►
From YouTube: Architectural Advisory Committee | December 7, 2020
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Great,
it
is
5
36,
and
this
is
the
december
7
2020
meeting
of
the
architectural
advisory
committee
planning
step.
Please
call
the
roll.
B
A
Yes,
vice
chair
rodman,
the
agenda
was
posted
on
december
3rd
and
our
meeting
has
been
published
in
accordance
with
state
law.
B
Not
seeing
any
so
then
will
someone
make
a
motion
to
accept.
C
D
B
Audience
members
are
permitted
to
comment
on
any
issue.
That's
within
the
committee's
purview
comments
on
an
item
appearing
on
today's
agenda
are
made
at
the
time.
The
item
is
presented.
If
you
want
to
speak
on
an
item
not
on
today's
agenda,
you
may
speak
now.
Each
speaker
will
have
three
minutes.
Is
there
anyone
who
wants
to
comment
on
an
item?
That's
not
on
today's
agenda.
B
Okay,
I
don't
see
any
action.
So
let's
proceed
to
the
meeting
minutes.
We
don't
have
those
today
so
now
we
will
go
to.
B
So
we've
approved
the
agenda
david,
and
that
includes
the
consent
calendar.
Is
that
correct.
B
Okay,
all
right,
so
we
have
two
items
on
the
consent.
Con
calendar
number
one
is
the
ringo
general
contracting
request,
a
minor
architectural
application
approval
for
to
construct
a
fifty
five
hundred
three
square
foot
single-family
residence
on
a
hillside
parcel
located
at
3172,
east
bulgart,
trail
and
item.
Two
is
brian
foster
for
a
minor
architectural
application
for
revisions
to
the
front
entry
at
old,
las
palmas
estates
subdivision
to
include
new
landscaping,
gate
and
signage
located
at
las
palmas
estates.
Drive.
A
E
Well,
I'm
not
even
familiar
with
ringo
general
contracting
for
the
5503
square.
Foot
single
family
residence,
hillside
parcel
bogor
trail,
so
I
wouldn't
mind
taking
a
look
at
it,
wish
all
of
our
projects
on
the
hillside.
Development
just
went
through
a
consent.
Calendar
none
of
ours
seemed
to
so
yeah.
I'd
like
to
see
that
brian's
lost
here.
This
is
is
the
third
time
that
it's
come
across
our
desk
the
first
two
times.
We
had
lots
of
comments
on
it.
E
A
A
vote
chair
we
don't
vice
chair.
We
don't
need
a
vote
to
do
that.
What
we'll
do
is
we'll
just
take
each
one
in
order
have
the
staff
presentation
and
if
there's
questions
we
can
respond.
B
Okay,
all
right
very
good.
So
then
let
me
re-read
item
number
one
which
is
ringo
general
contracting
requests,
a
minor
architectural
application
approval
to
construct
a
new
five
thousand
five
hundred
three
square
foot
single
family
residence
on
a
hillside
parcel
located
at
three
one.
Seven
two
east
broker
trail
staff.
May
we
have
to
report
please?
B
G
Yes,
perfect!
Okay,
good
evening,
chair
and
committee
members,
the
applicant
brian
newell
has
submitted
a
major,
I'm
sorry,
a
minor
architectural
application
for
a
new
single
family
residence
located
on
hillside
property.
G
You
can
see
that
this
is
the
exist.
This
is
an
area
of
the
existing
parcel.
There's
an
existing
cmu
block
wall.
It's
a
vacant
lot
and
part
of
it.
Well,
this
whole
parcel
is
considered
hillside,
but
part
of
it's
definitely
on
a
very
steep
slope.
G
G
There
is
an
existing
six
foot,
high
cmu
block
wall
that
that
goes
through
the
property.
G
G
The
proposed
landscaping
complies
with
the
coachella
valley's,
lush
and
efficient
handbook.
The
proposed
landscaping
is
going
to
be
scattered
throughout
the
property.
G
G
I
believe
one
of
the
plans
stated
that
their
worst
that
there
was
solar-
I
could
refer
to
the
applicant
to
answer
that
question.
G
G
Oh
he's
got
a
list,
I
don't
it's
the
end
of
the
packet.
I
guess
the
majority
of
the
building
is
going
to
be
a
crystal
white.
Stucco
finish
the.
Let
me
go
to
the
if
you
can
see.
There's
the
trellis
in
the
entryway,
that's
going
to
be
a
painted
steel,
trellis,
cmu
block
walls
for
the
planters
and
also
concrete
veneer
panels
throughout
in
the
rear.
You've
got
a
wooden,
a
wooden
accent,
kind
of
placed
as
well.
G
B
B
Okay,
so
please
give
us
your
name
and
address
and
tell
us
about
your
project
and
two
minutes
of
rebuttal
if
desired
after
any
public
comments,.
H
H
H
We
are
using
a
concrete
paneling
system
on
some
of
the
exterior
walls
and
interior
walls,
and
that
is
provided
by
two
stone:
we're
using
two
different
types
of
materials:
one's
a
board
form
pattern
and
the
other
one
is
a
pitted
pattern,
which
is
the
darker
wall
that
you
see
that's
piercing
through
the
great
room.
H
There
will
be
solar
panels
on
the
roof.
There
is
a
roof
plan
that
I
had
that
I
had
produced
that
shows
the
location
of
the
solar
on
the
high
roof.
Unfortunately,
they
we
did
not
show
those
on
the
rendering.
B
It
doesn't
appear
so
so
that
would
conclude
that
now
we
can
go
for
questions
to
the
applicant.
So
remember
sean.
E
E
H
E
And
that's
where
those
you
were
talking
about
those
thermal
right
panels.
H
Right,
that's
on
that's
on
the
left
side,
that
is
the
master
bedroom
and
that
will
wrap
around
into
the
interior
and
then
there's
also
thermary
rake
siding
at
the
entryway
that
that
breaks
up
the
the
outdoor
patio
space
from
the
great
room
to
the
entry.
H
And
then
there
is
also
some
thermary
which
is
difficult
to
see
if
you're
looking
at
the
garage
rendering
right
now,
it's
it's
in
the
middle
of
the
two
burnished
white
block,
cmd
walls,
okay
and.
C
H
As
you're
as
you're,
looking
at
the
front
view
with
the
garage
as
well
there's
a
lower
element
which
is
a
plant
which
is
a
planter
that
will
show
the
address
and
that's
a
that's.
The
two
stone
board
form
concrete
veneer
and
then
what
it's
difficult
to
see.
But
there
is
a
carport
on
the
right
side
of
that
garage
where
the
overhang
is
shooting
out
to
the
right,
and
there
will
be
a
series
of
steel
columns
that
picks
that
up.
H
And
it's
about
it's
about
an
inch
thick
and
they
they
we
have
certification
that
will
work
out
here
and
and
all
it
is,
is
just
a
is
a
coating
that
you
put
over
it
just
to
to
keep
it
keeping
out
its
color.
H
H
H
F
B
B
Much
so
we
go
to
having
some
discussion
amongst
the
committee.
B
So,
let's
start
with
member
polling.
C
Yeah,
I
think
the
only
I
mean
sean
brought
up
a
great
point
about
the
solar
panels.
I
think
you
know
given
that
that
is
the
high
point
of
the
roof.
I
think
it'd
be
good
to
see
a
render
in
terms
of
how
you
know
if
they're
going
to
be
angled
they're
going
to
be
visible
from
the
street,
so
I
think
we,
I
think,
we'd
like
to
see
something
there
in
terms
of
how
that's
going
to
be
addressed.
D
Thank
you.
I
think
the
only
comments
I
have
are
that
the
plant
material
list
looks
appropriate.
However,
there's
a
few
plants,
I
believe,
are
a
little
bit
undersized
and
all
the
trees
are
proposed
at
24
inch
box.
D
D
C
I
I
agree
with
the
solar
it'd,
be
nice
to
have
seen
that
I'd
like
to
see
it
low
as
possible,
so
it's
not
visible
from
the
street,
but
otherwise
I
think
the
house
is
a
good
looking
house,
since
it's
a
nice-looking
project.
F
Walsh,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
just
you
know
noted
that
it's
the
building
envelope
is
fully
compliant.
