Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-04-14 . �F � "�.r� r�•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 I. 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 6 Karel Lambell, Vice Chair X 6 Paul Clark X 6 Gene Colombini X 6 Allan Levin X 6 Michael McAuliffe X 6 Jim Mclntosh X 6 ,;� John Vuksic X 5 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director, Community Development Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Pedro Rodriguez, Code Compliance Supervisor Janine Judy, Recording Secretary Cancelled meeting:03/10/15; III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 24, 2015 (incomplete) Action: Commissioner Levin moved to continue. Motion seconded by Commissioner Colombini and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, Mclntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES. � , � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 � V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: None B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: MISC 15-83 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: ALDI INC., Attn: Skip Janes, Director of Real Estate, 1770 lowa Avenue, Suite 240, Riverside, CA 92507 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to preliminarily approve faCade changes to an existing building within Desert Crossing; ALDI. LOCATION: 72-543 Highway 111 ZONE: P.C.-3 Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, said this project was presented at the last meeting and the Commission had some concerns with the ` roof-mounted equipment being visible from the street. The applicant has submitted changes showing the relocation of the largest equipment piece above the loading dock and increasing the height of the parapet to hide it. For the smaller equipment, they created a screening mock-up and the Commissioners reviewed it in the field. Staff is recommending approval of the changes. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, Mclntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES. 2. CASE NO: MISC 15-98 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: KILBANE ARCHITECTURE, Attn: Justin Kilbane, Box 997 #C, Carefree, AZ 85577 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to preliminarily approve a new custom home within Bighorn. LOCATION: 107 Tekis Place ZONE: PCD/D "� G:\PlanningUanineJudyWRC\1Minute5�2015\150414min.docx Page 2 of 13 ,' .. "� '�rr` ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 � Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, presented a preliminary approval of a new custom home within the Bighorn Mountain Course. Generally, most homes in Bighorn don't come through the Architectural Review Commission (ARC); however the original approval for the mountain course had some lots that were potentially visible from Highway 74. There was a condition placed on the original map stating those homes shall be reviewed by the ARC to see if they are compatible with the hillside using natural design features. He presented a PowerPoint of the plans and pointed out the location on the hillside. He mentioned that the original grading plan had an area that was hillside disturbed and said it was a re-naturalized manufactured slope that was reconstructed as part of the grading. In discussing this with the applicant it is not structurally sound to support the home right now. This portion will be removed and reconstructed and re-naturalized to blend into the hillside. The home is low profile and the pad heights will not increase more than 6"; which is allowed in the code. If they request anything more than 6", it would have to go back to the Planning Commission. Staff feels this is well designed, fits in with the natural terrain. Staff is recommending approval. Commissioner Clark said they will have to work on the manufactured slope and asked if it was visible from Highway 74. Mr. Bagato said it is �+` visible today and they will have to re-naturalize it as part of the construction. MR. JUSTIN KILBANE, Architect, said they would like to make it look a lot better than it is today. They will get more select boulders that have more of a weathered surface on it than the ones that currently exist there now. Commissioner Mclntosh mentioned past discussion about this phase regarding the line of sight and how close you can build to the slope. He asked if this was still a part of the requirement. Mr. Bagato said the only conditions placed on this phase was that these homes were sent to ARC to make sure they were compatible to our hillside development standards and blend in with the natural terrain. There wasn't any discussion on how close to the edge they should be. Commissioner Mclntosh said on one of the sight sections the building comes right to the front edge. MR. KILBANE said most of it is patio and pool and is setback substantially. Commissioner Mclntosh said that is the only element that he feels won't really blend in because you don't have the rock wall below it. He and the architect discussed the vertical height of that element and MR. KILBANE said it will come up within a couple feet of the top of