Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-22 CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 22, 2013 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 12:30 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioners Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Chris Van Vliet, Chair X 16 2 Karel Lambell, Vice Chair X 17 1 John Vuksic X 16 2 Allan Levin X 17 1 Paul Clark X 17 1 Gene Colombini X 18 Michael McAuliffe X 14 1 Jim McIntosh X 14 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Eric Ceja, Associate Planner Pedro Rodriquez, Senior Code Officer Janine Judy, Recording Secretary Cancelled meetings: 05/28/13, 10/08/13 111111. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 10, 2013 & September 24, 2013 Action: Commissioner Levin moved to approve the September 10, 2013 and September 24, 2013 meeting minutes. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Vuksic and carried by a 7-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Lambell absent. ARCHITECTURAL RE W COMMISSION ' MINUTES October 22, 2013 IV. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 13-306 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JOHN JAUREQUI, 43-760 Warner Trail, Palm Desert, CA, 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of a color change. LOCATION: 43-760 Warner Trail ZONE: R-1, 9000 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented a color change that had previously been presented to the Commission and continued to allow the applicant to choose different colors. The applicant wants to stay with the current color palette and recently has painted over some of the green elements with brown, which is another one of his palette colors. At this point, that is the only change that has occurred since the last meeting. Mr. Swartz presented photos of the house with the revised colors and stated the applicant has submitted several letters from his neighbors indicating their approval of the colors. Commissioner Vuksic pointed out that at the previous meeting, the Commission discussed that a strong color would need to be an accent color because they thought the green color may be too intense. MR. JOHN JAUREQUI, applicant, made reference to a previous comment about setting a precedence and presented photos of other homes in Palm Desert that has a mixture of colors. Most of these photos were taken in his neighborhood along with commercial buildings. He also took photos of non-earth tone colors in his neighborhood. He made reference to ordinance 25.56.520 - Exterior Modifications. The Commission reviewed one of the applicant's photos of a commercial building that had gold and green colors. They explained that this building also came to this Commission as a code enforcement case and the approval was quite a struggle because the owner had to come back to this Commission a couple of times before the colors were toned down. G:," nningUanineJudyWRC\1Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 2 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE"":W COMMISSION MINUTES � `"v, October 22, 2013 Commissioner Vuksic said commercial buildings are different from houses and when buildings tend to have stronger architecture you can pull off aggressive colors, but it's harder to do that successfully in developments that are similar to each other. MR. JAUREQUI pointed out that in newer neighborhoods you do find diverse colors. His neighborhood is older with outdated colors and felt that a little diversity is not a negative thing. If anything it's a change of scenery. He has received overwhelming support from his neighbors who thinks the house looks nice, especially after he added more of the brown color. Commissioner Vuksic thought it was important that the Commission use their own judgment and act as a body that protects situations when something is introduced where a lot of neighbors would rather not like to see a house painted so aggressively. MR. JAUREQUI said it was a possibility, but it wasn't fair to assume that is what the neighbors really feel. Commissioner Vuksic expressed again that to have such a strong color palette a house needs to have architecture that is strong enough to pull it off, but he didn't see it here. Commissioner Clark asked if landscape would help moderate or mitigate the issue. Chair Van Vliet said landscape may help but they shouldn't rely on landscape. The Commission continued to discuss the green color and saturation issues. MR. FRANK TAYLOR, a resident of Palm Desert Country Club, said this house went from white to green and brown and felt it was an aggressive change. There are a lot of older homes in this area that have been repainted that probably didn't go through the approval process. He felt this body was a good place to look at these things as they come up. He asked if this house color was in south Palm Desert would this color be allowed. Mr. Swartz stated that if the Commission were to deny this today, the applicant would have 15 days to appeal their decision to the City Council or the Commission can continue the case to allow the applicant to choose a different shade of green. GAPlanning\JanineJudyVARC\\Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 3 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE` W COMMISSION MINUTES October 22, 2013 Commissioner Vuksic said the green is definitely an issue and it just may be the way the colors are composed. MR. JAUREQUI said he didn't want to change the colors and mentioned that at this time he was not able to continue with his landscape plans because he is a Federal employee and has not received a check in over a month. He pointed out that the landscaping is a priority for him because he is concerned with his house having a beautiful appearance. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to deny Case MISC 13-306 based on the green color. Motion was seconded by Commission Colombini and carried by a 7-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Lambell absent. 