They
aren't
looking
for
any
amms
or
derivations
from
from
what
would
be
prescribed.
I
have
no
problems
with
it.
E
E
Boger
trail
heading
down
towards
into
the
canyon
there,
and
it's
it's
really
a
nightmare.
When
you
look
up
at
that
roof
at
that
newly
constructed
house,
it's
kind
of
horrifying
what
they
did
with
roof
penetrations
there,
and
that
sloping
roof
really
magnifies
that-
and
it's
just
completely
missed
by
the
architect
and
builder,
and
it's
at
least
this
house-
it's
a
flat
roof
and
will
be
inside.
E
I
think
the
seeing
something
in
exhibit
with
the
solar
panels
and
maybe
pushing
them
back
further
and
paying
a
little
attention
to
that.
Hopefully,
that
won't
be
missed,
and
hopefully,
with
all
the
roof
penetration.
That's
here
that
that
won't
be
missed
either.
Maybe
they
can
be
tucked
back
into
dog
houses
or
pushed
further
back
towards
the
mountain
or
the
the
east
away
from
the
street,
also
with
the
flat
roof.
Maybe
there's
less
possibility
of
seeing
those
as
well,
because
what
happened
next
door
is
sad.
B
All
right,
I
don't
really
have
anything
more
to
add.
Do
we
have
a
motion.
E
B
A
E
E
And
then,
john
walsh,
I
see
you
with
a
look
of
skepticism
in
your
eye.
H
Right
right
now,
right
now,
if
you
don't
mind
right
now:
the
height
of
the
roof,
the
max
height,
is
15
6
and
there's
a
curb
around
that
high
roof,
a
four
inch
curb
and
we
can
put
the
solar
panels
towards
the
east
towards
that
mountain
as
much
as
we
can
to
satisfy
the
committee.
B
Thank
you,
and
this
is
probably
a.
H
B
Out
of
order,
remember
locklear.
Would
you
like
to
add
anything
in
your
motion
about
the
landscape.
E
Yeah
sure
I
like
the
idea
of
varying
the
container
sizes
and
between
24
and
36,
and
certainly
that
comment
about
anything
with
the
note
specimen
to
it
being
required
of
something
larger
than
one
foot.
Typically,
three
to
five
food
made
sense
to
me.
E
B
B
Okay,
now
we
will
go
on
to
item
number
two,
which
is
brian
foster
for
a
minor
architectural
application
for
revisions
to
the
front
entry
at
old,
las
palmas
estates
subdivision
to
include
new
landscaping,
gate
and
signage
located
at
las
palmas
estates,
drive
case
number
3.419,
maa
staff.
May
we
have
a
report
please.
I
Thank
you
vice
chair.
Are
you
able
to
see
the
presentation?
Yes?
Yes,
so
the
aac
reviewed
this
project
back
on
november
18th
and
at
the
time
you
had
six
comments
to
the
applicant.
I
Just
to
reorient
everybody
as
to
where
we're
looking
at
the
las
palmas
estates
is
in
is
a
13,
I'm
sorry,
a
17
lot
subdivision
at
the
end
of
in
old,
los
palmas
neighborhood.
So
what
we're
looking
at
now
is
just
the
entryway.
I
I
So
in
this
plan,
drawing
you'll
see
that
there's
one
monument
sign,
that's
the
last
promise
and
then
the
pillars
in
the
middle
have
been
lowered
to.
I
This
is
a
site
plan
and
you'll
see
in
the
upper
right
there
they've
added
a
pedestrian
gate
so
that
residents
can
get
out
of
the
the
complex
and
walk
around
the
neighborhood,
so
they
they
are
still
using
white
rock,
adding
various
mesquite
and
palo
verde
trees
along
the
perimeter
of
the
the
wall
of
the
subdivision,
and
then
the
the
turf
that
we
had
discussed
is
down
here
at
the
entrance
at
the
very
bottom
of
this
slide.
I
You'll
see
that
they
are
would
like
to
do
artificial,
but
they're
willing
to
do
natural
turf.
So
this
slide
shows
the
pedestrian
gate
on
the
right
hand,
side
that
they're,
proposing
to
add
to
the
entrance
and
exit.
Once
again,
the
pillars
have
been
lowered
to
12
feet.
I
One
monument
sign:
you
have
the
color
material
board
which
hasn't
changed,
and
this
is
a
slide
of
the
existing
pedestrian
gate
that
they
will
rehab
and
reuse
and
looking
at
existing
photographs
once
again
they
are,
are
taking
the
wall.
That's
existing
on
the
very
back
background
of
this
and
turning
it
from
the
mediterranean
style
into
a
more
modern
taking
off
the
caps
on
the
the
pile
esters.
I
I
So
vice
chair.
That
concludes
my
report
and
the
applicant
is
available
to
discuss
the
project.
B
Thank
you,
glenn.
Are
there
any
questions
for
staff.
B
I
have
a
question
for
staff
on
the
signage,
as
I
recall
on
the
initial
application
they
were
over,
and
I
know
this
may
not
be
part
of
this
application,
but
are
they
in
compliance
now
with
the
signage
requirements
in
terms
of
area.
J
I
Well,
the
area
for
the
monument
sign
they
would
be
the
sign
that
says
one
on
the
pillar
staff
has
not
evaluated
that
if
that's
even
allowed
your
the
sign
code
allows
one
sign
per
development.
So
I'm
not
even
sure
that
that
would
be
a
permissible
sign.
I
This
one
and
the
private
oops,
the
I'm
sorry,
which
one.
B
I
I
Yeah,
I'm
not
sure
if
that
you
know
that's
a
descriptor
sign.
It's
not
really
advertising
any
of
the
development,
I'm
not
sure
it
would
be
needed
or
approved.
I
E
I
have
a
question
from
maybe
a
few-
I
I
don't
remember
all
of
our
comments
plan
on
these
previous
applications,
but
I
remember
looking
at
the
look
and
feel
of
this
entryway
and
looking
at
these
three
or
multiple
obelisks
giant
obelisks
in
the
front
of
this
development
being
proposed
previously
and
feeling,
like
the
previous
proposal,
wasn't
all
that
dissimilar
from
this
last
one
so
wasn't
didn't.
We
have
similar
comments
previously
that
wanted
to
see
something
different
in
the
center
around.
I
I
don't
think
in
looking
at
the
my
notes
from
the
meaning:
there
was
not
consensus
on
the
columns
some
liked
them
if
they
were
reduced
in
height.
There
was
discussion
about
the
white
rock
some
committee,
members
didn't
mind.
The
white
rock
and
some
did
mind
the
white
rock
discussion
about
the
the
artificial
turf,
some
didn't
mind
it
others
liked
it.
So
you
know
the
applicant
took
your
comments
and
this
is
what
he
returned
with
and.
E
G
I
C
I
E
I
I
can
have
the
applicant
address
that
he
would
know.
I
haven't
seen
dimensions
on
the
height
of
the
columns.
E
F
Yes,
mr
chairman
glenn,
I
I
I
too,
I
think
I
misremembered
a
prescribed
reduction
in
height
there.
I
think
that
I
do
remember
commenting
that
they
were
the
three
mastabas
are
out
of
scale
and
large,
but
I
I'm
not
sure
that
I
remember
that
12
feet
was
gonna
work,
but
tell
me
if
let
me
repeat
back
what
I
think
I
understand
it
to
be.
The
sign
that
now
says
number
one
has
not
been
approved.
F
K
B
Any
other
questions
I'm
not
seeing
anything.
So
thank
you
is
the
applicant
present
and
if
so,
please
give
us
your
name
and
address
and
tell
us
about
your
project.
You
have
ten
minutes
to
present
and
two
minutes
of
rebuttal
if
desired
after
any
public
comments,.
B
L
Okay
hi-
this
is
brian
foster.
We've
already
did
one
round
of
this.
On
november
18th,
as
glenn
had
mentioned,
we've
made
all
the
changes
and
modifications
that
were
discussed
at
the
prior
aac
conference
and
as
it
stands
now,
we'd
like
to
proceed
as
is
and
not
make
any
further
changes.
I
think
the
only
thing
that
I
can
make
a
comment
to
is
the
height
of
the
existing
walls
by
the
gate.
