table listing the results of all the components tested is provided in Appendix ‘B’. See summary for additional information.

Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California Summary of Findings
Asbestos
When conducting renovation or demolition, A State of California C-22 Licensed Asbestos Abatement Contractor who is Division of Occupational Safety & Health (DOSH) registered, must be retained when disturbing materials containing greater than 0.1% asbestos (Asbestos Containing Construction Material). All work must be conducted in strict accordance with CalOSHA’s asbestos standard, 8 CCR 1529 and the requirements of the Monterey Bay Air Resources District’s (MBARD) Rule 424. Waste must be disposed of in the correct landfill for the classification of asbestos being removed.

The following recommendations apply specifically to this project:
✴ Regulated Asbestos Containing Material (RACM) exceeding 160 square feet will not be impacted by the scope of the current renovations. A notification to the Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD) is not necessary for the cutting of the observation panels in the specific rooms chosen for this project. If the scope of the removal expands to exceed 160 square feet, then air district notification will be necessary. ✴ Contractors should be aware that concealed spaces may harbor additional suspect material. Asbestos insulated pipes and asbestos cement pipes may be concealed within ceilings and wall cavities. Should any additional suspect materials be identified during the course of the renovation work, stop work and contact us to assess and sample if necessary.

Lead
Lead-Based Paint was not identified in any of the coatings expected to be impacted by the scope of the renovations. No further action is required with regards to LBP.

The following recommendations apply specifically to this project:
✴ Contractors shall ensure compliance with Cal-OSHA’s Lead in Construction Standard. All paints tested have a quantifiable lead content. Cal-OSHA has not set a lower ‘safe’ threshold for lead content in regards to occupational exposure for workers involved in the construction industry. Contractors who task employees with activities that could result in occupational exposure to lead must follow the requirements of the Lead in Construction Standard to ensure their employees are protected. Contractors should collect exposure data on their employees or have historical data from similar tasks or projects.

If you have any questions please feel free to call us at 831.883.8415 S Tech Consulting

Sean P. Tillema
Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC) #07-4257
Certified Lead Inspector / Risk Assessor #LRC-2901
484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California Limitations
This report is not intended to identify all hazards or unsafe conditions or to imply that others do not exist. This survey was planned and implemented on the basis of a mutually agreed scope of work and S Tech’s experience in performing this type of assessment.

Areas outside our scope or inaccessible areas are excluded from this report.

S Tech Consulting has performed this survey in a professional manner using the degree of skill and care exercised for similar projects under similar conditions, by reputable and competent environmental consultants. S Tech Consulting shall not be responsible for conditions or consequences arising from relevant facts that were concealed, withheld, or not fully disclosed at the time that this survey was conducted.

S Tech Consulting further states that no warranties, expressed or implied, are made regarding the quality, fitness, or results to be achieved as a consequence of this report or impacted by information not properly disclosed to S Tech at the time of this report. It further states that no responsibility is assumed for the control or correction of conditions or practices existing at the premises of the client.
484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California 484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Site Plan and Asbestos Sample Locations
Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California 484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com DATE PREPARED: SOURCE:

REVISION: REVISION DATE:

PROJECT NAME: CLIENT:

DRAWING TITLE:

FIGURE NO.

A
PROJECT NO: SCALE:
7/26/23
23116-2 NTS
Hofsas Hotel
San Carlos, 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California Hofsas Legacy LLC Aerial View of Subject Site
Google Earth

SUBJECT SITE
4-STORY HOTEL BUILDING
(Assessment Area)
NORTH
Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California 484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com DATE PREPARED: SOURCE:

REVISION: REVISION DATE:

PROJECT NAME: CLIENT:

DRAWING TITLE:

FIGURE NO.
1 PROJECT NO: SCALE:
7/26/23
23116-2 NTS
Hofsas Hotel
San Carlos, 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California Hofsas Legacy LLC Indicates Interior Sample
Location
Indicates Exterior Sample
Location
Asbestos Site Sample Location Plan
Hofsas Hotel