2. CASE NO: MISC 13-319 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PREST-VUKSIC ARCHITECTS, 44-530 San Pablo, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a building remodel. LOCATION: 73-811 El Paseo ZONE: C-1, S.P. Commissioner Vuksic recused himself from this project and left the conference room. Mr. Eric Ceja, Associate Planner, presented the applicant's request for facade changes, building color change, parking and landscape improvements for an existing vacant building on El Paseo. He presented a materials board for the Commission's review and summarized the staff report. Overall, the facade changes incorporated into the building update the current design to better match higher-end retail stores along El Paseo. Changes to the existing rear parking lot also compliment the building's facade changes. Staff is supportive of the requested architectural changes and recommends that the Commission approve the facade updates. He recommended that the final designs of the awnings and shade structure come back at a later date with further details provided to the Commission for review and approval. He then presented a slideshow presentation for the Commission's review. G^=)nning\.Janine JudylARC\1Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 4 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE`"-W COMMISSION MINUTES SNW *401 October 22, 2013 MR. DAVID PREST, Prest-Vuksic Architects, said they located the shade structure on the south side occupying 10 spaces. This structure will be in the middle of the parking lot and not against the building. They may change the design a little but it will be the same quality as presented today. Mr. Bagato said staff was concerned because the construction details were not provided and they have asked the applicant to return with that information. MR. PREST said this will come back during the construction document stage. He described the material of the structure as steel with canvas shade cloth and indirect lighting inside. Chair Van Vliet asked where the mechanical equipment will be located on the building. MR. PREST said all the mechanical equipment is already there and hidden behind a pretty big parapet wall. The building will be repainted white, the window frames will be brushed stainless steel, and the awnings will be purple as an accent color. They proposed a couple different plans to raise the sidewalk out front because as you walk in the main entry from El Paseo you actually step up two steps to get to the finished floor of the building, but none of these plans were accepted by Public Works or the Planning Department. All the changes in grade will happen inside the building. Commissioner McIntosh asked about the standing seam metal roof and MR. PREST said it will be a metal color with a galvanized look. Commissioner McAuliffe asked about the ADA parking in the back. MR.PREST explained that when covered parking is provided, one of those spaces have be handicap so they moved one of the handicap spots currently in the lot to the covered parking structure. They do not have any ADA issues with that. Commissioner Colombini asked if they will have lighting on the structure. MR. PREST said they will add sconces on the wall along with some in-ground lighting. They are also re-landscaping the entire area, but the four palm trees out front will remain. GAPlanning\JanineJudyWRC\1Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 5 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE' .W COMMISSION MINUTES October 22, 2013 Commissioner Levin asked staff if there were any issues with the tree requirement for parking by putting in the shade structure. Mr. Bagato said the shade structure can be used in lieu of trees, but landscaping around the building and parking is required. Commissioner Clark asked if the Commission was approving the landscape plan and Mr. Ceja said the Landscape Specialist gave preliminary approval and will return to her for final approval. ACTION: Commissioner Colombini moved to approve as presented subject to shade structure and awnings returning to the Architectural Review Commission for review and approval. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Clark and carried by a 6-0-0-2 vote, with Commissioners Lambell and Vuksic absent. 3. CASE NO: MISC 13-337 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): COUNTRY CLUB AWNINGS, 74885 Joni Drive #6, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval to install an awning above the store entrance; Clementine. LOCATION: 72-990 El Paseo ZONE: P.C. (3) Mr. Eric Ceja, Associate Planner, presented a request for an awning over the main entrance for Clementine Gourmet Marketplace and Cafe. The applicant is proposing a striped design to compliment their branding. There is no signage proposed for the awning. Staff has no concerns with the awnings and how it relates to the building and is recommending approval. The Commission reviewed the plans and felt the color mix is attractive and the striping will make it more interesting and lively. ACTION: Commissioner Levin moved to approve. Motion seconded by Commissioner Clark and carried by a 7-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Lambell absent. G:\F'I nning\Janine Judy\ARC11Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 6 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL REN`W COMMISSION MINUTES `'" ` October 22, 2013 4. CASE NO: MISC 11-323 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): STARBUCKS COFFEE COMPANY, Attn: Jon Alpert, 17700 Newhope Avenue, Suite 200, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revisions to previous approved awning; Starbucks. LOCATION: 73-520 Ell Paseo ZONE: C-1, S.P. Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented a request for revisions to a previously approved awning for Starbucks. A part of the original approval was to remove the hedges along San Pablo to make room for outdoor patio seating, however they are no longer proposing those changes and the landscaping will remain the same. They are now proposing to put black metal awnings over the windows along El Paseo and San Pablo. Signage will come back to the Commission and is not a part of the approval. Staff is recommending approval. The Commission asked about the signage and MS. CANDICE DOYLE, Architects Orange, pointed out that the signage on the entry door will be individual letters and the logo disc will be updated with the new siren logo minus the lettering. Commissioner Vuksic asked the applicant if they were no longer planning on having the seating on the San Pablo side. MS. DOYLE said that was correct but they will continue with the fenced-in patio area along El Paseo. Commissioner Colombini was concerned with how the lettering would come together on the "Starbucks Coffee" signage that sticks up above the canopy and said there were no details on how they would be mounted to the C-channel. MS. DOYLE said the lettering would be internally lit behind the C-channel so the lettering wouldn't be visible. The Commission suggested they bring the details back for staff approval. The Commission discussed the amount of seating outside and Mr. Bagato said they are limited to the amount of seating outside because of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP). They originally had G:\Planning\JanineJudyWRC\1Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 7 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL REW COMMISSION MIINUTES October 22, 2013 more outdoor seating, but have now made the interior bigger and will transfer some of the tables and chairs inside. They can amend the CUP later if they want more seating. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve subject to signage details returning to staff for review and approval. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 7-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Lambell absent. 5. CASE NO: MISC RV 13-298 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DOUGLAS AUER, 43-005 Connecticut Street, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of sailboat stored in the front yard. LOCATION: 43-005 Connecticut Street ZONE: R-1 Commissioner Clark recused himself from this project and left the conference room. Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented a request for approval to store a sailboat in a front yard carport. About three years ago, the City Council approved a new Recreation Vehicle ordinance which includes campers, camping trailers, travel trailers, air craft, motor homes, utility trailers, and watercraft. This sailboat is currently parked in a side-entry carport. At the present time, it is not visible from the front view because of the shrubbery, but it can be seen along the back. Staff has talked with the applicant and recommended enclosing the carport, but the applicant is proposing to screen it with shrubbery or a hedge along the back. Mr. Swartz presented photos of the carport for the Commission's review and stated this was advertised to the applicant's neighbors and staff has not received any comments in favor or opposition to. There was a complaint about the sailboat and Code Enforcement cited the applicant. Staff is recommending that the applicant enclose the carport or work with staff on screening alternatives. Commissioner Levin pointed out that the ordinance totally forbids RVs in front of the house. Commissioner Vuksic said the ordinance G:J'I nningl.anineJudyWRCllMinutes120131131022min.docx Page 8 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE` 7W COMMISSION MINUTES `"W. '%� October 22, 2013 states that it has to be 100% screened. Mr. Swartz said that is why staff is recommending that this carport be enclosed. MR. DOUGLAS AUER, applicant, stated that the boat has been in his carport for about 25 years and didn't think it was fair that he is no longer allowed to store it there. MR. FRANK TAYLOR, resident of Palm Desert County Club, stated he was on the Recreation Vehicle Committee a couple of years ago and when the ordinance was put into effect it didn't allow for any RVs in the front of the house. They were allowed on the sides or the rear of the house if there was space there along with screening. People have been trying to put boats under carports for a long time and the direction they have been given is that they have to enclose the carports, which then becomes a garage. Again he stated that nothing is allowed in front of the house under the new ordinance. Commissioner Vuksic said the spirit of the ordinance is to keep people from storing RVs in front of their house. He was concerned because there are a lot of carports out there and now the Commission is back to deciding what is substantially screened; which was a nightmare for many years. The ordinance is clear not to store large things in front of houses. Chair Van Vliet asked staff for their technical definition. Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Community Development Director, said this carport is original to the structure and not added on and would be considered part of the structure. However, she was not comfortable with the landscape solution since landscape solutions have failed time and again to provide adequate screening for situations like this. The City doesn't want to see stuff junking up the front of houses and if we can't see it because it's inside the structure then she's comfortable with that. That is something that would be defensible from a code enforcement standpoint. Mr. Pedro Rodriguez, Code Enforcement Supervisor, said the ordinance states that if a carport is enclosed to meet the conformity of the building code and is a lawful structure it would no longer be a code violation. Commissioner Colombini wanted clarification of the ordinance since this boat has been stored there for at least 25 years and now it's illegal for it to be stored there. Mr. Bagato said the last revision to the ordinance said that any RVs stored in a carport had one year to come into compliance. The Commission discussed the ordinance, landscaping solutions, and enclosing the