The URL can be used to link to this page

RER (09-0898)P.O. BOX 1504 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 Application Number: Property Address: APN: Application description Property Zoning: Application valuation: Applicant: DWiV&R, r 09-00000898 51705 AVENIDA MADERO 773-112-004-2 -000000- REMODEL - RESIDENTIAL COVE RESIDENTIAL 140000 Td4t 4 4 Q" BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT BUILDING PERMIT Architect or Engineer: CM01AR ES < <i1, / - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LICENSED CONTRACTOR'S DECLARATION I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professionals Code, and my License is in full force and effect. 1< ense Class: License No.: v/Date: Contractor: OWNER -BUILDER DECLARATION I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that I am exempt from the Contractor's State License Law for the following reason (Sec. 7031.5, Business and Professions Code: Any city or county that requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish, or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for the permit to file a signed statement that he or she is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's State License Law (Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code) or t that he or she is exempt therefrom and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by ' any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500).: (_ 1 I, as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractors' State License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does the work himself or herself through his or her own employees, provided that the improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner -builder will have the burden of proving that he or she did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.). (_ 1 1, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractors' State License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who contracts for the projects with a contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractors' State License Law.). ( 1 I am exempt under Sec. , B.&P.C. for this reason DateM-1,1( Owner: CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec. 3097, Civ. C.). Lender's Name: _ Lender's Address: LQPERMIT Owner: BOGREN CAROL 51705 AVENIDA LA QUINTA, CA (760)702-5175 Contractor: Owner VOICE (760) 777-7012 FAX (760) 777-7011 INSPECTIONS (760) 777-7153 .0/13/09 ------------------------------------------------ WORKER'S COMPENSATION DECLARATION I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: _ I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self -insure for workers' compensation, as provided for by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. I have and will maintain workers' compensation insurance, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My workers' compensation suran, carrier and policy number are: Carrier�bw • Policy Number I certify that, in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the workers' compensation laws of California, and agree that, if I should become subject to the workers' compensation provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code, I shall forthwith comply with those provisions. Date:,0 /Applicant: WARNING: FAILURE TO SECURE WORKERS' COMPENSATION COVERAGE IS UNLAWFUL, AND SHALL SUBJECT AN EMPLOYER TO CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND CIVIL FINES UP TO ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000). IN ADDITION TO THE COST OF COMPENSATION, DAMAGES AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 3706 OF THE LABOR CODE, INTEREST, AND ATTORNEY'S FEES. APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IMPORTANT Application is hereby made to the Director of Building and Safety for a permit subject to the conditions and restrictions set forth on this application. 1. Each person upon whose behalf this application is made, each person at whose request and for whose benefit work is performed under or pursuant to any permit issued as a result of this application, the owner, and the applicant, each agrees to, and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta, its officers, agents and employees for any act or omission related to the work being performed under or following issuance of this permit. 2. Any permit issued as a result of this application becomes null and void if work is not commenced within 180 days from date of issuance of such permit, or cessation of work for 180 days will subject permit to cancellation. I certify that I have read this application and state that the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all city and county ordinances and state laws relating to building construction, and hereby authorize representatives of this county to enter pon the above-mentioned property for inspection purposes. Date Signature (Applicant or Agent): ►�h�{r Q LQPERP*1IT Application Number . . . . . 09-00000898 ------ Structure Information 1361 SF ADDITION / REMODEL ----- Construction Type .. TYPE V, UNPROTECTED Occupancy Type . . . . DWELLG/LODGING/LONG <=10 Flood Zone . . . NON -AO FLOOD ZONE FEE Other struct info . . . . . CODE EDITION. 2007 11.0000 --------------------------------------------------"-------------------------- # BEDROOMS 1.00 Permit . . . BUILDING PERMIT 4.5000 Additional desc . . 1361 SF ADDITION / REMODEL VENT INST/ DUCT ALT Permit Fee . . . . 779.50 Plan "Check Fee 506.68 Issue Date Valuation . . . . 140000 Expiration Date 4/11/10 6.5000 Qty Unit Charge Per Extension 13.00 BASE FEE 639.50 40.00 3.5000 -------------------------------------------------7-------------------------- THOU BLDG 100,001-500,000 140.00 Permit . . . ELECT - ADD/ALT/REM Additional desc . . Permit Fee . . . . 