►
From YouTube: Architectural Advisory Committee | March 8th, 2021
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
All
right,
okay:
this
is
the
monday
march
8th
2021
meeting
of
the
architecture
advised
advisory
committee
for
the
city
of
palm
springs.
Mr
noll,
could
we
please
have
a
roll
call.
A
B
Okay,
with
all
members
present
does
dan
thompson
participate
in
discussion
or
voting.
B
Okay,
thank
you.
Could
we
please
have
a
report
on
the
posting
of
the
agenda.
A
B
Thank
you
second,
but
john
mccoy,
all
in
favor,
hi,
hi,
hi,
okay,
this
is
a
public
meeting
and
audience
members
are
permitted
to
comment
on
any
item
that
is,
within
this
committee's
purview
comments
on
an
item
appearing
on
to
debt.
Today's
agenda
are
made
at
the
time
that
that
item
is
presented.
If
anybody
has
anything
to
speak
to,
that
is
not
on
today's
agenda.
Now
is
the
time
to
speak.
Mr
newell.
Do
we
have
anybody
in
the
queue.
B
B
Okay,
do
the
other
members
have
any
corrections
or
additions
to
these
minutes.
B
A
B
Aye
any
opposed
okay,
unfinished
business
item
number
two
on
the
agenda
mike
flannery
for
a
signed
program,
application
for
flannery
exchange,
a
multi-tenant
commercial
building
located
at
750
north
palm
canyon
drive.
Do
we
have
a
staff
report?
Please?
B
C
Right,
as
you
may
recall,
the
ac
reviewed
this
item
on
february
16th
and
at
the
time
the
committee
boarded
and
decided
that
the
item
further.
C
C
The
office
spaces
cafe
slash
restaurant
and
retail
tenant
spaces
and
the
common
spaces,
and
this
is
the
view
of
the
building
from
the
primary
innovation,
which
is
on
north
palm
canyon
and
additional
images,
the
site
and
the
image
on
the
left
side
at
the
bottom.
That
is,
the
the
rear
elevation
of
the
building
on
north
indian
canyon,
drive.
C
As
you
may
recall,
previously,
the
african
proposed
installation
of
13
signs
and
since
then
after
receiving
comments
from
the
aac,
the
applicant
has
revised
a
plan
and
the
one
of
the
comments
that
was
received
was
that
the
project
proposing
project
is
proposing
too
much
signage,
so
the
applicant
has
decided
to
reduce
the
amount
of
signage
for
the
the
building.
C
C
The
african
has
also
revised
the
design
of
the
freestanding
signs.
The
proposed
sign
does
not
include
the
tenant
names
anymore.
The
height
has
been
slightly
reduced
as
soon
as
the
area.
The
construction
of
the
sign
itself
has
not
really
changed.
C
The
sign
background
is
going
to
be
a
painted
album
sheeting
in
according
steel
finish,
and
it's
going
to
accommodate
a
clinic,
the
building
name,
family
exchange
and
then
also
it's
going
to
include
some
decorative
trim
element
and
the
painted
eat
shop
and
work
signage.
C
The
applique
is
also
proposing
changes
to
the
blade
signs.
As
you
can
see
here,
the
amount
has
been
reduced
by
50,
so
instead
of
four
signs,
the
applicant
is
not
proposing
two
signs
and
the
sign
the
size
of
the
signs
also
has
been
reduced
significantly.
The
previously
the
projection
was
proposed
for
43
inches.
C
However,
that's
been
changed
to
29
and
this
graphic
shows
how
much
of
a
reduction
in
the
size
africans
proposing
these
signs
were
previously
proposed
on
the
north
palm
canyon
side.
Excuse
me,
north
palm
canyon
drive
front
edge
since
the
last
meeting
that
weekend
has
decided
to
remove
the
sign
that
was
proposed
on
the
above,
the
driveway,
as
well
as
the
the
the
fascia
of
the
the
canopy
structure
and
for
the
rear
innovation.
Africa
has
decided
to
remove
the
building
id
signage,
so
these
science
has
been
reduced.
C
So,
based
on
these
findings,
the
staff
recommends
aac
recommend
approval
to
the
the
government
services
director
as
proposed,
and
this
is
the
end
of
staff,
presentation
and
applicant
is
available.
If
you
have
any
questions.
Thank
you.
A
I
I
had
one
quick
one
really
yeah,
so
narco
are
signs
1.1
and
1.2.
Those
are
the
signs
on
indian
canyon
and
palm
canyon.