the slope then there will be a 3' retaining wall to keep people from falling off. It will be clad with a natural stone veneer that they have selected for the rest of the house and then the roof will come up out of that. � G:\PlanningWanineJudyWRC\1Minutes�2015\150414min.docx Page 3 of 13 � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 � MR. TERRY KILBANE, architect, said they are well within all setbacks and they are not aware of a slope setback. He pointed out there are other homes in the area that have many components that go right up to the edge of the slope. Commissioner Mclntosh said the concern with the original approval of the hillside homes was how vertical it would be. MR. T. KILBANE explained that this is a totally open overhang with no wall fa�ade there and you will be able to see through that almost 20' back to the main house wall. Commissioner Vuksic was concerned that one of the bathrooms had a shower with a large piece of glass and pointed out that there is no depth to the wall; it is flat. All the other windows are well protected under considerable eaves. He suggested more articulation where it has some depth and the glass is recessed deep into that wall. MR. J. KILBANE said they could bring the overhang from the o�ce across it and give it some relief. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to approve subject to: 1) articulating bathroom wall to provide more depth around the window; and 2) provide hand-selected weathered finished boulders for manufactured slope. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Colombini and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, Mclntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting "' YES. 3. CASE NO: MISC 15-19 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: WESTliving, LLC, Attn: Alyce Conti, 5796 Armada Drive, Suite 300, Carlsbad, CA 92008 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to preliminarily approve the architectural and landscape design for a two- story, 150-unit assisted living facility with a memory care component on Lot 4 within Villa Portofino; WESTliving. LOCATION: 40-235 Portola Avenue ZONE: P.R.-5 MR. KEVIN SWARTZ, Assistant Planner, said this project was continued from the previous meeting. He mentioned there were five items that the Commission recommended that required a response by the applicant. He stated that the applicant has presented those changes for the Commission's review. Commissioner Lambell asked about the carport design and MR. � GARTH BRANDAW, CB Two Architects, said they are trying to G:\PlanningWanineJudy�,4RC\1Minute5�2015\150414min.docx Page 4 of 13 ''�rr� w� ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 � integrate solar panels into the design of the carports and they will have the option to do a number of different things. Mr. Swartz said the Commission won't see the plan changes again until final drawings. The Commission felt that would be too late. Mr. Swartz suggested that the Commission request the plans to come back for review. The Commission and the applicant discussed the white vinyl windows. MR. BRANDAW said they are proposing a tan or almond color that will integrate within the building and work within the trim. They are comfortable with using a vinyl window product because vinyl has become a lot better today with newer technology and it works within this climate. Chair Van Vliet said he had a difficult time trying to determine what was actually revised because the scale is so small and details for the windows were not provided. MR. BRANDAW said the lower elevations do show more detail of the typical window surrounds. The header and the sill will both have a 2" depth, which will provide more shadow and relief. Commissioner Vuksic said it would help if they picked some key spots and made the walls thicker so that the windows can have some nice depth to them and it would also help if there were strategic locations that had thicker walls that would create more character. He �'' discussed the proportions on the taller elements that are relatively narrow and pointed out there is way too much stucco above a window before you get to the eave; it needs more thickness. Commissioner Clark noticed there were medallions in some of those areas and Commissioner Vuksic said that would help or maybe in some cases the window may actually get a little taller. MR. BRANDAW said they could easily incorporate more window area in that mass. Commissioner Vuksic and the architect continued to discuss the roofline, fascia height, gables and shed roofs, flat walls and the windows. MR. BRANDAW reminded the Commission that at the last meeting they were comfortable with the south elevation so they tried to bring that relief and articulation around to the rest of the building. He totally understands and respects the comments and thinks there are a couple of areas in particular where this would make a lot of sense. Commissioner Colombini suggested lowering the roof lines and MR. BRANDAW said that was a very good point. They are now 3' above that fascia line and they could probably be more like 2' and it