carport. G:\PlanningWanireJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2013\131022min.dou Page 9 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE` W COMMISSION MINUTES October 22, 2013 Commissioner Vuksic made a motion that the boat cannot be stored in the carport unless applicant builds a garage to store the boat. Commissioner McIntosh made the second. Chair Van Wet asked for further comments. Chair Van Viet said the only way to meet the ordinance would be to convert the carport into a garage or to substantially screen it. The Commission and staff discussed the terminology for substantial screening versus 100% screening which is part of the new ordinance. Mr. Bagato read the ordinance and said, evidence must be submitted illustrating that there is an exceptional or extraordinary circumstance or conditions applicable to the property involved or intended for use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. Commissioner Levin asked if the applicant could appeal this or is it something that City Council can override. Mr. Bagato said the applicant can appeal to City Council. The Commission continued to discuss the ordinance. Mr. Bagato said if this was in front of the carport, it would be within the setback and it wouldn't be allowed. However, the carport is in the front of the house and within the setback; it is within the building envelope. It may be a good thing to present to City Council to give them an opportunity to clarify some things within the code. Commissioner McIntosh asked Commissioner Vuksic if his motion still stands. Commissioner Vuksic said yes and expressed that this doesn't meet the spirit of the ordinance. Chair Van Vliet reminded the Commission that there was a motion and a second on the floor to convert the carport into a garage and asked for additional comments. Commissioner McAuliffe stated he didn't like it and didn't know if this meets the criteria for the exception. This is like opening Pandora's Box and the City doesn't want to fight this with every other carport that comes in for review. Commissioner Levin suggested continuing this so the applicant can come back with screening alternatives. Commissioner Vuksic withdrew his original motion. He made a motion to continue for sixty (60) days subject to applicant submitting screening alternatives. Commissioner Levin made the second. G:\I'nnning\Janine Judy'ARC\1Minutes\2013\131022min.dou Page 10 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE%' -W COMMISSION MINUTES I'"° 1-401 October 22, 2013 ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to continue Case RV 13-298 for sixty (60) days subject to applicant submitting screening alternatives. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 6-0-0-2 vote, with Commissioners Clark and Lambell absent. 6. CASE NO: MISC 13-218 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): D.R. HORTON, Attn: Jennifer O'Leary, 2280 Wardlow Circle #100, Corona, CA 92880 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of construction plans for new homes; Sonrisa. LOCATION: Spanish Walk/Gerald Ford ZONE: P.R.-5 Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, presented approval of construction plans for new homes at Sonrisa. This project previously received preliminary approval with conditions that had walls on the front elevations increased to 2" x 6" to allow for 2" reveals and - wrapped around corners where appropriate. In reviewing those plans, staff noticed that Plans 1 and 3 didn't wrap where appropriate and Plans 4 and 5 didn't wrap on the second story elements, which could be the most visible. He recommended approving the construction drawings with those changes. Commissioner Clark reminded the Commission that he had some concerns with the blank walls on the two-story units that were adjacent to a road or public right-of-way and asked if that was corrected. Mr. Bagato said he will talk to the applicant because the plans didn't show specifically which ones were on the corners. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve construction drawings subject to: 1) on Plans 1 and 3, wrap corner; 2) on Plans 4 and 5, wrap corners on 2"d story room; and 3) on Plan 5, increase front to 2" x 6" on 2nd story room to allow for 2" reveals where appropriate. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Colombini and carried by a 7-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Lambell absent. GAPlanning\JanireJudy\ARC\\Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 11 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE114 ;W COMMISSION MINUTES October 22, 2013 7. CASE NO: MISC 13-218 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): D.R. HORTON, Attn: Jennifer O'Leary, 2280 Wardlow Circle #100, Corona, CA 92880 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of construction plans for new homes; Esperanza. LOCATION: Spanish Walk/Gerald Ford ZONE: P.R.-5 Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, presented final approval of construction plans for new homes at Esperanza. He indicated there were no changes and recommended approval of plans as shown. ACTION: Commissioner Levin moved to approve as presented. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Vuksic and carried by a 7-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Lambell absent. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: MISC 13-206 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): AUTO ZONE DEVELOPMENT CORP. 123 South Front Street, Memphis, TN 38102 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a new building design and landscape plan: Auto Zone. LOCATION: 34-860 Monterey Avenue ZONE: P.C. (3) Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented a new building design and landscape plan for Auto Zone in the Gateway Shopping Center. He presented an aerial map and photos of the project and described the slope of the pad and the elevations off Monterey Avenue and Dick Kelly Drive. Signage is shown but is not part of the approval and the applicant will resubmit the signage. All the mechanical equipment will be screened behind the parapets. He presented a materials board for the Commission's review and pointed out where each color would be located. Landscape is also G:\fl:nning\Janine Judy\ARC\1Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 12 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE`-'W COMMISSION MINUTES `a October 22, 2013 a part of this approval, but only for the conceptual design of the plant material. He pointed out where the plants and trees would be located. The Landscape Specialist has given preliminary approval of the plant location and plant palette and the final landscape plans will be submitted to the City and CVWD. Mr. Swartz stated the architect was not able to attend the meeting; however Mr. Kurt Saxon, Saxon Engineering was available for comments. The Commission reviewed and discussed the building offsets, punch details, and parapets. Commissioner Vuksic suggested increasing the building offsets to at least meet the standards of the other buildings that currently exist out there. He asked for clarification on the punch details to make sure they were set in far enough. The parapets need to be four-sided on all the elevations and the baseline parapets need to be at least as high as the mechanical equipment horizontally. The Commission and MR. SAXON discussed continuing the project off calendar so the architect can return to address their suggestions. ACTION: Commissioner Clark moved to continue Case MISC 13-206 off calendar subject to: 1) increasing the building offsets; 2) submit clarification on the punch details; 3) parapets shall be four-sided on all elevations; 4) the sides of the elements on the north side of building shall return at least 2/3rds of the width; and 5) baseline parapets shall be at least as high as the mechanical equipment measured horizontally. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 7-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Lambell absent. 2. CASE NO: MISC ODP 13-210 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CAFE DES BEAUX-ARTS, 73- 640 El Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a new awning and outdoor dining: Cafe Des Beaux-Arts. LOCATION: 73-520 El Paseo ZONE: C-1, S.P. G:\Planning\JanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 13 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE' .'!W COMMISSION MINUTES lw October 22, 2013 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented an approval to extend an existing patio for Caf6 Des Beaux-Arts along Larkspur Lane and El Paseo to comply with the approved design guidelines for the El Paseo Shopping District. However, the design guidelines approved by the City Council (Council) in January 2013 only approved areas along El Paseo. Staff recommends approval of the design of the new awning, new patio railings, new patio furniture, and concrete planters with umbrellas; subject to Council granting approval of the patio extension of 6' from back of curb along Larkspur Lane, and the applicant obtaining an encroachment permit and a hold harmless agreement from the Department of Public Works. Commissioner Clark stated he walked the distance on Larkspur and the side of the building and was concerned about maneuverability. He expressed that the aesthetic value of El Paseo was the ability to stroll along the street and avoid obstructions and believes that it will be pretty tight on Larkspur. He also noted that he nearly tripped on a sidewalk that needed some repair. He mentioned a trash receptacle on El Paseo and suggested moving it further to the east to make more walk way. He and Mr. Swartz discussed the reduction of clear walkway to 7'. The Commission discussed the metal awning, railings, patio grade, furnishings, handicap accessibility, and the irrigation of the concrete planters. The Commission was concerned about the plants during the summer when the restaurant will be closed for two months. MR. DIDIER BLOCH, owner, mentioned that the plants will probably die and would then have to be replaced upon his return. The Commission discussed seasonal plants for the planters and irrigation. Commissioner Vuksic asked if this would return for final approval and Mr. Swartz answered yes. Commissioner Vuksic wanted to make sure that the planters are attractive and include real plants and that the railings look good because he didn't want the two different railings, one white and one a dark bronze, to junk up the restaurant. Chair Van Vliet suggested this be continued for further detail. Mr. Bagato stated in the meantime it will go to Council to review the patio extension of 6' from back of curb along Larkspur. MR. BLOCH stated he would be able to remodel the Larkspur side now, but the El Paseo side would have to wait until next summer when they are closed. G:\F1:nningW3nineJudy\ARC\1MinuteM2013\131022min.docx Page 14 of 15 ARCHITECTURAL RE%t.W COMMISSION ,,,w MINUTES October 22, 2013 ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to continue Case ODP 13-210 with comments regarding patio grade, railings, furnishings, handicap accessibility, concrete planters and irrigation. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Clark and carried by a 7-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Lambell absent. C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES UPDATE — Commissioner John Vuksic The October AIPP meeting was cancelled. VII. COMMENTS Mr. Pedro Rodriguez, Code Compliance Supervisor, discussed the ordinance regarding carports. In order for the applicant for Case RV 13-298 to store his boat in the carport, the carport would have to meet the same standards as a garage. Vill. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Levin, second by Commissioner McAuliffe, and a 7-0-0-1 vote with Commissioner Lambell absent, the Architectural Review Commission meeting was adjourned at 2:58 p.m. TONY BAGATO, RINCIPAL PLANNER SECRETARY J J U DY0 R DING SECRETARY GAPlanning\JanineJudyWRC\1Minutes\2013\131022min.docx Page 15 of 15