Are
they
the
same
design.
C
No,
the
design
has
been
changed.
I'm
sorry,
I
I
can
see
what
you're
saying.
Yes,
the
the
sign
designs
are
identical
on
both
frontages
and
the
device
design
is
shown
on
this
slide
here
on
the
right.
B
Okay,
thank
you.
Would
the
applicant
like
to
you
have
10
minutes
to
present
your
project
noriko?
Can
you
bring
them
in.
A
D
Yes,
this
is
john
cross
best
signs.
Thank
you
for
the
time
to
to
look
at
this.
D
Once
again,
I
had
a
had
a
chance
to
go
over
with
the
owner
regarding
quantities
of
signs
signed
locations
yeah,
as
you
can
imagine,
a
building
owner
is
going
to
want
to
get
as
much
as
they
possibly
can
for
signage
that
that
doesn't
always
bode
well
for
the
overall
look
and
that's
why
you
guys
are
here
to
make
sure
that
you
know
there's
not
a
plur
proliferation
of
signage,
and
I
I
understand
that
so
we
reduced
the
number
of
signs
on
the
building
and
also
remove
the
tenant
panels
from
the
freestanding
signs.
D
So
the
freestanding
signs
are
more
utilized
now
to
just
identify
the
building.
So
people
know
that
they're
walking
into
or
driving
past,
flannery
exchange
and
and
the
sign
locations
have
been
reduced
to
just
allow
for,
for
a
number
of
tenants
to,
you
know,
get
their
name
on
on
the
on
the
building.
The
blade
signs
were
reduced.
D
You
know
I
did
take
note
of
the
blade
signs
you
know
having
four
of
them
when
there's
only
access
to
two
suites
that
you
know
that
makes
sense
to
me
a
blade
sign
is
supposed
to
be
an
entry
point.
So
that's
why
we
we
reduced
those
as
well.
So
essentially
we
you
know
I
I
remem
removed
as
much
as
I
could
with
you
know,
with
what
the
building
owner
was
comfortable
with
and
that's
that's
the
result.
So
if
anyone
has
any
questions,
I'd
be
I'd
be
happy
to
answer.
B
Thank
you
at
this
point
would
be
a
time
for
public
comments
from
the
audience.
Mr
newell,
do
you
know
if
there's
anybody
wanting
to
comment
on
this
item.
A
Seems
like
one
of
the
questions
we
had
last
time
was:
removing
the
some
of
the
building
signage
was
that
a
change
that
was
made.
D
Yes,
yeah
there
was,
I
think,
they're
on
the
building
signage.
I
think
there
was
originally
seven
locations
that
has
been
reduced
to
four
well.
Okay,.
B
D
Absolutely
yeah
it'll
be
a
faux,
finish,
print
faux,
finish
paint
and
then
it
will
be
cleared
and
there
will
be
no
issue
with
maintenance
or
actual
rust.
B
A
Else,
yeah,
I
I
think
what
I
would
add
is
it's
the
difference
between
non-compliant
and
compliant,
and
the
staff
report
was
pretty
clear
and
you
know
the
issues
evaporated
that
we
were
concerned
about.
As
I
see
it,.
B
B
Thank
you.
Do
we
have
a
second
second,
second
by
john
walsh,
all
in
favor
aye
aye,
any
opposed
great.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
cross.
B
Okay,
now
we're
going
to
move
to
a
kind
of
different
sort
of
item
for
us
and
that's
a
discussion
of
the
changes
to
the
architectural
review
process
and
I'm
going
to
turn
the
meeting
over
now
to
planning
director
flynn
fagg,
who
has
been
very
involved
with
this
and
would
be
the
best
to
kind
of
lead
us
through
this
discussion.
At
the
end
of
this,
we
are
not
making
a
motion,
but
we're
going
to
see
whatever
comments.
The
aac
has
that
flynn
can
take
back
to
whomever
he
needs
to
work
with
flynn.
E
E
What
I'd
like
to
do?
This
is
a
little
bit
different
than
what
we
typically
do
with
the
architectural
advisory
committee.
In
that,
let's
see,
can
you
all
see
my
screen?
No.
A
E
Typically,
the
aac
is
not
involved
in
modifications
to
the
city's
zoning
code
ever
because
of
the
fact
that
this
will
affect
the
architectural
review
process.
We
would
like
the
aac
to
review
the
proposed
changes
and
we'll
see
if
we
can
get
my
screen
to
work
here
in
just
a
moment
there.