L
I
think
it's
more
of
an
illusion
of
what
you're
seeing
the
the
original
gate,
the
metal
gate
that
you're
seeing
there
is
kind
of
an
irregular
shape
and
it's
higher.
So
what
we've
done
is
we've
just
cut
the
square
up,
the
top
of
the
gate,
and
that
gives
the
appearance
of
the
of
the
wall
being
higher.
So
we
haven't
proposed
any
additional
height
on
those
columns.
E
L
As
far
as
the
gate
design
is
concerned,
it's
the
same
other
than
the
pedestrian.
It's
really
hard
to
see
in
the
in
that
photo
because
the
the
trees
are
blocking
that
side
gate,
but
that's
a
better
picture
of
it.
There
right
now
it's
a
fixed
panel,
but
that
could
be
modified
as
a
gate
and
some
of
the
trees
might
need
to
be
removed
to
gain
some
access
in
and
out
of
that
area.
B
B
Okay,
so
then
we'll
move
on
to
questions
to
the
applicant
from
the
committee
do
we
have
any
questions?
B
D
The
question
for
the
applicant
is:
will
these
monoliths
be
uplit
from
the
ground
and
will
they
be
using?
You
know
what
type
of
light
like
a
well
light,
or
is
it
proposed
to
be
lit.
L
Yes,
I
think
well
that
led
well
light
would
be
sufficient.
There,
probably
whatever's
lighting.
The
trees
would
still
illuminate
the
wall
at
the
same
time,
so
on
how
that
ultimately
lays
out
so
either
it'll
be
the
trees
that'll
be
lit,
which
will
obviously
illuminate
the
wall
as
well,
or
there
might
be
an
additional
well
like
placed
in
front
of
each
one
to
illuminate
it
at
night.
L
Probably
just
a
standard
landscape
like
well
right
around
well
like
with
probably
a
78
watt,
led,
maybe
2700
to
3000k,
bulb.
B
Oh
sorry,
I
don't
see
any
so
then
I
think
sorry.
B
Okay,
thank
you
very
much,
mr
foster.
The
committee
will
discuss,
discuss
it,
and
so
here
we
go
so
members
lock
here.
Would
you
like
to
open
the
discussion.
E
Well,
it's
just
it's
a
good
question
out
there.
You
can
that
last
comment
and
that
last
question
was
a
pretty
good
one.
So
you
could
you
could
call
that
thing
whatever
you
want
out
front
there,
it's,
whether
it's
got
the
letters
one
on
it
or
not.
E
It's
12
foot
high!
I
forget
what
the
width
said
on
it.
Doesn't
matter
it's
let's
just
scale
it
roughly
at
six
foot
wide
each.
E
You
know
that's
three
12
foot
high
by
six
foot
wide
signs
and
they're.
E
E
E
Just
talking
about
it
right
now,
I
prefer
to
see
a
bit
more
design
and
a
bit
more
muted
and
that's
kind
of
what
I
was
saying.
The
first
two
go-arounds
on
this
right
here.
It's
it.
I
don't
know
not
really
my
thing:
it's
not
what
I
would
be
shooting
for
here.
I'd
like
to
see
something
else
to
something:
a
much
more
downplayed.
E
F
I
think
it
has
a
problem
with
its
scale
number
one.
It
seems
as
though
these
freestanding
monolith,
slabs
kind
of
have
perhaps
their
root
in
oftentimes.
You
find
freestanding
garden
walls
and
different
planes
that
drop
back
from
one
another,
but
they
are
discreet
and
small,
and
certainly
not
supporting
signage.
F
C
I
have
nothing
further
to
add
it's
it's,
I
kind
of
feel
the
same
way
they
they're.
I
as
you
look
at
this
render
it
feels
like
they
are
blocking
they're
they're,
just
blocking
the
view
of
the
gate,
and
you
know
for
no
apparent
reason.
I
feel
the
same
way.
No
other
comments.
D
A
D
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
you
know
the
effect
that
he's
trying
to
create.
Here
again,
I
think
I
would
just
ask
that
the
proportions
be
looked
at.
I
So
vice
chair,
if
I
could
say
that
your
recommendation
today
will
be
presented
to
the
planning
director
or
assistant
planning
director,
so
the
aac
has
looked
at
this
twice
and
your
recommendations
will
be
final.
You
won't
see
it
again.
B
C
B
I
I
too
also
don't
specifically
remember
that
we
landed
on
12
foot
height
and
I
think
there
was
a
lot
of
discussion
about
whether
three
were
necessary
and
and
matter
of
fact
it
it
kind
of
creates
a
wall
from
various
angles.
As
you
approach
the
project,
I
think
if
the
one
is
not
approved,
then
the
whole
idea
of
the
three
monoliths,
or
at
least
the
first
one,
makes
no
sense,
because
then
you
just
have
three
12-foot
high
by
six
foot:
nine
wide
walls.
B
B
But
I
don't
think
it's
necessary
necessitates
having
three
monoliths
so
yeah,
so
I
I
I
think
we
would
deny
it
that
would
be
my
suggest.
That
would
be
my
thought.
Based
on
the
comments
I've
heard.
I
think
the
aac
probably
would
deny
this
at
this
point.
I
Vice
chair,
if
the
columns
were
removed,
what
what
do
you?
What
would
be
the
other
comments
relative
to
or
maybe
and
the
applicant
may
agree
to,
remove
the
columns.
B
Well
again,
I
I
for
personally,
I
think
you
you
could
have
one
element:
that
is
a
lower
white
wall
that
would
accommodate
the
access.
You
know
they
keep
the
keypad
and
the
the
intercom
access.
B
It
just
seems,
like
it's
gonna,
fill
out
that
island
completely
and
really
obscure
the
entry
gates,
which
are
a
nice
design
feature
with
the
round
motif
so
anyway,
but
that's
I'm
just
speaking
for
me.
Other
other
members
should
come
in.
C
Okay,
I
think
I
think
you're,
right
though
I
think
there
should
be
a
better
element
to
you
know,
allow
for
the
key
punch
and
for
the
gate
code
and
all
that
kind
of
thing,
but
I
think
that
could
be
done
better
than
the
three
monoliths
that
are
people.
So,
if
they're
willing
to
remove
the
three
monoliths
and
resubmit,
something
that
would
I
don't
know
glenn,
would
we
get
something
resubmitted
if
they
change
that
part.
I
If
the
aac
votes
to
deny
the
project,
then
we
will
go
back
to
the
applicant
then,
and
I
would
hope
that
if
the
denial
would
give
him
some
direction.
B
C
E
C
B
I
Who
was
the
the
opposed?
Was
it
tom
tom.
F
E
Isn't
that
isn't
that
in
sorry,.
A
So
right
now
the
motion
is
to
deny
the
proposal
as
submitted
you've,
given
comments
about
removing
the
walls
as
a
possible
way
to
approve
it.
If
the
applicant
chose
to
do
that,
but
with
what
you
have
before
you,
it's
a
denial
recommendation
and
from
what
we
gather.
If
the
emotion
the
denial
of
motion
has
passed,
five
to
one.
E
B
Great,
thank
you
very
much.
Now
we
move
on
to.
There
is
no
unfinished
business.
Now
we
move
on
to
new
business,
which
is
item
number
three
core
palm
springs:
llc
dba
living
out
for
an
amendment
to
an
approved
plan,
development
district
to
convert
condominiums
to
122
unit
apartments
and
revision
to
tentative
trap
map
trap
map
37602
located
at
1122,
east
talkwoods
canyon
case
number,
5.1449,
pdd,
389
staff.
I
have
to
recuse
myself
on
this
project.
A
Correct
because
it's
a
business,
related
decision
advice,
sure
you'll
have
to
accuse
yourself
vast
member
walsh,
if
you'd
be
able
to
step
in
and
share,
while,
since
we
don't
have
chair
jake
way
and
with
vice
chairs
refusal,
so
remember
walsh,.
I
Thank
you,
member
walsh,
so
this
project
was
approved
back
in
2018
and
for
some
of
the
newer
aac
members
I'll
take
a
few
minutes
and
refresh
and
describe
the
project.