wouldn't have as much of an eyebrow above the window. Commissioner Vuksic said there are many ways you can do it by lowering it a bit, or raising the window, adding medallions and thickening the walls on certain elements. He stated that 3-dimensional drawings would help a lot. � G:\PlanningUanineJudy�P,RC\1Minutes�2015\150414min.docx Page 5 of 13 � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 v Commissioner Vuksic felt there were still some issues with the ridgelines because of the fairly steep roof; steeper than they're used to seeing. He feels it is a problem in a couple of areas because the building is so 2-dimensional in the floor plan layout and he thinks showing it in 3-dimensional will help sell that. He pointed out a section of the east elevation that is adjacent to Portola Avenue and feels the ridgeline is something that needs some attention. Commissioner Mclntosh said it is a big building and the details need to be in proportion to the building. Some of these details are the same scale you would see on single family homes. This mass is multiple times bigger but it is the same scale and articulation. There are nodes and modules around to break it up and thaYs where the introduction of these larger scale elements can be placed and it would read so much better. Commissioner McAuliffe said the details have been carried through a majority of the building and he would hate to have that lack of detail in certain areas undo the great stuff they have done so far. His primary concern was making sure that the carports become an extension of the building and are not an afterthought particularly with incorporating solar panels on top of them. � ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to continue Case No. MISC 15-19 subject to: 1) submit certain sections of each elevation of the building in a larger scale; 2) in areas where there are large stucco walls between the windows and roof lines, consider lowering the roof line to break up the large wall areas; and 3) add more articulation on the east, north, and west elevations similar to the south elevation. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, Mclntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES. 4. CASE NO: DA/PP/CUP 15-87 -Amendment to DA/PP/CUP 07-11 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: EL PASEO HOTEL, LLC, Attn: Robert Leach, 3941 Park Drive, Suite 20-308, EI Dorado Hills, CA 95762 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to preliminarily approve a four-story, 154-unit hotel development; Larkspur Hotel. LOCATION: 45-400 Larkspur Lane ZONE: C-1 8� R-3 � Commissioner Vuksic left at 1:25 p.m. G:\PlanningUanineJudyWRC\1Minules\2015\150414min.docx Page 6 of 13 ,.: �'�rr►` � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 r MR. TONY BAGATO, Principal Planner, presented for preliminary approval a four-story, 154-unit hotel development called Larkspur Hotel. Commissioners McAuliffe and Mclntosh informed the Commission that they met with the architect and the developer in an informal setting just to discuss the previous iteration. They stated that it was a non- contractual relationship with no financial interest. Mr. Bagato presented information of the 2006 original approval and discussed what has already been entitled. The reason it is before this Commission is because of changes to some of those requirements. Back in 2006/2007 staff worked on an approval for a hotel which was considered for 106 rooms and a condominium portion of 48 rooms. However, after performing all the environmental studies for traffic, parking analysis and CEQA studies it was based on 154 rooms. The original approval resulted in a site plan that was very dense because they were trying to maintain a lower profile than the project you see before you today. Two masses of architecture were incorporated; one geared towards a hotel component and the other a residential component. The Development Agreement (DA) was for three stories, 154 rooms, and all the environmental. If this project was coming back �" within those same approvals, the Commission could technically approve it for architectural changes but it is now being proposed for more than three stories. Because of the changes in the DA, this project will now have to get an amendment through the Planning Commission and the City Council. Mr. Bagato said the applicant focused on the original approval since this was a hotel component with three stories. This was originally approved at 31 to 37'; ranging in different heights. It incorporated a rooftop deck that had a pool and other amenities. It also had a gazebo that went up to 42' in height so the maximum height approved in the DA was 42'. Mr. Bagato said the original approval, although limiting the height, it also created a lot less area for amenities and was very courtyard based. There was concern that the taller buildings would create a lot of shadowed areas for the amenities and having more of a footprint on the ground surface. He discussed the noise concerns with the roof amenities and the building being located within 10' from a single-story condominium