It
is
okay,
thanks
david,
so
let
me
start
at
the
very
beginning.
E
In
january
of
2020,
the
city
council
held
a
discussion
on
the
city's
architectural
review
process
and
our
entitlement
processes
in
general
and
at
that
city
council
meeting
they
provided
direction
to
staff
on
a
couple
of
measures
that
they
wanted
us
to
look
at
number
one.
They
wanted
us
to
look
at
reversing
the
architectural
review
and
planning
commission
process
and
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
the
reasons
for
doing
that
in
just
a
moment.
E
So
with
that
in
mind,
the
planning
commission
appointed
a
subcommittee
to
study
the
issue
in
july
of
2020
and
on
the
subcommittee
we
had
kathy
wehrmacht,
who
is
chair
of
the
planning
commission,
maria
song,
a
former
member
of
aac,
who
is
now
on
the
planning,
commission
and
then
chair.
Jaquay
representing
the
aac,
was
also
on
our
subcommittee.
E
It's
been
difficult
for
the
aac
to
approve
the
architecture
when
there
are
still
aspects
of
the
site
plan
that
hasn't
been
approved
by
the
planning
commission.
Yet
so
you
all
are
working
with
unclear
boundaries
in
terms
of
what
your
responsibilities
are.
E
Some
of
that.
For
example,
when
we
had
parker
hall,
the
expansion
to
the
parker
hotel
come
through
the
process.
Recently
we
had
a
lot
of
people
who
are
concerned
about
traffic
issues
and
some
other
aspects
of
the
development
that
is
really
outside
of
the
scope
of
the
aac
and
because
you
all
were
first
in
the
process.
E
The
subcommittee
also
looked
at
how
other
cities
do
this.
We
always
look
at
what
other
cities
in
the
coachella
valley
are
doing,
because
our
developers
go
to
the
other
cities
as
well.
Our
architects
are
signed
professionals,
they
work
in
the
other
cities,
so
we
looked
at
how
other
cities
do
it?
We
also
looked
at
a
number
of
cities
across
the
state
of
california
in
terms
of
ones
that
might.
E
For
how
to
do
architectural
review
and
then
finally,
we
also
look
to
the
american
planning
association,
my
professional
organization,
who
has
materials
on
the
architectural
review
process,
and
so
the
subcommittee
looked
at
all
of
those
things.
E
E
Some
of
the
things
that
we
learned
in
doing
that
study
process
is
that
palm
springs
has
no
separate
site
plan
approval
process
that
we
have
a
combined
process,
which
is
kind
of
unique
that
you
don't
see
in
other
cities.
Most
other
cities
keep
the
site
plan
review
process
separate
from
the
architectural
review
process.
So
we
looked
at
that
also
many
other
cities
employ
some
type
of
a
pre-submittal
conference
process
with
staff,
whereby
a
staff
member
will
sit
down
with
an
applicant
before
they
have
submitted.
Formal
applications
will
review
their
project
for
conformance
to
criteria.
E
Both
development
standards,
such
as
height
setbacks,
parking
spaces.
Things
like
that,
but
also
looking
at
any
architectural
criteria
that
that
city
might
have
another
thing
that
we
learned
from
the
study
was
that
architectural
review
is
typically
a
discrete
process
and
it's
usually
limited
to
specific
areas
of
the
city.
Palm
springs
again
is
kind
of
unique
in
that
it
applies
to
all
commercial
districts
in
our
city
and
also
extends
to
residential
districts
in
certain
cases
as
well.
So
there's
a
number
of
ways
that
we're
unique.
A
E
D
D
E
It
to
other
departments
for
review,
prepare
a
staff
report
step
two:
is
you
the
architectural
advisory
committee?
So
you
all
review
the
application.
You
make
your
comments
and
you
vote
on
the
application
step.
Three
is
planning
commission,
so
they
take
into
consideration
the
recommendation
of
the
aac
and
then
they
either
approve
it
or
in
certain
cases
where
city
council
approval
is
required,
for
example,
for
general
plan
amendments,
changes,
zone,
applications,
etc.
E
E
It
again
and
it
will
go
through
that
process,
and
so
it's
understandable
that
sometimes
applicants
are
frustrated
that
once
they've
submitted
their
formal
application,
there
are
still
a
number
of
redesigns
to
the
project,
and
so
what
we'd
like
to
look
at
is
a
slightly
different
process
where
we
spend
more
time
with
the
application
up
front
before
it
gets
to
planning,
commission
and
aac,
and
so
what
we're
proposing
is
that
step.