So
you
know
we
all
have
a
common
understanding
of
where,
where
it
is
and
what's
been
approved
at
this
time,
so
the
aac
has
looked
at
the
project
many
times
as
it
led
up
to
approval
by
the
planning
commission.
I
I
The
planning
commission
reviewed
the
project
on
the
18th
of
november
and
what
they're
proposing.
The
reason
why
it
went
back
to
planning
commission
is
because
it's
a
staffords
had
agreed
that
it
was
a
minor
amendment
to
the
planned
development
district
which
allowed
the
conversion
of
the
105
condominium
units
to
122
apartments.
I
So
the
planning
commission
reviewed
the
project
and
they
felt
that
there
were
enough
changes
in
the
design
when
they
converted
it
to
the
apartments
that
the
planning,
the
aac,
should
take.
A
look
and
that's
why
it's
here
to
you
today,
so
in
your
stack
report,
there's
a
list
of
eight
items
that
the
planning
commission
felt
needed
to
be
clarified
and
we're
going
to
go
through
those
in
just
a
minute.
I
So
this
is
a
site
plan
showing
the
approved
plan
and
you'll
notice
that
it's
a
a
building
that
has
three
legs
to
it.
There's
a
retail
building
at
the
very
corner
here
that
it
was
intended
for
pet
services
with
a
dog
park
parking
is
located
underneath
the
building,
and
then
you
see
the
amenities
around
the
site,
the
pools,
pickleball
courts
and
then
other
types
of
amenities
that
the
residents
would
use.
I
And
then
this
is
a
site
plan
showing
the
details
of
how
the
parking
and
the
landscaping
would
all
work.
And
this
is
the
approved
plan
I'll
go
through
some
designs,
some
renderings
that
show
how
the
plan
was
approved,
and
I
want
to
notice
point
out
that
this
bottom
corner
here,
which
is
along
takowitz,
just
see
how
the
the
setback
is
here
and
then
another
illustrative
design,
a
3d
rendering.
I
I
want
to
point
out
that
in
the
new
design
this
driveway
here,
this
landscaping
has
been
eliminated.
There's
parking
here
now,
just
so,
you
can
see
what
that
looks
like
and
then
this
is
the
entryway
into
the
pork
ashore
that
goes
into
the
building,
and
you
notice
that
it
is
three
stories,
there's
a
landscape
plan
and
when
the
landscape
plan
was
approved,
there
remember
this
was
a
preliminary
approval.
I
It's
not
a
final,
so
a
final
would
come
back
to
the
aec
and
the
planning
commission
when
they're
ready
to
actually
start
construction,
so
the
landscape
plan
included
just
sort
of
placeholder
trees.
So
there's
a
grouping
of
shade
trees
and
you'll
see
them.
There
include
palo
verde
desert,
willow
iron,
wood
and
tipu
trees,
and
so
that
this
is
what
they're
still
working
off
of.
They
have
not
come
to
a
final
decision
on
the
trees,
but
they
would
like
to
work
off
of
this
menu
for
the
landscaping.
I
So
what
they're
asking
for
the
building
size
has
gone
from
231
to
204
000,
so
the
the
building
has
gotten
smaller.
The
height
went
from
34
feet
to
the
top
of
the
roof.
It's
been
lowered
to
31
feet.
Six
setbacks
have
been
increased
significantly
along
tokowitz,
so
it's
gone
from
30
feet
to
81
feet
and
then
50
feet
on
her
along
hermosa
and
then
26
feet
from
the
north
property
line.
I
So
in
your
packet
today
you
were
emailed
three
drawings.
Those
are
the
drawings
that
you
should
be
looking
at.
I
apologize
that
we
got
the
drawings
late,
but
those
are
are
the
ones
that
we'll
be
looking
at
today.
I
I
You'll
also
notice
that
the
parking
that
was
underneath
the
building
has
been
moved
out
into
a
parking
area
in
that's
between
the
retail
building
and
the
residential
building
itself.
Also,
the
building
has
been
turned
a
little
bit.
You'll
notice
that
it's
a
different
angle,
some
of
the
amenities
that
included
the
large
pool
on
the
west
side
have
been
eliminated
and
moved
the
pool
over
here.
I
If
you
remember
the
the
planning
commission
had
the
series
of
things
like
adding
a
community
garden
sizing
the
pool
to
accommodate
all
the
residents,
look
at
possibly
eliminating
some
parking.
If
you
remember
down
here,
there
was
no
parking
along
the
dog
park.
Now,
there's
parking
added
here
and
there's
also
parking
added
along
hermosa
road,
which
wasn't
there
in
the
previous
plan
in
the
center
of
the
parking
area,
they're
proposing
carports.
I
This
is
a
closer
view
of
just
what
they're
asking
for
their
proposal
and
where
number
12
is.
These
are
carports
that
will
be
built
over
top
of
the
parking
for
the
residence
and
then
the
parking
for
the
pet
services
or
the
retail
building
will
be
adjacent
to
that
that
port
that
section
of
the
building
so
carport
design.
This
is
a
new
design
that
we
are
just
seeing
today.
I
You'll
see
that
it's
steel
with
a
perforated
roof
covering
and
at
various
various
heights.
So
this
would
cover
both
spaces
and
the
applicant.
The
applicant's
architect
can
describe
how
this
functions
also.
The
end
that
faces
hermosa
would
also
be
screened,
so
the
metal
screen
will
come
down
on
the
sides
to
also
help
screen
the
cars.
I
In
looking
at
the
changes
to
the
building
elevations
and
there's
a
series
of
of
slides
that
show
all
the
sides
of
the
building
and
we'll
go
through
them
in
somewhat
detail,
but
you'll
notice,
the
bottom
elevation
is
the
approved
which
shows
the
parking
underneath.
So
the
slide
on
the
top
shows.
The
the
areas
that
were
used
for
parking
will
now
be
units
they're
one
and
two
bedroom
units
with
sizes
or
in
the
snap
report.
I
So
you
can
see
that
the
building
has
changed
a
little
bit
by
eliminating
the
parking
and
adding
the
apartments.
And
then
on
the
first
floor.
There
are
also
patios
that
go
out
onto
the
outside.
The
exterior
the
building
materials
are
the
same,
including
the
10
steel
screens,
which
are
actually
powder
coated,
the
metal
seams,
the
the
rock
the
stone
that
goes,
the
glazing
and
then
also
the
balcony
railing.
There
was
a
lot
of
discussion
about
the
balcony
railings
and
how
that
looked.
I
I
One
area
that
is
does
show
a
significant
screen
or
somewhat
of
a
difference
is
the
ends
of
the
building,
so
the
top
of
the
slides
are
the
ones
that
are
proposed
and
the
bottom
was
approved.
So
you'll
notice
that
there
are
some
bump
outs
that
are
a
little
bit
different.
Some
wrap
around
balconies
are
different
and
then,
when
the
planning
commission
saw
this,
they
felt
that
the
ac
should
weigh
in
on
if
these
changes
are
appropriate.
I
So
I'm
going
to
go
through
these
slides,
showing
the
exterior
and
then
just
to
refresh
you.
This
is
the
the
pet
services
with
the
corner,
little
parklet,
that
was
a
public
benefit
that
was
required
to
approve
the
pd,
that's
not
changing
that
is
staying
the
same
and
then
a
drawing
of
the
dog
park.
As
to
how
that
looks,
the
only
changes
here
is
that
there's
going
to
be
a
long
sidewalk.
I
D
I
Well,
no,
all
the
parking
has
been
moved
out
from
underneath.
Let
me
go
back
to
a
comparison,
so
there
there
was
the
main
driveway
that
came
in
off
of
hermosa,
which
was
sort
of
like
your
entry
arrival
point.
I
And
then,
if
you
remember,
we
had
a
long
discussion
about
the
connection
between
the
the
arrival
courtyard
and
how
it
connected
to
the
parking
for
the
guests
and
for
the
pet
services
retail
building
in
the
new
plan.
All
that
parking
underneath
has
been
removed
and
put
and
moved
out
into
the
area
that
was
the
grand
entrance
and
then
the
landscape
sort
of
walkway.
C
I
Okay,
let
me
clarify
yes,
so
in
the
the
weeks
since
the
planning
commission
met,
the
applicant
has
revised
the
plan.