ASSESSMENT AREAS
116-2-1
116-2-2
116-2-3
116-2-4
116-2-5
116-2-6
116-2-9
116-2-10
116-2-11
116-2-12
116-2-13
116-2-14 116-2-15
* Samples 16 & 17 Not Shown
116-2-7
116-2-8
Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California 484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Appendix A - Asbestos Analytical Data
Attachment 5
PLM Asbestos Identification
Certificate of Analysis
S Tech Consulting
484-B Washington Street #401
Monterey, CA 93940
Date Received: 7/26/2023
Number of Samples: 32
Lab/Client ID/Layer Location Material Description Color Composition (%) Report Number: 983996
Project Name: Hofsas Hotel
Date Reported: 7/26/2023
Claim Number:

Project Number: 23116-2
Project Location: San Carlos 2NW of 4th
Carmel, California
Date Analyzed: 7/26/2023 PO Number:

Date Collected: 7/25/2023 Collected By: Sean Tillema
983996-001 4-Story Guest Room 1
116-2-1
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-001A 4-Story Guest Room 1
116-2-1
100% NonFibrous MaterialJoint Compound White
Chrysotile % <1
Total Asbestos < 1%
983996-002 4-Story Guest Room 1
116-2-2
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-002A 4-Story Guest Room 1
116-2-2
100% NonFibrous MaterialSkim Coat White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-003 4-Story Guest Room 3
116-2-3
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected

Attachment 5
PLM Asbestos Identification
Certificate of Analysis
S Tech Consulting
484-B Washington Street #401
Monterey, CA 93940
Date Received: 7/26/2023
Number of Samples: 32
Lab/Client ID/Layer Location Material Description Color Composition (%) Report Number: 983996
Project Name: Hofsas Hotel
Date Reported: 7/26/2023
Claim Number:

Project Number: 23116-2
Project Location: San Carlos 2NW of 4th
Carmel, California
Date Analyzed: 7/26/2023 PO Number:

Date Collected: 7/25/2023 Collected By: Sean Tillema
983996-003A 4-Story Guest Room 3
116-2-3
98% NonFibrous Material
2% Glass Fibers
Joint Compound White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-004 4-Story Guest Room 3
116-2-4
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-004A 4-Story Guest Room 3
116-2-4
100% NonFibrous MaterialSkim Coat White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-005 4-Story Guest Room 5
116-2-5
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-005A 4-Story Guest Room 5
116-2-5
98% NonFibrous Material
2% Glass Fibers
Joint Compound White
Chrysotile % <1
Total Asbestos < 1%

Attachment 5
PLM Asbestos Identification
Certificate of Analysis
S Tech Consulting
484-B Washington Street #401
Monterey, CA 93940
Date Received: 7/26/2023
Number of Samples: 32
Lab/Client ID/Layer Location Material Description Color Composition (%) Report Number: 983996
Project Name: Hofsas Hotel
Date Reported: 7/26/2023
Claim Number:

Project Number: 23116-2
Project Location: San Carlos 2NW of 4th
Carmel, California
Date Analyzed: 7/26/2023 PO Number:

Date Collected: 7/25/2023 Collected By: Sean Tillema
983996-006 4-Story Guest Room 5
116-2-6
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-006A 4-Story Guest Room 5
116-2-6
100% NonFibrous MaterialSkim Coat White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-007 4-Story Guest Room 26
116-2-7
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-007A 4-Story Guest Room 26
116-2-7
100% NonFibrous MaterialJoint Compound White
Chrysotile % <1
Total Asbestos < 1%
983996-008 4-Story Guest Room 26
116-2-8
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-008A 4-Story Guest Room 26
116-2-8
100% NonFibrous MaterialSkim Coat White
Total Asbestos None Detected

Attachment 5
PLM Asbestos Identification
Certificate of Analysis
S Tech Consulting
484-B Washington Street #401
Monterey, CA 93940
Date Received: 7/26/2023
Number of Samples: 32
Lab/Client ID/Layer Location Material Description Color Composition (%) Report Number: 983996
Project Name: Hofsas Hotel
Date Reported: 7/26/2023
Claim Number:

Project Number: 23116-2
Project Location: San Carlos 2NW of 4th
Carmel, California
Date Analyzed: 7/26/2023 PO Number:

Date Collected: 7/25/2023 Collected By: Sean Tillema
983996-009 4-Story Guest Room 25
116-2-9
70% NonFibrous Material
25% Cellulose
5% Glass Fibers
Linoleum Off White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-009M 4-Story Guest Room 25
116-2-9
100% NonFibrous MaterialFlooring Material White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-010 4-Story Guest Room 25
116-2-10
100% NonFibrous MaterialVFT - 9 Inches x 9 Tan Brown
Inches
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-010M 4-Story Guest Room 25
116-2-10
100% NonFibrous MaterialMastic Brown Black
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-011 4-Story Guest Room 24
116-2-11
70% NonFibrous Material
25% Cellulose
5% Glass Fibers
Linoleum Off White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-011M 4-Story Guest Room 24
116-2-11
100% NonFibrous MaterialFlooring Material White
Total Asbestos None Detected

Attachment 5
PLM Asbestos Identification
Certificate of Analysis
S Tech Consulting
484-B Washington Street #401
Monterey, CA 93940
Date Received: 7/26/2023
Number of Samples: 32
Lab/Client ID/Layer Location Material Description Color Composition (%) Report Number: 983996
Project Name: Hofsas Hotel
Date Reported: 7/26/2023
Claim Number:

Project Number: 23116-2
Project Location: San Carlos 2NW of 4th
Carmel, California
Date Analyzed: 7/26/2023 PO Number:

Date Collected: 7/25/2023 Collected By: Sean Tillema
983996-012 4-Story Guest Room 24
116-2-12
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-012A 4-Story Guest Room 24
116-2-12
100% NonFibrous MaterialJoint Compound White
Chrysotile % <1
Total Asbestos < 1%
983996-013 4-Story Guest Room 24
116-2-13
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-013A 4-Story Guest Room 24
116-2-13
100% NonFibrous MaterialSkim Coat White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-014 4-Story Guest Room 22
116-2-14
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected

Attachment 5
PLM Asbestos Identification
Certificate of Analysis
S Tech Consulting
484-B Washington Street #401
Monterey, CA 93940
Date Received: 7/26/2023
Number of Samples: 32
Lab/Client ID/Layer Location Material Description Color Composition (%) Report Number: 983996
Project Name: Hofsas Hotel
Date Reported: 7/26/2023
Claim Number:

Project Number: 23116-2
Project Location: San Carlos 2NW of 4th
Carmel, California
Date Analyzed: 7/26/2023 PO Number:

Date Collected: 7/25/2023 Collected By: Sean Tillema
983996-014A 4-Story Guest Room 22
116-2-14
100% NonFibrous MaterialJoint Compound White
Chrysotile % <1
Total Asbestos < 1%
983996-015 4-Story Guest Room 22
116-2-15
93% NonFibrous Material
7% Cellulose
Drywall White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-015A 4-Story Guest Room 22
116-2-15
100% NonFibrous MaterialSkim Coat White
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-016 4-Story Exterior
116-2-16
100% NonFibrous MaterialStucco Pink Grey
Total Asbestos None Detected
983996-017 4-Story Exterior
116-2-17
100% NonFibrous MaterialStucco Pink Grey
Total Asbestos None Detected

Attachment 5
PLM Asbestos Identification
Certificate of Analysis
S Tech Consulting
484-B Washington Street #401
Monterey, CA 93940
Date Received: 7/26/2023
Number of Samples: 32
Lab/Client ID/Layer Location Material Description Color Composition (%) Report Number: 983996
Project Name: Hofsas Hotel
Date Reported: 7/26/2023
Claim Number:

Project Number: 23116-2
Project Location: San Carlos 2NW of 4th
Carmel, California
Date Analyzed: 7/26/2023 PO Number:

Date Collected: 7/25/2023 Collected By: Sean Tillema
Denis Hau - Analyst Esmeralda Jimenez - Approved By
Note: Additional materials observed and analyzed.