project to the east. When the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) first reviewed this project, there was a concern about how close these buildings would be to the neighborhood. The ARC recommended tiering some of the building, but there was still a lot of building mass closer to the condominium project to the east. �rrr G:\PlanningUanineJudyWRC\1Minutes\2015\150414min.docx Page 7 of 13 � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 � Mr. Bagato said this site is on Larkspur Lane (Larkspur) just north of Shadow Mountain and is zoned residential multi-family that allows hotels with a portion zoned Commercial. One component of the DA is that it does give them more density as a hotel. This was analyzed and approved because staff as well as the business community had a lot of discussion about a crucial component of EI Paseo bringing in a hotel that will bring in more year round foot traffic to EI Paseo and create a better shopping experience in our commercial core. He also pointed out that there has been talk about increasing the heights along Highway 111 and EI Paseo from three to four stories. Mr. Bagato discussed the underground parking, the orientation of the entrance, and the hotel layout. He said because it is a taller building they are creating more open space and making larger setbacks that will be more sensitive to the neighbors to the east. He pointed out that the overall height is 46'-6" for the four stories. MR. ROBERT LEACH, Project Manager, said he specializes in hotel projects and has had a chance to watch the evolution of hotels in the desert over the past 35-40 years. When the site became available a couple of years ago, they thought it was one of the best hotel sites in the Coachella Valley. The DA they have requires them to build a four- star luxury boutique hotel which includes a ballroom, restaurant, day "� spa, fitness center, pool and spa, room service, and valet parking. It is a lot of building and they need to be sensitive to the residents and try to figure out a way to do that. Even though they went taller they tried to reduce the massing significantly. He presented a PowerPoint presentation of the massing overlay of their building on top of the old project and you can see a significant drop in the massing on the site, which is a big plus. Their intent was to come up with a reduced massing model that gave them a good luxury hotel and architecturally they were looking to do something more contemporary. He said that he is 100% open to hearing the comments from the Commission and hearing the comments from the neighbors that came out today. His goal is very simple; he wants to build the best hotel that he possibly can. MR. LOUIE DeCARLO, Project Designer, discussed the plans and the building materials. They felt that it would be nice to have this be a striking building and something that was cohesive with the desert architecture, but something a bit different from what was happening on EI Paseo. The predominant material will be off-white stucco and a couple of other shades of browns to accent in certain areas. That will be anchored by a beige getty stone that will have a chiseled look. Throughout the project there will be decorated insets of the stone within a really nice stucco face. The faCade itself is three levels, with �' overhangs, porte-cochere, use of inetal in certain areas, and balconies G:\PlanningUanineJudyV+RC\1Minutes�2015\150414min.docx Page 8 of 13 `� � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 .� strategically placed in certain areas. Overall, it gives a striking experience especially as you are driving down Larkspur. Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Director, Community Development, asked why there were balconies only on some of the rooms. MR. DeCARLO said they wanted to give a nice texture to the building and felt that balconies throughout the whole facade would be to monotone so they wanted to give a sprinkle of functional balconies in certain areas to give the faCade a playful appearance and a little more interest. The Commission and the designer discussed the use of spandrel glass on the balconies and between the floors. He pointed out where the spandrel and the clear glass will be located. Commissioner Lambell said the massing has changed dramatically and most of it is in the center part of the project or towards Larkspur which won't bother anybody because it's the parking lot. Commissioner Clark asked if they had a materials board. Mr. Bagato said they don't have the board yet, just the exhibits. Commissioner Clark said for a project of this magnitude the Commission should review the actual materials. �`` Commissioner Mclntosh felt the applicant should get the massing down before they look into the details. He feels the applicant has done a great job and likes the project and feels there are certain areas of the building that are a lot more successful than others. He asked how far they are away from the south side property line. MR. LEACH said 20'. Commissioner Mclntosh said they have done an excellent job by centralizing the mass east and west, but