So
if
we
want
to
go
through
those,
so
the
community
garden
has
been
added
here,
number
four,
the
size
of
swimming
pool.
This
is
much
larger
than
the
one
that
the
planning
commission
reviewed.
I
There
was
a
comment
about
it
being
over
parked
and
the
applicant
can
discuss
that
in
just
a
minute.
Building
elevations
have
changed
so
we
talked
about
the
ends
of
the
building,
how
they
are
different,
that's
what
the
planning
commission
saw
and
their
they
have
not
made
any
proposed
changes
for
the
aac,
the
carport
design,
the
design
that
the
planning
commission
saw
is
completely
different
than
what
you
are
looking
at
here.
I
So
this
is.
The
planning
commission
has
not
seen
this
design,
so
this
is
a
new,
a
new
review
of
it.
I
I
They
also
wanted
shade
trees
along
the
pedestrian
walkways
and
they've
added
trees
around
the
walkways,
and
then
there's
a
requirement.
The
zoning
code,
that
the
parking
lot
be
screened
and
they've
added
a
line
of
hedges
along
here,
and
we
still
need
to
work
with
them
on
what
this
really
should
be
a
block
wall,
and
not
it's
good
to
have
landscaping
there,
but
landscaping
can
doesn't
always
scream
so
that
that's
what
the
changes
are.
I
Right
there
was
long
discussions
about
trash
in
this
plan.
If
you
in
the
trash
was
located
inside
the
buildings
underneath
here
there
were
two
two
trash
areas,
and
now
there's
just
one
down
number
17
and
I'm
not
convinced
that
will
be
enough.
D
Yes,
so
the
site
plan
we
are
looking
at
now
was
approved
by
the
planning
commission.
I
F
I
That's
correct:
when
number
four
building
elevations
have
changed,
they
right
right.
They,
you
know,
that's
not
not
something
that
they
they'll
discuss
and
you
all
will
weigh
in
today.
If
you
think
what
they're
proposing
is
appropriate.
The
same
thing
with
the.
C
I
Is
well,
it
will
be
required,
the
the
building
codes
for
you
know
2019
and
the
city.
New
solar
ordnance
requires
any
building,
that's
three
stories
or
under
to
provide
solar.
So
in
one
of
the
drawings
I
didn't
include
it,
they
did
show
panels
on
the
roof
and
there
was
a
discussion
about
whether
conditions
of
approval
that
the
planning
commission
was
looking
at
back
in
2018.
I
The
planning
commission
required
that
they
provide
2
kilowatts
per
unit.
The
california
building
code
has
using
our
climate
rating
it's
a
little
bit
less
than
that.
So
one
of
the
conditions
that
the
that
they're
looking
for
the
planet
commission
approve
is
to
reflect
the
number
of
of
kilowatts
that
would
be
required
and
not
not
say
to,
but
what
the
code
would
allow
or
require.
J
Astro,
hello,
hi,
I'm
this
is
lauren
astro
and
my
I
also
have
on
the
call
my
business
partner,
paul
alanis
he's
my
partner
42
years,
and
he
is
building
this
with
me.
Thank
you,
members
of
the
committee
for
taking
the
time
to
discuss
this.
J
Many
of
you
may
remember
that
this
is
a
project
that
I
am
extremely
committed
to
it's
a
project
that
I
wanted
to
do
in
palm
springs,
because
there
are
no
senior
housing
opportunities
for
lgbt
seniors
in
the
country
that
are
not
affordable,
housing
options,
but
one
in
santa
rosa,
I
think
palm
springs
is,
is
the
place
to
do
it.
J
We
tried
to
do
this
as
a
condominium,
a
luxury
condominium
project,
and
that
was
what
was
approved
in
the
past
by
you
guys
and
the
planning
commission
and
the
city
council,
but
we
found
that,
as
we
were
getting
numbers
from
contractors
that
the
costs
of
construction
for
a
condominium
project
were
substantially
higher
than
we
had
anticipated
in
a
way
that
would
make
the
cost
of
the
condominiums.
J
We
thought
prohibitive
and
would
create
a
failed
project.
So
we
went
back
to
the
drawing
board
and
we
have
determined
that
we
can
build
this
project
as
an
apartment
building,
but
for
the
same
concept
of
senior
living
for
lgbt
seniors,
primarily
at
a
cost
and
it
rents
that
will
make
sense
economically
for
us.
J
So
many
of
the
changes
that
we've
made
that
you
saw
today
in
the
building
and
relate
to
cost
considerations
and
are
trying
to
value
engineer
the
car,
the
construction
cost
of
this
project
and
the
primary
one
was
to
remove
the
parking
from
under
the
building,
which
is
something
that
was
necessary
for
a
condominium
project.
J
But
we
do
not
believe
in
the
competitive
world
as
necessary
for
an
apartment
project,
and
so
we
have
moved
all
the
parking
out
from
under
the
building.
We
have
taken
that
space
and
put
in
units
that
all
will
have
private
patios,
as
as
the
units
that
were
on
the
ground
floor
originally
had.
So
there
are
many
more
units
on
the
ground
floor
with
private
patios.
J
J
We
have
used
the
same
landscaping
palette
as
was
approved
the
same
lighting,
the
same
shade
trees,
as
was
already
approved.
J
The
changes
that
we
made
were
the
addition
of
the
parking
out
front
and
we
we
changed
the
amenities
in
the
west
and
the
north
to
eliminate
the
pool
in
the
west
and
to
make
that
a
more
tranquil
space
with
many
more
trees
and
walking
paths
in
in
the
north.
J
We've
added
the
hedges
that
were
asked
for
by
the
planning
commission
we're
happy
to
put
in
a
wall
if,
if
planning
is
telling
us
that
that's
necessary
as
well
as
the
hedges,
we
glenn
made
a
comment
that
the
entry
off
of
tockwits
is
no
longer
there.
J
There's
parking,
there
still
is
an
entrance
off
of
takwitz,
and
he
also
commented
that
there's
only
one
trash
area
and
that's
not
the
case,
there
are
two
trash
areas,
one
on
the
east
wing
facing
chocolates
and
one
on
the
wing
facing
hermosa,
and
we
feel
that
that's
adequate
because,
unlike
the
condominiums,
the
residents
who
live
here
will
have
help
weekly
housekeeping
service
provided
as
part
of
their
rent.
J
J
In
addition,
this
is
a
building
that
will
have
concierge
services
and
so
they'll,
be
the
residents
will
be
able
to
drop
off
packages
and
groceries
at
the
concierge
and
obviously
we
as
management
are
as
concerned,
if
not
more
concerned
than
the
planning
commission
about
our
our
tenants,
not
having
an
uncomfortable
experience.
So
we
will
address
that
through
management
issues,
as
it
relates
to
removing
the
spaces.
J
We're
hesitant
to
agree
to
that
at
this
point.
Until
we
see
what
the
operation
is
like,
we
are
not
substantially
over
parked
by
zoning
code.
I
think
we
have
nine
spaces,
and
you
know
with
this
with
the
screening
that
we
provided
on
hermosa
the
additional
trees
in
the
parking
lot.
We
would
like
to
defer
that
until
we
see
whether
the
parking
is
for
the
retail
and
for
the
dog
park
and
for
the
guests
is
adequate,
as
well
as
for
the
residents.
J
I
think
that
those
are
the
major
issues
that
the
planning
commission
asked
us
to
address.
We've
addressed,
I
believe,
all
of
them
other
than
the
walking
and
the
number
of
parking
spaces.
So
with
that
you
know,
I
would
ask
you
if
you
have
any
questions
to
direct
to
me
or
to
paul
or
to
jerry.
Please
do
so.
C
J
I
think
jerry
can
speak
to
that,
but
my
understanding
was
that
they
looked
at
that
and
they
felt
that
it
was
too
ponderous
given
the
layout
of
of
the
building
on
the
east
wing,
but
jerry.
If
you
could
address
that.
K
Yes,
thank
you
very
much.
By
the
way
I
have
to
apologize
to
everyone.
My
internet
went
out,
and
so
I'm
on
a
cell
phone
right
now
trying
to
make
do
so.