Bulk sample(s) submitted was (were) analyzed in accordance with the procedure outlined in the US Federal Register 40 CFR 763, Subpart F, Appendix A; EPA-600/R-93/116 (Method for Determination of Asbestos in Building Materials), and EPA-600/M4-82-020 (US EPA Interim Method for the Determination of Asbestos in Bulk Insulation Samples). Samples were analyzed using Calibrated Visual Estimations (CVES); therefore, results may not be reliable for samples of low asbestos concentration levels. Samples of wall systems containing discrete and separable layers are analyzed separately and reported as composite unless specifically requested by the customer to report analytical results for individual layers. This report applies only to the items tested. Results are representative of the samples submitted and may not represent the entire material from which the samples were collected. “None Detected” means that no asbestos was observed in the sample. “<1%” (less than one percent) or Trace means that asbestos was observed in the sample but the concentration is below the quantifiable level of 1%. This report was issued by a NIST/NVLAP (Lab Code 201022-0) and CA Water Board ELAP (Cert. No. 2900) accredited laboratory and may not be reproduced, except in full without the expressed written consent of Patriot Environmental Laboratory Services, Inc. This report may not be used to claim product certification, approval or endorsement by NIST, NVLAP, CA-ELAP or any government agency.

ASB_Rep_2.23

Attachment 5

Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas House, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California 484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com Appendix B - Individual Lead XRF Data Table
Attachment 5
Limited Asbestos & Lead-Based Paint Assessment - Hofsas Hotel, San Carlos 2NW of 4th, Carmel, California 484-b washington street monterey, ca 93940 #401 / p 831 883 8415 / f 877 984 5495 / [email protected] / stechconsulting.com XRF Calibration
Assay Assay Description Purpose Standard Pass Fail Note C1 Cal-Check System Start-Up Stainless Steel 316 Device Unlocked C2 NIST Calibration #1
Lead-Based Paint XRF Calibration NIST SRM 2573 Lead Calibration Check Passed C3 NIST Calibration #2 C4 NIST Calibration #3
Project Information
Project # 23116-2
Date Tuesday, July 25, 2023
Client Hofsas Legacy LLC
Site Hofsas Hotel, San Carlos 2NW of 4th,, Carmel, California Tech Sean Tillema - CDPH #2901
Analysis X-ray Fluorescence (XRF)
484-B Washington Street, #401, Monterey, California 93940 T 831.883.8415.

XRF Data Log
Assay Area Location Component Substrate Pb (mg/cm2)
<0.01 (BDL) Pb (mg/cm2) Pb (mg/cm2)
>1.0 LBP Note
1 4-Story Building, 1st Floor Guest Room #1 Wall Drywall 0.38 2 4-Story Building, 1st Floor Guest Room #3 Wall Drywall 0.65 3 4-Story Building, 1st Floor Guest Room #5 Wall Drywall 0.53 4 4-Story Building, 2nd Floor Guest Room #26 Wall Drywall 0.31 5 4-Story Building, 2nd Floor Guest Room #24 Wall Drywall 0.09 6 4-Story Building, 2nd Floor Guest Room #22 Wall Drywall 0.12 7 4-Story Building Exterior Siding Stucco 0.19
Attachment 5
Attachment 6
Attachment 6
Attachment 6














 




!
"


 
#
 










"

$
#



 





 %
$
#





















 

!








!




"&

#
$  !
'()" !
*
+,,-,./01#




 

"




 #$%&'())!
*+ 



+ #$%,%()
)!
*






-!







 "


 







./0))!)






!






)

./0










!"

1 

))!1






!










#



$

"
!





2



(
* 

 34%5%05#$0%%50%%%


%5%05#$0%5$0%%%

/.# #$%&'2+ #$%,%()
)!
* #%5%05#$0%%50%%%%5%05#$0%5$0%%%

/2#.$
#6!

/.#






#



$
"
!

/.#7



 34.#))!


5/-6-773#
8))!)

./0



9





5'&%:8

-





;








!











!

!







9!



<







8

9!





"
!


#%#.







 95/#%#.
)
!




 






9




8










!









"


"









-!





/77.8.#



!

(



5*"

+ 

./0


)




 

))!



!










#




$
"
!





2



(
* 

 3%5%05#$0%%50%%%

%5%05#$0
Attachment 7
%5$0%%%




!

(



#*"

 

"







-!






 "


 






./0))!)






!






)



./0










!"

1 

)
)!1





!










#



$
"
!





2



(
* 

 3%5%05#$0%%50%%%

%5%05#$0%5$0%%%
/29-.8.8:/$,/.#
8))!)

!.,#%%=!
9!















/%%%=!