feels the mass of the building could use some relief on the south side where it abuts residential zoning. He would be more comfortable if it didn't go so vertical off Shadow Mountain. He asked what was going on with the balcony on the third floor. MR. LEACH said they pulled the fourth floor back from the street on the south side. Commissioner Mclntosh asked what the setback rule was. Mr. Bagato said on commercial property the zoning ordinance was a 2:1 setback per height rule. So if you are getting up to the taller buildings they should be tiered or stepped back which doesn't technically apply on this property because it is not in the R-3 zone. He said the original approval had the building 10 to 15' closer to the property line and the new proposal has been stepped back ten more feet and they modified the corner to try to address those concerns. Commissioner Mclntosh said this reads as a strong mass close to that street where there is residential on the opposite street. MR. DeCARLO said they did try to address that with terraces on top with additional architecture. Commissioner Mclntosh said he saw �"` some articulation there but it still reads as a strong mass. MR. LEACH said at the end of the unit is 62' wide and is on a land site that is 220' G:\PlanningUanineJudyWRC\1Minutes�2015\150414min.docx Page 9 of 13 � � . ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 v wide so they have reduced the massing from almost a 100% coverage down to 62'. Commissioner Mclntosh said his main concern is the massing in this environment. He thinks there are great details and likes the style, but the south end of the building is a little bit troubling. Commissioner Lambell and the applicant discussed the fourth floor suites with the huge overhang patio and columns. MR. DeCARLO said they wanted to give that edge some cohesive with the columns. He said they can look at that and do something different there. Commissioner Levin and the applicant discussed where the mechanicals would be located. MR. DeCARLO described the parapet heights and said they will screen all the mechanicals. Commissioner Levin said those are the kind of elements they like to see because those are above the fourth floor. Commissioner McAuliffe referred to a couple of exhibits that were cross sections to the site and said they have made great efforts in trying to accommodate the neighbors by consolidating the building to the center of the site. What is really hard to understand is exactly what that relationship might look like to all those neighboring buildings. He suggested a sight line study to see where those windows and views might be in respect to this project. He feels there isn't enough �' information with respect to where they are headed with this design, but architecturally they have come a long way with this compared to the previous design. He had a concern with the mechanicals and what they are proposing to use. He would also be interested on what has been done with the landscaping to help soften and mitigate some of the height and proximity concerns. Chair Van Vliet pointed out that there is some architectural detailing on the south side but not really anything on the north side which will be a lot more visible than they realize. MR. RON GREGORY, RGA Landscape Architects, described the landscaping around the entire hotel. He said they are looking at the entire massing of the development before they get too far into it. They will plant a lot of trees in the refuse and mechanical equipment area and pointed out that trees will be planted near the slope of the underground parking as well. He described the landscape on the Larkspur side and said this area will be planted with date palms. They will tier the landscape and the palms will create the tallest elements. He described the turn-around island for people and traffic entering the hotel. He said they are handling the 10' space between the neighbors to the east and where the project is happening. They would like to plant date palms in that area at a height not yet determined. On the '� corner of Larkspur and Shadow Mountain they will continue the same G:\PlanningUanineJudyWRC\1Minutes�2015\150414min.docx Page 10 of 13 � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 r type of wall and palm trees like on the over side. They have talked about shifting the other end of the building to the east a little to open up more room for additional planting on the west side of that southern most intrusion of the building. They felt that was important to allow them the opportunity to plant some tall elements such as date palms on the west side of that particular building between the sidewalk to the east and the building. Right now there is limited planting area and this would give them more room to have softening elements available to make the building look nicer. Continuing around the corner there is a grove of trees in that area between the street and the building and their landscape perspective is to plant the heck out of that particular area. They will continue the date palms towards the east along the street side of the complex. He