One
prior
to
the
formal
submittal
would
be
a
required
pre-submittal
conference
with
staff.
E
The
architectural
review
application
would
go
to
architectural
advisory
committee.
The
site
development
permit
application
would
go
to
the
planning
commission.
What
we
are
attempting
to
do
there
is
to
give
you
all
discrete
responsibilities
so
that
there
isn't
the
overlap
or
the
conflict
between
the
two
groups.
E
We
would
then
forward
that,
on
to
the
architectural
advisory
committee
to
review
the
architectural
review
application,
if
there
was
a
need
for
city
council
action
on
the
site
plan,
then
that
would
happen
in
between
the
planning,
commission
and
the
aac
review.
E
One
of
the
questions
that
has
come
up
in
the
planning
discussion
of
this
process
is:
would
the
planning,
commission
and
aac
still
see
the
same
materials,
even
though
there
are
two
technically
separate
applications?
And
the
answer
to
that
is:
yes,
I
think
it's
important
that
both
the
planning,
commission
and
the
aac
see
the
same
applications.
E
Let
me
go
on
and
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
this
process.
E
So
the
intent
of
the
pre-submittal
conference
is
to
wind
up
with
a
better
application,
as
we
take
that
through
the
process
going
into
the
proposed
application
types,
the
planning
commission
would
review
the
site
development
permit,
and
so
they
would
look
at
the
use.
They
would
look
at
the
layout
of
the
site
conformance
to
development
standards.
E
E
So
these
are
the
things
that
the
planning
commission
will
be
looking
at
number
one
they'll
look
at
conformance
to
the
general
plan.
Does
it
conform
to
the
general
plan
density
floor
area
ratio
use?
Secondly,
they'll
be
looking
at
the
use
relative
to
the
zone
district
where
the
site
is
located
and
impacts
to
adjacent
sites.
E
E
Another
thing
that
they're
looking
at
is
issues
relative
to
traffic
in
terms
of
the
number
of
trips
generated
or
vehicle
miles,
traveled,
which
is
the
new
standard.
Under
the
state,
they'll
also
look
at
the
alignment
of
driveways
or
streets
within
the
project
with
the
existing
grid.
Again
looking
at
issues
relative
to
the
layout
of
the
site
plan
now,
look
at
issues
of
on-site
circulation
both
for
vehicles
and
for
pedestrians,
look
at
adequacy
of
landscape
areas
and
open
space
utilities
are
they
available
next
to
the
site,
seqa
and
then
any
general
health
safety
and
welfare
impacts.
E
So
those
are
the
things
that
the
planning
commission
would
review
and
then
approve
as
part
of
the
site
development
permit
moving
on
to
the
architectural
review
process,
so
the
criteria
that
I'm
going
through
now.
These
are
the
things
that
you
all
as
the
aac
would
be
looking
at,
so
architectural
treatment
being
consistent
on
all
four
sides
of
the
building.
It's.
E
D
E
Are
those
consistent
with
the
principal
structure
so
looking
at
carports
and
things
like
that
on
the
site,
you'd,
look
at
the
composition
of
facade
elements
and
the
fenestration
in
terms
of
the
aesthetics
of
the
facade
treatment,
you
would
also
look
at
the
appropriateness
of
the
materials
relative
to
its
context.
So,
looking
at
the
adjacent
buildings
and
here
in
hillside
areas,
this
is
most
important.
E
E
Another
thing
that
you
would
look
at
is
shading
and
solar
orientation.
So
looking
at
window
openings,
is
there
adequate
shading
of
those
openings
in
terms
of
the
building
and
its
layout
relative
to
the
seasons
and
the
sun
landscape
plan
is
another
important
component
that
you
would
review
consistency
for
our
water,
efficient
landscape
ordinance
and
for
any.
D
E
We
would
also
look
at
sign
locations
and
placement
in
terms
of
where
those
might
be
located,
either
on
the
building
or
on
the
site
and
the
appropriateness
of
those
locations,
screening
of
mechanical
equipment
and
service
areas
and
then,
finally,
consistency
with
any
adopted
design
standards.
Currently
miralon
has
design
standards.
The
asena
development
has
design
standards
and
any
other
design
standards
that
we
may
adopt
at
any
point
in
the
future.
E
E
E
E
Keep
in
mind,
however,
that
those
are
just
comments
and
not
part
of
their
approval
of
the
site
plan
once
they
are
approved
at
the
planning
commission
level.