(
>.$
52. 3%5%05#$0%%5*

#/#%%=!


(
>.$

&?/'5%555#5$ 3%5%05#$0%5$*8 

>








!


5'&?

;



5',/8
 

))!















 








!


5',%
@!




!




?'55

5#











@!

"
!9


5'#.

5'..
5'$.


0





'













@
)!



5'$'




))!
;









5'&,








(

?

5#*


>





A
!5'&? 



@
9!

"
0 
!0
#&0!













9

9
A
8

05'&?

















:




(

&

?*8



!






;


9!



"


99
A
B



-
(

'*8
!







!



 
0(



55*

0




9




!

"
 
0 


!

!


"



"

"9


>

!








"
0
9



0 9


"




0






9



9

0








!
9;

9

5',% 

))!

0









9
09
(>


!

0 

*


!










(

/

5%*



 





"





B!8
"
!








#%%#




#%#.












)

"



5',/ 

)




0!




3





5

.(








*









9!






8





;

"


!



"



"


9

>
!

"
0
9



9




9

0





8

9!




"
!


#%#.







 95/#%#.

)
!



 






9




3







9


A
!5%#%#$
8







./0))!)



9!











)

8
!

9




!9









  

8





!





A
!#,#%#.

C
95/#%#.



Attachment 7






-


!






9>8








-





9
!

9

5?#%#.






9





#&#%#.8















9>"













 






C
@9!5,#%#.


B "


"






!

-



"



9>




8




!




!






2!



 




 !9
> 




@ 







!





 








 




 




!






5?5$55%(




"


 

D!


*




 





 




 
















 











































 







 








  


 




















  !














 



 














C
 95.#%#.









!9



"

-
:

!



8




!E







B

<


4 "




!







9!






8
!

9"

99




!





99


=!





!(











*




;

;!9!






8



"





-
!


>

<

!




!!

9




!







9>





!9






"







4 8



999!





!
9.

>

<

!

!9



8"
;

8
"
!











!







.
3,,#





C"
 

4






!















"
"

;"

!


!9





!




!





(*8F


!




(*4









@
G(


D!



9



C)
 "

*

9
!

!






8









 




!








!





!
D!



"



!
















! -






"
9






D!






9"

Attachment 7










(
* 

48!

 


"



















!"

!







!





"








9
8








"







9!9







"




















"


05

0$


)










!


 




!

" #$% &%

!
'

() 


) (  
 #

8))!)









!9!


9







!






=!!


8







!





=!


-



!









!








!
9









8





!




=!



!



<








(

5?,$5#%7;




+




!



!








0$ 

*
8







;





!


9



5'//











8


!







!9




!


;









4
5'&?!0
#&0!












!





-



0







"




8;





-









!





5',/






!





!




-

/%%%0=!0








9




"!





















./!


5',/8




)



!
./8-







8


!


9


9!












!



"
8

!






"

=!
!
9!

0 


0
!
!

"!

9



!


48


)







!



"














!




.%
8
 

))!
"









B!




9














!"



"

=!


0 


8-








8


!
!9!




"8
;



B!


!






>




>





48-




./

!







"

./







!






>




>

>




"
 





 





#













 

 











 



 





!
 




!



"


 





 












!




 





 














 





!
(

5??%*8










 

))!




"

0


B!


=!

">








!









-

Attachment 7







8




!


"
"



9
"

!




"



;E!9


E!

"
;
"


"


>














=!




5?5$




H


 




48


!9








"




!





;


;
"


"


>




!
!
>







"


"

!

"!











"9


!




!


-







=!












-







78

!


>

=!



!



9

9

5?./


C0


 >

=!




48-
=!

"


0
>



!



5&







!


$58





,/


!


!

>


!
!8





"
0

>





:

"

>

!
!!



























"

0

"


!





8-








@8





"!"

9



















!






9



!9

!










9
"
9





!9



48-


!

!

I<9>
















!9

;
99

9!
8






!






!


8-








) 

) #

 

*



)







!

!!








!







!

!


!!"
9





!9

!

9






!



!







!




!






>






!

!



9


!(

5?5$%$%)





*











5?5$%$%(


+*


$#


 





 


















 







   

 

%&











 

 













 
 


 










'

%(
)*
&)&
"


"




+


8










<


!4
$
8-


!
&%0

!