closed by saying that it is tough because it's difficult to conform to the required maximum water use allocation when they are also trying to create something that speaks luxury resort and they will deal with that. Commissioner Clark asked if this meeting was noticed to the neighbors and Mr. Bagato said generally ARC is not noticed unless required by the code. After this is reviewed and approved by ARC it will move on to the Planning Commission and the City Council and will be noticed at that time. r✓ Commissioner Levin and Mr. Bagato discussed the 10' drop in height from EI Paseo to Shadow Mountain. They also discussed the setbacks and the building mass. Mr. Bagato opened the floor for public comment. Commissioner Lambell reminded the public that their comments should only relate to the architecture. MS. ALEX JOSEPH stated she has a couple of properties next door at the Shadow Club. She said within three to four years she will build another condo on that right next to this hotel. She said that noise among other things will affect this property more than anybody else in these units. She would like to get some consideration for that and asked if they could get a wall higher than the one proposed at 6'. Mr. Bagato said they could approve a taller wall as part of the project. He reminded her that the noise would be something that would be addressed by the Planning Commission. MS. JOSEPH said the distance will be about 30' from the pool to the wall. She felt the style of the four story hotel was not cohesive and it is important to minimize the imprint that it will have on the Shadow Mountain side. She suggested more terracing on the building. r►� G:\PlanningUanineJudylARC\1Minutes\2015\150414min.docx Page 11 of 13 � � . ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 � MR. JIM SATTLEY said he lives directly behind the hotel and his only issue is the tower that backs up 10' from their property line; which will end up being a 60 x 50' high plastered wall. He thought that it could be moved or terraced. The problem they have with the project is the fact that they started out at 42' and now are up to about 54'. They are not against the hotel just that one area. He asked what the top of the tower would be from Momma Gina's parking lot. MR. LEACH said it would be 56'-6" tall. MR. SATTLEY pointed out that it is 16' over what it was supposed to be. MR. RICHARD KUTCHER asked what the shadow lines would be on the other properties and wondered if they would be in constant shade. MR. DeCARLO said they could do a shadow study. MR. KUTCHER and MR. LEACH discussed the noise from the trash pickup. MR. KUTCHER asked if the HVAC equipment in that same area would be muffled. MR. LEACH said a screen wall would be provided. MS. SYLVIA ELLMORE said she also has a concern with the height of the tower, and the noises that will come from the cars, underground parking, ballroom, and restaurants. MR. LEACH said based on the garage design there won't be a build-up of toxic exhaust. They also have some control over the parking because it will only be for valet use. If there is a problem, then it can be addressed by staff. She asked `� if there was something to make this hotel a little more attractive and mentioned that it had a "Bauhaus" design. MR. DeCARLO said that is something they will take a look at. MS. BARBARA SATTLEY asked about the emergency access area that is closer to the Momma Gina's parking area and MR. LEACH said this spot was picked by the Fire Marshal to ensure they have a hose access not a fire truck access. Commissioner Clark asked MR. LEACH if they have met with the neighbors and MR. LEACH said they have had two neighborhood meetings. Mr. Bagato recommended that the applicants submit a line of sight study and also show the impact from the old project to the new. Commissioner Clark also recommended providing exhibits for a height and shadow study that would include the adjoining properties. � G:\PlanningUanineJudy�ARC\1Minutes\2015\150414min.docx Page 12 of 13 r �� � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES April 14, 2015 � ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to continue Case No. DA/PP/CUP 15-87 subject to: 1) adding more relief and interest on south side; 2) review terrace and columns on third floor; 3) submit a line of sight study with adjacent properties; 4) submit plans for HVAC location; 5) add more architectural detailing on north side; and 6) submittal of a shadow study. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, Mclntosh, and Van Vliet voting YES and Vuksic absent. C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. COMMENTS None VII. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Lambell, second by Commissioner Levin, and a 7- 0-1 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, Mclntosh, and Van Vliet �"' voting YES and Vuksic absent, the Architectural Review Commission meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m. TONY BAGA O, PRIN IPAL PLANNER SECRETARY /� JA I JUD RE DING SECRETARY rr. G:\PlanningUanineJudyWRC\1Minutes\2015\150414min.docx Page 13 of 13 � � . � V ill