The
application
would
then
be
forwarded
to
the
architectural
advisory
committee,
and
you
all
would
review
for
the
architectural
character
and
conformance
to
our
architectural
standards.
E
E
Next,
they
would
formally
submit
their
application.
In
this
case
it
would
just
be
an
architectural
review
application,
so
one
application
instead
of
the
two
and
then
it
would
go
to
aac,
and
you
all
would
review
and
approve
the
project
at
that
point.
So
this
helps
to
shorten
the
process
by
removing
planning
commission
from
these
types
of
reviews
and
leaving
it
solely
to
the
responsibility
of
the
aac,
and
so
that's
how
we
would
improve
the
process
there
with
those
particular
types
of
applications.
E
A
E
E
A
B
D
E
So
those
are
the
changes
that
we're
proposing.
There's
a
couple
of
other
steps
that
we'd
like
to
look
at.
In
addition
to
looking
at
changes
to
our
architectural
review
process.
E
The
palm
springs
architectural
alliance,
which
is
a
citizens
alliance
of
design
professionals
here
in
the
community,
has
offered
to
help
in
that
regard.
What
we
might
recommend
is
once
city
council
approves
the
architectural
review
process
changes
that
they
look
at
putting
together
a
task
force
or
subcommittee
to
study
the
issue
of
design
guidelines.
E
That
would
include
a
representative
from
the
aac
from
planning,
commission
and
members
of
the
design
community.
So
that's
more
or
less
phase
two
of
the
project
that
we
would
like
the
city
council
to
consider
and
something
that
we
think
could
help
in
speeding
applicants
through
the
process
by
having
design
guidelines
that
they
can
review
and
look
to
as
they're
working
through
the
schematic
design
of
a
project.
E
So
I
see
this
individual
is
working
closely
with
the
aac,
as
projects
are
brought
through
the
review
process,
so
that
would
be
another
critical
component
that
would
help
us
be
more
successful
in
trying
to
get
a
better
product
before
you
as
well.
So
those
are
some
of
the
additional
considerations
that
we
also
need
to
look
at,
and
these
are
things
that
I'll
be
presenting
to
the
city
council
as
they
begin
their
discussion
on
changes
to
the
architectural
review
process
with
that.
That
concludes
my
presentation
to
you
this
evening.
E
As
chair
jakeway
indicated
we're
not
taking
a
vote
on
this,
but
rather
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
to
get
your
comments
here
this
evening
on
the
proposed
changes.
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
questions
in
terms
of
how
this
process
would
work.
If
I
wasn't
quite
clear
in
explaining
that,
but
I'd
like
to
forward
your
comments
onto
the
planning
commission,
the
planning
commission
will
be
having
a
formal
public
hearing
on
this
on
wednesday
evening,
and
so
I
would
present
your
comments
to
the
planning
commission
as
part
of
my
presentation
on
wednesday
with
that.
E
That
concludes
my
portion
of
the
agenda.
Mr
chair
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
you
for
questions
of
the
aac
and
comments.
Okay,.
B
And
let
me
make
one
comment
for
the
committee
notice
that
this
committee
will
have
a
new
name
instead
of
being
the
architectural
advisory
committee.
It
will
be
the
architectural
review
committee
and
that's
indicating
that
we
are
not
advising
the
planning
commission
and
they
make
the
final
choices
on
the
architecture.
B
B
B
E
E
E
If
they
have
an
approved
site
plan
from
the
planning
commission,
it
doesn't
mean
that
they
go
back
to
square
one.
It
just
means
for
the
architectural
portion
of
that
application,
so
the
architectural
materials,
you
know
the
fenestration,
the
composition
of
the
facades
etc.
That's
the
portion
that
they
would
need
to
resubmit
and
go
through
again.
E
B
We
looking
at
robert
robert.
A
Yeah
hi,
so
a
couple
of
things
on
your
matrix
of
the
proposed
changes.
I
noticed
in
the
middle
under
architectural
view,
site
plan
review
major
under
the
new
multi-family
residential,
that
is
up
to
planning,
commission
and
aac
or
arc,
would
not
be
involved
and
when
I
think
about
miralon
and
the
subcommittees
that
we
had
between
aac
and
planning
commission
to
review
the
architecture
of
the
individual
houses
individually
and
as
a
whole.
That
seemed
like.
E
E
It
limits
the
reviews
that
you
can
have
relative
to
architectural
requirements,
but
it
doesn't
limit
all
residential
reviews.