My
apologies
to
everyone-
and
I
would
like
to
thank
all
the
committee
members
on
the
aac
for
giving
us
this
opportunity
on
the
are
you
talking
about
the
north,
the
northwest
wing
stair
tower.
A
K
Yes,
that
was
back
in
in
the
corner
in
the
corner
of
the
property,
and
we
felt
as
obviously
a
cost-saving
measure
that
we
weren't
going
to
put
it
on
there.
That's
one
of
the
only
stairs
that
we
have
that
doesn't
go
to
the
roof
also,
and
so
we
decided.
Where
can
we?
K
C
K
Well,
the
the
color:
it's
really
not
a
true
white.
If
you
look
at
the
materials,
I
think
it's
it's
hard
to
tell
it's
a
little
off-white
color,
it's
a
it,
has
a
manila
feel
to
it.
The
actual
color
of
the
paint
of
the
of
the
stucco
and
the
other
colors
that
we're
introducing
are.
We
originally
had
core
10
but
per
the
recommendations
of
aac.
Originally
we
ended
up
going
with
a
simulated
powder
coated
core
10,
look
to
it
and
then
the
stone
all
the
windows
will
be
bronze,
bronze
glazing
and
bronze
frame.
K
So
those
are
really
the
only
colors
we
have
on
the
building.
We
tried
to
keep
it
very
simplistic
and
very
more
in
tune
with
the
mid-century
feel.
F
Any
other
member
questions
for
our
applicant-
I
I
I
have
one
mr
ostrow,
you
you
had
mentioned
it's
like
a
300
plus
foot,
walk
and
that's
that
would
take
me
from
the
furthest
space
to
the
front
door
of
of
the
complex.
Is
that
correct?
That's
correct!
That's
correct!
Okay!
So
then
kind
of
once
I'm
in
that
lobby,
I've
got
another
hike
to
undertake.
F
If
I'm
yeah
see
it
just.
It
prompts
me
to
kind
of
ask
I
you
know
this
is
a
complex
site
plan
and
you
had
a
you
know,
a
myriad
of
factors
that
you
had
to
kind
of
mesh
and
work
out
and
set
priorities
with.
Did
you
try
to
break
up
the
parking
and
associate
some
of
it
to
different
ends
of
the
complex?
Did
that
work?
I'm
sure
you
probably
tried
it.
J
Well,
we
did
try
it,
but
what
I
was
saying
is
none
of
our
residents
will
park
in
that
space.
They
will.
They
will
not
be
assigned
that
space,
they
will
be
assigned
spaces
if
a
resident
lives
in
the
in
the
I'm.
Sorry,
yes,.
J
Yeah,
so
they
if
they
live
in
the
tockwood,
spacing
wing
they'll
be
parking.
You
know
in
the
spaces
most
close
to
the
elevator
right
there
and
and
the
same
for
the
hermosa
wing.
But
you
know
we
were
constrained.
I
mean
to
to
come
up
with
a
parking
arrangement
that
you
know
provided
enough
spaces
as
code,
but
you
know
we're
we're
gonna,
you
know
take
care
of
our
residents.
I
I
can't.
Obviously,
if
my
residents
are
are
uncomfortable
right,
I'm
gonna
have
to
come
up
with
something.
Maybe
golf
carts.
J
You
know
maybe
valet
parking,
maybe,
but
but
we
will
have
a
concierge
service.
So
but
it's
a
management
issue
in
my
mind,
because
I
have
to
make
sure
that
my
residents
are
comfortable
or
I
I
won't
have
a
successful
project.
F
Thank
you,
mr
sherman,
like
this
question
might
be
for
you,
there
was
some
talk
about
the
the
railings.
I
I
remember
weren't
they
glass
before
and
what
are
they
now
have?
They
changed.
K
Yes,
they
they
are
glad
they
would.
They
were
glass
and
we
are
gonna,
keep
them
as
glass
now.
So
we
are
not
changing
the
railings
at
all.
We're
gonna
keep
them
all
glass
so
that
every
unit
residents
can
take
advantage
of
views
out
of
their
units.
F
F
F
K
F
F
F
K
E
K
A
bottom
rail
bronze
rail
there
will
be
what
they
call
shoes
underneath
it
that
elevated,
so
drainage
could
go
underneath
it.
Then
you
have
the
glass
and
then
the
top
rail
will
be
a
bronze
rail.
That
would
be
probably
no
more
than
you
know
an
inch
diameter,
but
it
might
it
probably
won't
be
round
it
might
be
square
so
to
be
very
elegant
and
very
streamlined.
F
Any
any
questions
public
comment
at
this
point
for
our
applicant
and
it
sounds
like
there
are
no
further
questions
from
members,
we'll
close
the
discussion
now
and
open
it
up
to
to
members.
Anybody
want
to
go
first
I'll,
go
first.
D
I
guess
my
comment
is:
I
remember
when
this
project
first
came
before
the
committee
and
one
of
the
areas
of
concern
that
we
had
was
with
the
parking
along
talkwitz
canyon,
way
in
saying
that
you
know
we
had
the
parking
that
was
under
the
building
there
was
we
had
worked
really
hard
with
the
applicant
to
create
that
separate.
D
D
It
feels
like
the
whole
site
plan
and
now
that
it's
gone
from
condominiums
to
an
apartment
it
the
site
plan,
feels
contrived
like
it.
It
really
doesn't
work
and
with
this
piece
of
land
and
if
you're
gonna
do
apartments,
I
I
think,
there's
a
far
better
site
plan
that
could
work
that
would
maintain
the
integrity
of
tockwoods,
because
talkwoods
has
a
beautiful
parkway.
D
C
E
How
is
it
helping
with
the
access
to
the
garage?
E
E
I
E
That's
what
I'm
maybe
a
little
slow
on
the
uptick
here,
but
the?
How
is
this
three-story
building
meeting
its
parking
requirement.
J
I
I
And
yeah
includes
the
retail
also
and
the
apartments.
I
E
I,
as
I
look
at
the
two
side
by
side,
there's
just
a
couple
things
jump
out
at
me.
I
see
your
original
approved
design
on
the
left.
A
couple
things
trouble
me
and
so
again
sorry
john,
if
I'm
jumping
back
to
more
questions
for
the
architect
here,
original
approved
design.
J
Yeah,
let
me
address
that
yeah
I
I
was
the
one
who
made
that
determination,
because
I,
if
we
were
going
to
have
all
of
the
activity.
C
J
E
Then
I'd
still
argue
that
well,
if
you're
gonna
put
it
on
the
north
side,
then
you
gotta
push
it
way
way
out
there
as
far
as
you
possibly
could
away
from
these
other
buildings.
Otherwise
it's
going
to
be
the
chili
chamber
because
you've
surrounded
it
by
three-story
buildings
and
it's
going
to
be
constantly
in
the
shade.
J
J
E
I
think
anyway,
this
is
my
argument.
E
I
don't
know
generally
look
just
a
couple
things
that
jump
out
at
me
and
then
the
the
pickleball
thing
like
the
activities
and
stuff
you
lost
them
because
of
of
the
the
sound
and
it's
it's
annoying.
I
don't
know
it's
it's
your
your
business,
I
don't
know,
but
but
we've
got
clients
and
stuff,
and
I
I
hear
about
all
the
fun
pickleball
we're
putting
them
into
houses
and
things
like
that
and
so.
J
C
Yeah,
so
I
I
think
the
pool
I
mean,
as
I
look
at
it
and
I
kind
of
do
a
rough
calculation.
The
pool
looks
like
it's
about
150
feet
from
the
building
from
the
west.
C
So
given
a
height
of
30
feet,
I
don't
think
I
don't
think
it's
going
to
be
in
shade
that
much
and
as
I'm
looking
at
it,
but
maybe
I'm
wrong
from
the
south,
it's
the
south
side,
maybe
a
little
bit
worse.
C
But
you
know,
oh
and-
and
you
know,
in
terms
of
the
street
view
from
chocolates,
you
know
I
think,
moving
the
parking
where
the
parking
is
located
is
kind
of
the
the
best
solution
you
get
with
this
lot,
because,
obviously,
if
you,
if
you
reposition
and
move
it
in
the
back,
then
you're,
you
know,
then
you
you're
losing
access
from
the
main
roads
that
are
going
to
be
accessing
this
place.