8>


!

9




"


9




99







"
!9"

99

,-.!8
I<9>
!

9;

.%%=!

E


!

9





"
#
-




999!




Attachment 7
/-0

8-


!

;

&%%0=!0




!



8D
!

9







 

))!

!

9
,

'


.


8
9!


;

.&%=!









 

))!

!

9
#$!
"


>
1
2
3
1 8




;

?%%=!







"
#
!



&
"
!

9"
9
9






'

()

) #

8









=!
"



!(

5?,$%,%*4
8






!
9



!J


48



!
9








!








"

!



8





!





"





!
!


9









!




;9

!


!




"

9




9!
J


4




"

!

"



!



"




9!

!





!




"


9

!







8

!




9!












"




;
!
=!



"


48






9

!
"


) +


#

&
)


!






5?&#5?%(8

"


 

*
;0







9!
!
8"
;
9!



9











5?&#5?%











"




"



9







"









"

?
(



5*
;








9!
!




"


;


5/


!

!








"


%,%"
&
%
! $!
$
-
8.9#8;!9!







 

.#%%%=!
8-











/%%%0=!0













#/#%%0
=!0







.%

89



E.,#%%=!
8










-!






=!

E



;

5/...=!



5?/,?=!

"
8-









.8:-,7.#







-!







=!"


"
9







(

5?$$%$%"



*8


=!

Attachment 7







9




.

&

>.$

!
9



!



#

$

998
-!






!

!







9

=!

E

;


5/...=!


5?/,?=!

"


!
"






-!









"

.'=!







!"

!9




!








!



 


"








C



!


-
8.9
69#!



"








!


!
9

9!




!
!!

!


!!



;





!


9
!



"


!
;

!
!!



9





!
!





!


9!



!"



9









"



!

0 "



"

(

5?5$5.%!




"
*
7;
!

9!



"
";







.%



9!







"















;



!












0














!


9!



"


9



(

5?5$5.%!



"
*C



!
!

"!

9
!9




>
(

5?5$5?%*
8;!


9
9!



"










;
?%











$%%%=!







$%%%=!





9
9!



"


9
!
9







#%%%=!


(@;




9
9!



"

,%%%0=!0

=!
,'







*
8


E;

5/...=!


5?/,?=!
8;!



9
9!



"
,#/$K55&#%=!


,.%?K55#,/=!


"






"

$%9



=!


"9!



"




!






!
9!







-




;!9!



"






 #@







9



!





!!



;








"
@


!



!


!
!











!


!

!


!
9EE






>



9"
!






9




;




>

7;
!








4!


!





9




!


!







!

!
;
!

4!


!







>








9!







"


!









=!



!E=!
9
9!





8

#0
9!






 

/%

3


!
!







5%%%%=!








9



0
9!




=!
9
!!
5&







!
'&





9
!!
5%

9



-




!
!



<

09
>


>

8


E;

5/...=!


5?/,?=!
8;!



9

5$,,,

5$#'.
"
8









9
>


>

0 


>


#



0!


>


5
Attachment 7
8
9
9

"
9>










9
>

>
9
!
89
5/%K@


!5%K

9
>
>

!

; <
=


=
.-,




48
,8 $0

5 5/... 5$,,, 5/.. 5,$'' 5/,// L#5/'

# 5?/,? 5$#'. 5?/, 5,%?' 5.??/ 0#.%5
8

.,#%% #/'&' .,5' .#&?/ .#$,, 055#


-





;

9







!

=!




5;











"

$5=!






!
=!



!
9!















-







-
8.99>#8;!


9
9!








 

#,
;


9!






9!

-




05




9





#$
8
-

05



9










J

;!9!





#$

3
4




;


5%



9!



"


!
9




!!










;



"
9









8

9!



!


!9"





;







(
"

"*







(

5?%,%#%!

)

*
7;








"






!

!

















-
7;





9



!


@








"







!

!





!
9
9!



!
-




C



!9
"!



;"


"

;

;







9!






"
;




!





-












!"

!

;



=!

!















!



-





=!


H


C


"


;
!


!


!










05


9-
"(

5?%,%#%@*
!
"0;"








=!