So
my
mistake
there
for
those
that
aren't
subject
to
the
state
streamlining
they
would
still
be
subject
to
architectural
review
and
mirlon
is
a
good
example.
E
So,
for
example,
when
a
new
single
family
subdivision
is
proposed,
where
you're
going
to
have
models
that
are
repeated
throughout
the
development
that
would
still
come
forward
to
the
aac
to
review
the
architecture
of
those
houses,
certain
multi-family
projects
would
still
come
before
you
for
review
and
approval
of
the
architecture
as
well.
It's
only
those
that
would
be
accepted
under
state
law
that
wouldn't
come
before
you.
So
again.
Let
me
make
a
change
to
that
chart.
A
And
then
the
other
example
that
comes
to
mind
is
the
proposed
new
condominium
project
on
the
virgin
virgin
hotel
site
downtown.
That
project
came
before
aac
and
I
don't
think
it
really.
The
message
of
what
the
committee
was
proposing
or
thought
would
be
better
was
that
that
that
project
was
designed
to
around
a
courtyard
and
it
basically
filled
the
site
and
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
the
committee
felt
that
that
was
not
the
appropriate
plan
for
a
project
downtown.
A
E
We
have
really
four
specific
plans
that
have
been
adopted
where
this
would
impact
the
review
process,
the
downtown
specific
plan,
which
is
basically
the
downtown
redevelopment,
the
desert
palisades
specific
plan,
which
is
primarily
the
individual
single-family
hillside
homes.
In
that
area.
We
have
the
college
park
specific
plan,
which
is
the
former
college
of
the
desert
site
on
the
north
end
of
town,
and
then
we
have
the
section
14
specific
plan.
E
All
of
those
in
some
ways
talk
about
the
architectural
review
process
as
it
currently
stands
and
may
need
to
be
amended
at
some
point
in
the
future.
In
discussing
those
changes,
the
planning
commission
has
some
ideas.
What
they
would
like
to
see
happen
with
the
downtown,
in
particular,
one
of
the
things
that
they
have
suggested
is
for
the
downtown
that
there
would
be
a
joint
pre-application
of
the
aac
and
the
planning
commission
to
discuss
those
issues
in
advance
of
the
formal
submittal.
E
So
that's
one
of
the
things
that
we
might
see
happen
as
part
of
this.
If
we
were
to
amend
the
specific
plan
to
do
that,
but
just
talking
generally,
where
there
is
a
a
significant
difference
of
opinion
in
terms
of
the
planning
commission
and
the
aac
relative
to
a
site
plan,
I
don't
know
that
we'll
have
any
extreme
examples
like
what
we
just
saw
in
the
downtown
area
in
our
normal
process,
but
occasionally
for
more
complex
developments.
E
B
A
E
That
you're
not
preparing
separate
materials
for
one
body
and
for
the
other
planning
commission,
really
wants
to
see
the
architecture
that
you
all
are
going
to
decide
and
I'm
assuming
that
you
all
really
want
to
see
the
site
plan
materials
as
well,
and
so
we
thought
it
would
be
important
that
the
submittal
be
the
same
for
both
bodies,
but
just
two
separate
application
forms.
E
What
we
are
attempting
to
do
is
because
we're
splitting
this
process
into
aac
and
planning
commission
two
different
application
forms
one
application
package
in
effect,
we're
also
trying
to
keep
the
fees
the
same
as
they
are
now.
The
last
thing
we
want
to
do
is
to
increase
fees
for
this
process,
and
so
we're
going
to
be
very
mindful
of
that.
Now,
in
certain
cases,
for
example,
where
only
aac
is
going
to
be
reviewing
items
like
hillside
houses,
you
should
see
a
reduction
in
the
fee
for
those
applications,
because
it's
not
going
to
two
bodies.
E
It's
less
staff
time
for
us
to
prepare
two
reports.
One
report,
instead
of
two
reports,
so
we're
trying
to
make
it
not
be
as
cumbersome
as
it
sounds,
keep
in
mind
that
we're
also
moving
towards
an
electronic
submittal
software
system
here
in
the
near
future.
E
E
So
we're
trying
to
be
mindful
of
that.
In
some
ways
it
is
a
little
cumbersome
having
two
applications,
but
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
is
to
keep
the
application
standardized
in
terms
of
the
submittal
materials.
Okay,.
A
E
E
They
will
need
to
look
at
things
as
that
as
well.