C
But
I
think
the
mitigating
factor
of
that
is
the
is
the
retail
and
the
dog
park
that
face
talkwitz,
that
kind
of
shields
the
parking
from
from
talkwood.
So
I'm
I'm
less
concerned
with
that.
I
like
the
fact
that
you've
added
spas
kind
of
around
on
the
on
the
west
side
as
well,
because,
quite
frankly,
in
the
winter,
most
people
aren't
going
to
be
swimming
they're
going
to
be
spending
time
in
the
spa.
I
would
think
so.
C
C
Remember
thompson:
I
agree
with
steve's
last
comments.
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
where
the
parking
is
located.
I
guess
just
on
that
northwest
end
I'd
like
to
see
something
done.
There
just
looks
so
so
kind
of
plain
compared
to
the
other
ends
of
the
building,
and
I
was
hoping
that
maybe
there
was
an
accent
color
on
the
building
that
could
at
least
paint
that
that
particular
wall
with
so
that
kind
of
matches
the
other
ends
better.
I
Walsh,
we'll
need
some
sort
of
recommendation
for
a
list
of
of
the
are
the
is
the
carport
design.
Okay,
I
mean
we
haven't
discussed
that
and
that's
brand
new.
F
Okay,
so
glenn,
would
you
like
to
collect
up
our
comments
specific
to
any
changes
or
any
further
questions
that
need
to
be
addressed?.
I
Right,
I
think
some,
you
know
a
comment
about
the
site
plan
itself.
I
think
you've
said
that
I
don't
know
if
there's
agreement
on
the
location
of
the
parking
and
then
the
planning
commission
would
would
like
some
sort
of
recommendations
on
the
building
architecture
and
member
thompson
mentioned
about
painting
the
one
tower
in
so
that
it's
sort
of
similar
to
the
stone.
So
it
looks
like
it
like
it
blends
or
fits
in
with
the
rest
of
the
ends
of
the
buildings.
F
I
would
leave
it
to
the
members
to
to
bring
up
any
of
the
concerns
that
they've
got
on
issues
of
of
the
carport
design
or
or
any
of
the
architectural
elements
that
that
we
want
to
make
comment
on.
A
Correct
chair
walsh,
I
would
just
note
that
when
this
item
was
reviewed
by
the
planning
commission,
they
did
specifically
ask
that
the
aac
take
a
look
at
the
elevations
of
the
building
architecture,
elevations
and
then
the
final
details
of
the
carports
weren't
readily
available
at
that
time.
So,
with
this
latest
proposal
that
you
have,
those
are
really
also
appropriate
for
consideration
and
review.
A
E
E
K
Well,
the
height,
the
lower
canopy
is
nine
feet
clear
and
the
upper
one
is
eleven
five
to
the
underside.
E
E
Why
do
I
have
to
decipher
what
these
things
are
supposed
to
be
made
out
of
the
materials
they're
made
out
of
the
details
with
these
I-beams?
How
these
things
are
detailed?
E
A
I
would
just
note
that
this
is
a
preliminary
development
application,
so
the
details
typically
come
forward
as
a
part
of
the
final
development
plan,
but
in
general
what
you
see
are
the
concepts
that
the
applicant
is
proposing
and
if
you're
comfortable
with
what
you
see
in
terms
of
the
basic
elevation
and
inspirational
imagery
in
the
screen,
then
we
can
let
the
commission
know
that.
But
if
there's
some
concerns
with
it,
maybe
the
overall
height
or
the
material
that
they're
looking
at,
I
think
they
discuss
the
materials
that
they're
considering.
A
E
E
E
D
E
E
Although
I
see
I
see
perforated
material
up
here,
maybe
that's
you're
going
for
something
a
bit
more
solid.
These
beams
in
this
drawing,
though,
appear
a
bit
heavy
in
the
drawing
I
see
on
the
lower
area,
and
yet
what
I
see
up
above
looks
much
more
slender
and
gentle
to
me,
which
looks
nicer.
I
think.
F
I
I
would
add
a
couple
supportive
elements
that
I
think
would
need
to
be
further
delineated.
You
know,
obviously
to
bring
them
down
in
height,
makes
the
shadow
more
effective
over
the
car
and
unless
there's
some
overarching,
aesthetic
reason
to
push
them
up,
I
don't
see
that
anything
is
necessarily
gained
from
it.
The
second
is
a
critical
element
in
the
effectiveness
of
the
shading
is
what
this
perforation
ratio
is.
I
have
seen
some
of
the
perforated
panels.
F
F
C
J
Jerry
you
can
jerry,
perhaps
you
can
address
it,
but
it's,
my
understanding
is
it's
the
same
exact
materials.
K
Jerry,
I'm
muted,
I'm
sorry!
Yes,
it
is
the
exact
same
stone
glenn.
If
you
could
pull
up
the
material
board
yeah
in
the
lower
left
hand
corner,
that's
what
was
approved
and
that's
what
we're
going
to
continue
on
with.
K
K
Okay,
so
if
you
don't
mind
I'll
address
that,
though,
that
other
color
that
you
see
on
there
was
originally
the
core
10
cladding
on
those
pop
outs,
and
we
did-
we
did
look
at
on
the
ends.
We
do
have
those
similar
pop-outs
still
there.
K
We
did
look
at
putting
it
back
on
there
and
it
really
seemed
very
heavy
and
competing
with
the
stone
on
that
side
and
it
really
weighed
down
the
building
and
then
the
other
factor.
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
these
elevations
are
80
plus
feet
on
on
top
which
away
from
the
street
and
then
a
lot
of
landscaping
in
front
of
it.
So
a
majority
of
at
least
the
first
floor
and
to
two
floors
you
might
not
even
see
from
dockwits.
K
A
K
Well,
it
it
it
did
and
it
didn't.
It
really
is
the
same
right.
The
building
got
a
little
shorter,
so
the
proportions
look
a
little
different
on
it
and
that
also
the
the
parapets
that
are
around
it.
So
those
two
towers
were
required
by
the
fire
department
to
go
up
to
to
the
roof.
That's
the
reason
why
they
are
that
high.
K
Again,
as
we
develop
it
further,
we
might
be
able
to
shave
off
a
little
bit
of
it,
not
a
lot.
I
wouldn't
say
that
we
will
be
able
to
shave
off
feet
off
of
off
of
it.
K
But
the
one,
the
I'm
sorry
on
the
east
wing
that
one
we
might
be
able
to
take
a
foot
off
of.
I
think.
K
D
D
E
I
Yes,
yes,
so
the
middle,
the
middle.
Drawing
here
that
I'm
circling
is
the
one
that
will
face
taco.
It's
is
that
right,
jerry.
E
K
You
are
correct,
no,
you
are
correct,
but
we
did
pull
it
back
and
we
felt
that
by
pulling
it
that
far
back
with
the
landscaping
in
front
the
impact
would
obviously
the
impact
gets
diminished
from
chocolates.
By
going
almost
80
feet,
we
were
only
30
feet
away.
Originally
that
corner
of
that
stair
tower
was
only
30
feet
from
the
property
line.
Now
it's
81
feet.
E
E
J
More
trees
in
the
in
the
parking
area
now
there'll
be
a
lot
more
trees
in
the
west,
there'll
be
more
trees
in
the
north
because
we
won't
have
the
oh.
E
E
Well,
east
wing
is
facing
facing
the
faces
up,
yeah
we'll
face.
I
E
K
Let
me
explain
on
the
on
the
east
side-
oh
and-
and
I
know
it's
probably
hard
to
tell
on
this
elevation
one
thing
all
the
towers.
Well,
all
these
those
two
towers
that
we've
been
talking
about,
the
one
on
chocolates
and
hermosa
did
get
a
little
larger
because
we
had
to
put
the
trash
enclosures
in
there
because
we
got
rid
of
the
garage.
We
didn't
have
room
to
put
the
trash
rooms
anywhere
else
that
would
be
conducive
for
the
project,
so
they
did
get
tall.
They
did
get
wider
and
larger,
but.
C
K
That
tower,
the
one
thing
you
can't
tell
is
that
there
is
a
step
in
it.
There
is
a
notch
in
the
in
that
tower.