!"



!






!
!"





"
 4 

 

 

 
 











 




 
 




"










 






 95.#%#.













;
!
!

"



!9!






8-
9








#$0




!
"






;


-


"







&

05'





-





05


9-
"8-







?/2,#8-

9!




 



!











05 









8



 


Attachment 7
8
9>



9




-


9>

9!







!



50$4
@



9>(7








 

*4&



9>(
*43

9

3




9>(+
"
8



*43

9


!




9>( 
999!




 

*4&
&%

994
@



9>(7








 

*4&



9>(
*43

9

3




9>(



9!




 

*4&
&%

!




9>(



9!




 

*4&
&%

!



&4
@



9>(
 



05*


9>(7
*43

9

3




9>(



9!




 

*4&
&%

!




9>(



9!




 

*4&
&%

)
 

))!43



2.9 9-
.,#@



-
:




0
>

=!




!
9"!







+ 
@






!

)

+

!9

7


 95.#%#.

!
"


















>

>





!

"
!



 











<;










9


9



"

!











;


8
"
!
9
!



!9"




 





8





);

8





!





6

8"

(68*

 >




-
(



,*
6

8"

(68*


"

"(C
*





!






7
"



M!


(
7M*8
!
9

./0






0










!





!




!

9




"




!
















"



9!

!
"


!

!


!












!










8"

!






"






"










!


!9

"


9;


9


8);





E
;


>












!






>>






!
;

'

>


'


!

>

!
!"


!



#'#%#.(

!
*

##%#.(8!
*




;


>








8!"
"
"
!





!9"

>

0

!


>
C#/
0
>




5&
!

8!


#%



!
8


!


;



0
>


!





8







!9




"











9




!















>












Attachment 7
-
,/
0
>


;

!


!9
0
(#/*

!

=!
>

($5*
".89-.82.9#8










!


!

>

4 58;!






"
9"
!


!

>






!9





>



9


"
9"
;











"!

!











48




"



>


!
!



 



,,$5B8



"
!



&,'B8-







#+


!

>



9

!




=!

9>









9
"

-!




9>



9
"




+


!








"
!

!






;











=!


-




48
>


!
!
!








9>




!







7;




"



!!


9
"










9







"

.,=!








=!

9>
9















.8


"
"



!


!







;
"





5%


"








>





;
5%





5%




"




8

"








;
#&

 "






"
!






"
"
!
9






9





!




48
5%


"

 





"&



8
;
#$

!

9


#.

8
"

!

9




6

!

;


8
"
!







8-







$D


9"





"

9!

0!;!




"




!






!

9


!

0 

!



!

>

"9


99

!




 !




;!




9!











-









0
0






>9



!9
6












!


!





9"




!9

 


@ 






!



8
;


9

!



"!







!

9








"









>

!



4





"

.?=!




















!
9!





%$

%,
%-


 

"
48


!
=!=!













;





!9-








!
"
9




5?&/

 

"
89



"









-




!

"

";






N




-
-!


!




(

5?5$5%% 

"


"





*
Attachment 7
"




"




-


=!














-



"

";








-
"







!E







9

98

5?H


)
"





!









!
!

9-
"
 -



9
"
!










!






!9-




"




=!!9


!


-

"
"


!
!





=!!
"
!9
"





-!



9



"



(
*



!


=!






"













>

-


9!9-



=!








(
*


>




"
"





!



"





-



) 


 







5





9
















9!













!

9














9!







9!









;!


#











9

9!
9


0

!







9



=!

!!













!




9
"
9
!



C







9










7=!


5 

"



=!

!9!














"





=!



9


!9
"

"9



!



!=!

!9-




"
7;





=!



9






!
"


"





!9

(*($*







=!

!






;




=!!
9!





#




"



=!



9





"


!9


00



-



!
!9







4











"9


!9

9

9






9





!




!
!
C

2



4 




!


9!



"


9



(

5?5$5.%!



"
*C



!
!

"!

9
!9




>
(

5?5$5?%*





5?5$5/%(



*=!











9"









5?.$





8




=!



"





4
Attachment 7
5
!&%


=!





9









!



"



!


9



!





"










9




!






"

!


#&



=!















"





!
!


0



<




>






"9

#!