The
one
of
the
key
things
that
the
planning
commission
is
looking
at
is
not
only
conformance
to
development
standards
but
impacts
to
adjacent
properties,
and
so,
where
you
place
your
dumpster,
for
example,
is
it
next
to
a
single-family
property
or
is
it
at
the
rear
of
the
property
where
it
doesn't
impact?
E
Others
they'll
need
to
look
at
that,
so
they
will
look
at
the
placement
of
those
things,
but
in
terms
of
the
materials,
the
screening
things
like
that,
that's
where
you
all,
as
the
architectural
advisory
committee,
come
into
play.
Okay,.
A
E
E
One
of
the
things
that
we've
discussed
at
the
planning
commission
level
is
to
do
a
review
if
this
process
is
adopted
to
do
a
review
after
12
months
to
sit
down
with
planning,
commission
and
aac
and
see
if
it
really
is
working
but
we're
hoping
that
we
don't
have
to
go
back
and
forth
between
the
two
bodies
by
keeping
their
review
responsibilities
separate
one
of
the
questions
that
has
come
up
and
I'm
glad
you
brought
this
up
tom-
is
what
happens
for
appeals.
Let's
say,
for
example,
that
the
aac
denies
the
architectural
review.
E
E
We
look
to
the
city
of
santa
monica
in
terms
of
their
process,
and
what
they
have
found
is
that
they
have
very
few
appeals
after
the
site
plan
has
been
approved
by
the
planning
commission.
The
architecture
is
then
reviewed
by
their
architectural
review
board,
but
they
haven't
had
many
appeals
of
the
architectural
approvals
or
denials
okay.
Great.
Thank
you.
A
One
on
the
I
notice
you
addressed
it,
the
pre-submittal
conference
with
staff-
I
I
was
as
you
were,
reading
it.
A
I
was
thinking
that
there
should
be
some
architectural
representation
in
that
session
to
make
sure
that
they're
prepping
the
applicant
for
what
we're
going
to
be
looking
for,
and
you
said
you
were
going
to
potentially
staff
it
and
what
I
was
wondering
is
if
it
potentially
could
be
a
rotating
position,
one
of
the
members
of
the
a
aac
or
arc
that
could
rotate
into
that
and
play
that
role
for
those
pre
pre-submittal
conferences.
E
E
To
ask
our
volunteer
board
and
committee
members
to
be
available
like
they
would
need
to
be
for
the
pre-submitted
conferences,
having
managed
a
pre-submittal
conference
in
another
city.
It
takes
a
lot
of
time
in
terms
of
the
scheduling
of
the
conference,
reviewing
the
materials
and
then
the
actual
meetings
themselves.
A
Right,
okay,
great
and
one
question
and,
and
those
pre-submittal
that
includes,
I
remember
they
used
to
call
it.
The
development
committee
and
they'd.
Have
you
know
fire
in
their
engineering
planning?
Is
it
a
similar
type
group
of
departments
that
would
be
reviewing
the
applications.
E
To
the
degree
that
we
can
yes,
it
would
be
a
similar
type
of
situation
based
on
the
application
pipe,
for
example,
for
a
hillside
house.
We
probably
don't
need
the
other
disciplines
represented
if
it's
in
a
subdivision,
that's
already
been
approved
and
is
already
graded,
but
in
other
types
of
situations
you
know
major
new
development,
then
fire
and
engineering
would
need
to
be
invited,
so
it
would
be
based
on
the
application
type.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
I
have
a
question
on
it
says,
under
conditional
use
permits
to
cell
towers
that
the
planning
commission
would
approve
those.
What
about
in
a
situation
like
we
had
in
a
couple
meetings
back
where
they're,
putting
extending
the
elevator
shafts
in
the
parking
structure,
that's
very
visible
and
seems
to
be
more
of
an
architectural
thing.
What
about
something
like
that?
How
would
that
be
affected?.
E
E
Let
me
think
about
that
in
terms
of
how
we
might
handle
that,
because,
again,
that's
a
great
point
where
we
would
want
aac
to
look
at
the
architecture
and
that's
not
going
to
be
for
every
cell
tower,
but
certain
ones
where
they're
located
on
tops
of
buildings
or
adding
onto
an
existing
building.
We
would
want
architectural
review.
So
thank
you
for
bringing
that
up.
That's
a
good
point.
A
Yeah
flynn,
as
you
look
at
this,
if
it
if
it
were
to
gel
in
terms
of
all
of
the
specifics
when
and
how,
would
it
roll
out
like
one
big
cut
over
date,
or
is
this
something
that
would
piecemeal
ramp
up.