It's
not
a
flat
face
on
this
elevation
that
you're
looking
at.
If
you
see
that
l-shaped
line
there,
that
corner
is
cut
out
right
there,
so
that
wall
that
you're,
looking
straight
on,
actually
steps
back
about
four
or
five
feet.
K
Yeah,
and
also
again
about
I'm
not
saying
this
is
the
the
answer
to
all
but
realize
again
what
you're
looking
at
you're
looking
at
a
straight
elevation
but
from
the
street
there's
going
to
be
hedges
or
walls
or
landscaping
on
this
side
as.
E
K
Yeah,
so
this
is
the
original,
so,
as
you
see
on
the
tower,
we
have
the
stone
and
then
we
have
the
glazing.
We
still
have
that
on
our
project,
we're
still
going
to
introduce
that
keep
going.
C
K
Okay
and
then
the
balcony,
how
it
juts
out
at
the
ends
yeah,
we
still
have
balconies
at
the
ends
of
our
project.
K
That
was
the
that
was
the
sighting
on
those
bump
out
elements.
Yeah
and
again
we
did
look
at
it
and
it
just
seemed
very
heavy
since
we
got
rid
of
the
garage
because
remember
the
base
of
the
building
was
a
good
12
feet
up
because
it
was
a
garage,
so
it
it
made
sense.
This
building
was
a
lot
taller,
but
now,
when
we
start
putting
the
core
10
when
we
stopped
it
short
on
the
bottom,
it
looked
really
funny
and
then,
when
we
put
it
all
the
way
three
stories,
it
looked
very
heavy.
K
E
E
K
Maybe
no
no
exactly
I
mean
I
don't
I
don't
mind
that
we
could
look
at
this
and
we
could
actually
add
add
something
to
it.
Just
you
know,
and
we
could
add
the
screens.
You
know
I
I
the
one
thing
I
see
as
you're
talking
is
that
on
the
on
the
south
wing
on
the
e
on
the
south
wing,
we
could
on
the
balcony
ends,
we
could
put
screens
on
there
the
those
corten
cut
cut
screens
to
help
balance
that
a
little
further.
K
E
I
think
I'd
like
to
hear
what
other
folks
have
to
say,
but
I
I
think
I
know
where
the
I
know
what
I'm
feeling
is,
that
it'd
be
a
real
shame
to
have
these.
Your
concept
fall
so
flat
on
these
key,
really
viewable
facades
that
are
these
very
public.
You
know
these
are
the
real.
E
K
F
But
at
the
same
time
the
this
is
like
apples
in
terms
of
the
way
it
is
presenting
and
the
and
the
response.
I
think
that
you're
getting
from
us,
along
with
looking
at
this,
the
lack
of
kind
of
any
sort
of
a
cohesive
refinement
that
wraps
around
the
entire
building
is
of
issue
you
know,
and
that,
and
that
also
doesn't
touch
on
the
the
I.
I
think
tom
dosey's
comments
about
the
location
of
the
parking
and
the
extent
of
it
on
such
a
critical
corner
is
also
hugely
impactful.
J
F
J
J
That
was
a
requirement
of
the
city
from
day,
one
that
if
we
were
going
to
build
something
they
wanted
that
retail
building
there,
and
so
I'm
gonna
have
parking
and
I've
always
had
parking
up
against
the
dog
park
and
the
building
because
of
the
city
requirement
there
was.
J
There
was
no
possibility
of
me
moving
the
parking
to
the
north
side
because
of
the
city
requirement
here,
and
so
you
know,
I
think
the
comment
that,
with
with
the
plaza
and
the
building
and
the
dog
park,
it's
the
same
you're,
presenting
the
same
that
we
were
presenting
before
as
it
relates
to
the
parking
facing
tuckwoods.
It
was
always
there
and
it
was
always
required
by
the.
J
A
A
On
the
you
know,
conceptual
elevations
that
you've
you've
been
looking
at
as
well
as
the
carports
the
site
plan,
the
layout.
Those
are
really
going
to
be
for
the
planning
commission
to
consider.
But
again,
so
the
recommendation
from
the
planning
commission
was
that
you
provide
some
additional
comments
on
the
elevations
and
the
carports.
A
So
what
we
have
we've
taken
notes
so
far-
and
it
sounds
like
a
lot
of
the
discussion
about
the
architecture
of
the
building-
has
been
related
to
reincorporating
the
corten
steel,
to
enhance
those
kind
of
bookend
elements
of
the
building.
A
This
there
were
comments
initially
about
the
northwest
wing,
but
it
looks
like
all
the
wings
could
use
some
enhancement
based
on
the
discussion
and
then
there
was
also
some
recommendations
about
lowering
the
height
of
the
carports,
as
well
as
incorporating
thinner,
thinner
elements,
not
the
kind
of
the
heavier
ones
that
were
shown
in
the
elevation
plant.
A
A
The
question
was
there
were
comments
about
landscaping,
adding
additional
trees
along
this
chocolate's
frontage.
If
no.
E
A
So
again,
this
is
going
to
planning
commission
on
the
17th,
so
we're
looking
for
a
recommendation.
It
sounds
like
we
have
all
your
comments
if
you're
comfortable
with.
F
F
A
Yeah,
so
the
the
first
item
I
have
is
related
to
the
carports
and
those
being
reduced
in
height.
A
There
are
some
comments
about
the
lower
height
being
seven
to
eight
feet,
roughly
and
the
upper
height
being
about
nine
feet
or
nine
to
ten
feet.
Roughly
there
were
so
that
would
be
related
to
the
carports,
also
tying
it
back
to
the
conceptual
image
that
was
shown
in
terms
of
detailing.
A
We
had
comments
about
adding
trees
near
the
south
elevation
fronting
chocolates
beyond
what
is
shown
here
on
the
site
plan,
and
then
there
were
comments
about
improving
the
three
exterior
elevations
facing
or
really
the
book
end
of
the
project
to
incorporate
the
corten
steel
screening
as
a
part
of
the
final
development
plan.
F
F
A
No,
I
know
we
had
discussion
about
having
a
second
meeting,
but
it
looks
like
the
items
that
we
possibly
might
have
have
not
come
to
fruition.
So
at
this
point
we
won't
be
using
anything
on
the
january
course
january.
4Th
meeting.
C
A
Yep,
so
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
I'll.
Send
you
out.
We
have
a
draft
schedule
for
your
meetings
for
the
next
year,
so
I'll
send
you
a
copy
of
that.
A
Yeah
kind
of
give
you
a
sense.
What
we've
done
is
you
know
we
try
and
avoid
certain
return
to
work
holidays,
as
well
as
any
religious
holdings
that
that
occur
later
in
the
year.
So
I'll
send
that
out
to
you,
so
you'll
get
a
copy
of
that
in
the
next
week,
or
maybe
two.
D
A
It's
it's
still
a
residential
project,
so
it's
really
viewed.
Similarly
in
terms
of
what
we're
looking
at,
you
know,
obviously
we'll
always
try
and
point
you
back
to
the
architectural
review
criteria.
Findings,
because
this
is
the
previous
iteration
and
the
new
iteration.
You
know
you're,
basically
charged
with
looking
at
the
same
findings
so
so
yeah.
If
there's
questions
on
that
and
just.
C
Thank
you.
I
had
one
question
as
well
and
david.
I
know
I
discussed
this
with
you
over
the
phone,
but
as
I
drove
past
margaritaville,
the
sign
has
been
installed.
Yes
and
I'd
love
for
you
to
address
that
to
the
committee
as
to
how
that
happened
after
we
rejected
the
project.
A
So
that
project
was
approved
by
staff,
so
the
comments
that
you
gave
were
to
the
planning
director-
or
I
guess
the
development
service
director
in
this
case,
and
so
you
know
I
went
to
your
you
went
before
you
review
on
two
occasions.
A
We
do
review
those
with
the
committee
for
additional
support
in
our
review
of
applications,
but
ultimately
the
authority
of
for
signing
successful
on
on
director,
so
that
sign
was
approved.
C
E
Have
a
great
day
everybody
merry
christmas
and
happy
holidays.
Here
we
go
yeah.
I
guess
no,
no
celebrations
of
joy
this
year.