E
E
So
we
would
probably
need
to
give
ourselves
a
couple
of
months
if
city
council
is
amenable
to
having
a
new
staff
person
or
adding
a
staff
person.
That
would
certainly
take
time
for
us
to
be
able
to
hire
that
person
right.
I
would
want
to
have
someone
available
before
I
begin
this
process
yeah
and
start
going
down
the
road
with
pre-submittal
conferences,
because
we
really
need
to
have
someone
with
architectural
experience
in
order
to
initiate
it.
So
I
anticipate
that
it
would
take
us
several
months
in
order
to
begin
the
process.
E
That
would
also
give
applicants
time
to
understand
the
changes
to
the
process
and
to
be
able
for
us
to
line
up
applicants
into
the
proper
channels
in
terms
of
going
through
the
process.
So,
for
example,
if
someone
has
a
hillside
house
where
the
new
process
will
only
require
review
by
the
aac,
we
wouldn't
want
to
take
them
to
planning
commission
and
then
turn
around
and
say.
Oh
only
aac
is
necessary.
So
again,
I
think
we
need
a
couple
of
months
to
really
get
that
ready
and
get
it
ready
to
go.
E
A
Is
there
any
change
to
at
what
point
the
public
is
engaged
in
the
process
and
how
they're
notified.
E
Here's
what
we're
hoping
is
that,
because
the
planning
commission
will
be
seeing
projects
first,
they
will
be
able
to
engage
with
the
planning
commission.
At
that
point,
they
would
also
be
able
to
engage
with
the
aac,
as
the
project
comes
to
aac
for
architectural
review
and
approval,
so
they
would
still
have
two
opportunities
for
most
application
types
where
that
would
change
is
for
signed
programs
and
for
hillside
houses
or
houses
on
major
thoroughfares,
the
aac,
as
they
are
the
only
ones
who
will
be
looking
at
those
applications.
A
Those
say,
for
instance,
you
have
a
neighbor
on
a
hillside
home
who,
who
would
they
appeal
to?
In
other
words,
say
the
aac
approves
the
hillside
project
and
the
owner
is,
would
they
have
any
adjacent
property
owner?
Would
they
have
any
option
to
appeal
either
to
the
city
council
for
finance,
correct.
E
They
would
on
architectural
approvals.
The
appeal
process
would
be
to
the
planning
commission,
so
they
would
be
able
to
appeal
to
the
planning
commission,
just
as
we
brought
up
the
issue
of
public
comment.
Currently,
our
ordinance
requires
a
notice
for
hillside
houses
that
we
do
notice
to
the
adjacent
property
owners.
That
process
will
continue
so
that
adjacent
property
owners
are
aware
and
have
the
ability
to
comment
at
the
aac
level
or
appeal
in
the
case
of
an
approval
or
denial.
B
E
We
had
that
discussion
at
a
staff
level
that
that
may
be
appropriate
with
pickleball
coming
all
the
rage
now
in
palm
springs.
It
seems.
B
I
might
not
be
understanding
that,
but
I
would
think
that
we
would
have
to
review
any
change
to
a
building,
even
if
it
didn't
increase
the
square
footage
and
as
an
example,
if
you
look
at
the
kauffman
house,
you
know
we
had
the
angels
of
the
harrises
come
in
and
do
that
spectacular
renovation,
but
somebody
else
who
bought
that
might
say
geez.
I
hate
these
still
louvers.
I
want
to
enclose
this
upper
deck
with
glass
windows
and
it
would
totally
demolish
the
integrity
of
the
house.
E
I
don't
think
so.
One
of
the
things
that
this
doesn't
reference
is
the
fact
that,
under
the
historic
preservation
ordinance,
the
historic
site
preservation
board
has
to
review
alterations
to
class
1
and
class
2
structures,
including
single
family.
So
there
will
be
a
review
that
goes
on
it's
just
that
it
won't
necessarily
be
at
the
aac
okay.
Thank
you.
The
historic
site
preservation
board
would
do
that
review.
B
E
E
This
doesn't
go
forward
to
the
city
council
until
march
the
20
I'm
looking
at
my
calendar
march,
the
25th.
So
if
you
do
have
questions
or
comments,
feel
free
to
email
me
between
now
and
you
know
march
the
25th
that
still
gives
us
the
opportunity
to
look
at
those
and
maybe
make
some
tweaks
along
the
way.
If
we
need
to
do
that,
so
there
still
is
the
opportunity
for
input.