86:04 Plan Check Fee 21.51 Issue Date . . . Valuation . . . . 0 Expiration Date 4/11/10 Qty Unit Charge Per Extension BASE FEE 15.00 1361.00 .0350 ELEC NEW RES - 1 OR 2 FAMILY 47.64 27.00 .7500 PER ELEC DEVICE/FIXTURE 1ST 20 20.25 7.00 .4500 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- EA ELEC DEVICE/FIXTURE >20 3.15 Permit . . Additional desc . Permit Fee . . . Issue Date . . . Expiration Date . MECHANICAL 94.00 4/11/10 Plan Check Fee . . 23.50 Valuation . . . . 0 Qty Unit Charge Per Extension BASE FEE 15.00 2.00 11.0000 EA MECH FURNACE >100K 22.00 1.00 4.5000 EA MECH VENT INST/ DUCT ALT 4.50 2.00 16.5000 EA MECH B/C >3-15HP/>100K-500KBTU 33.00 2.00 6.5000 EA MECH VENT FAN 13.00 1.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6.5000 EA MECH EXHAUST HOOD 6.50 Permit . . . . . . PLUMBING Application Number . . . . . 09-00000898 Permit . . . PLUMBING Additional desc . Permit Fee 84.00 Plan Check Fee 21.00 Issue Date . . . . Valuation . . . . 0 Expiration Date 4/11/10 f Qty Unit Charge Per Extension BASE FEE 15.00 9.00 6.0000 EA PLB FIXTURE 54.00 1.00 7.5000 EA PLB WATER HEATER/VENT 7.50 1.00 3.0000 EA PLB WATER INST/ALT/REP 3.00 6.00 7500 EA PLB GAS PIPE >=5 4.50 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Special Notes and Comments 1361 SF ADDITION (DINING, LDRY, GUEST ROOM AND TO MASTER BEDROOM W/ BATH) REMODEL OF KITCHEN AND MASTER BEDROOM. R-3 OCCUPANCY, TYPE V -B CONSTR. 2007 CODES. **PERMIT DOES NOT INCLUDE BLOCK WALLS, FENCES, SWIMMING POOLS, SPA,. WATER FEATURES & BBQ'S** 2007 CODES. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Fees . . . . . . . . . BLDG STDS ADMIN (SB1473) 6.00 ENERGY REVIEW FEE 50.67' STRONG MOTION (SMI) - RES 14.00 Fee summary Charged Paid Credited --------------------------------------------------------- Due Permit Fee Total 1043.54 .00 .00 1043.54 Plan Check Total 572.69 .00 .00 572.69 Other Fee Total 70.67 .00 .00 70.67 Grand Total 1686.90 .00 .00 1686.90 LQPE%NIIT P.O. BOX 1504 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92247-1504 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT PROP OWNE1 'S. PACKAGE. (760) 777-7012 FAX (760) 7.77-7011 Disclosures & Forms for Owner -Builders Applying for Construction Permifs l il1kIP�CI RANT! NO FICE TQ PROPERTY OWNER Dear Property Owner. An application- for --a building permit has been submitted in your name listing yourself as the builder of the property improvements specified at E 17 D 5 A yt -m Idle► M A d 620 1 A Q-,, ,I^ [ A- 19z1►5 3 We are .providing you with an Owner -Builder Acknowledgment and Information Verification Porm to make you aware of your responsibilities and possible risk you may incur by having this permit issued in your name as the Owner -Builder. We bill not issue a building.permit until you have read, initialed your understanding of each -provision, signed, and returned this form to us at our official address indicated. An agent of the owner cannot execute this -notice unless you, the property owner, obtain the prior approval of the permitting authority. OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND VERIFICATION OF DWORMAITION DIRECTIONS: Read and initial each. statement below to signify you understand or verify this information. 0. I understand a frequent practice of unlicensed persons is to have the propertyiowner obtain an "Owner -Builder' building permit that eirone'ously-implies that the property ' p perry owner is providing his or her own labor and material personally. I, as an Owner -Builder, may be held liable and. subject to serious fmancial risk for any injuries sustained by an unlicensed person and his or her employees while working on my property- My homeowner's insurance may not provide coverage for those injuries. I am willfully acting as an Owner -Builder and am aware of the limits of my insurance coverage for injuries to workers on my property - a2. I understand building permits are not required to be signed by property owners unless they are responsible for the construction and are not hiring a licensed Contractor to assume this responsibility. VT 11 understand as an "Owner -Builder" I am the responsible party of record on the permit. I understand that 1 may protect myself from potential financial risk by hiring a licensed Contractor and having the permit filed in his or her name instead of my own. (04. I understand Contractors are required by law to,be licensed and bonded in California and to list their license numbers on permits and contracts. -`d': , , , • .. > ' 1 • hS. ] understand if 1 employ or otherwise engage any persons, other than California licensed Contractors, and the total value of y construction is at least five hundred dollars, ($500), including labor -and materials, I may be considered an "employer" under state and federal law. 6. 1 understand if I am considered an "employer" under state and federal law, I must register with the state and federal go ernment, withhold payroll taxes, provide workers compensation disability Insurance, and contribute to unemployment compensation for each "employee." I also understand my failure to abide by these laws may subject me to serious, financial risk. 7. 1 understand under California Contractors' State License Law, an Owner -Builder who builds single-family residential s ctures cannot .legally build them with the intent to offer them for sale, unless all work is performed by licensed subcontractors and the number of structures does not exceed four within any calendar year, or all of the work is performed under contract with a licensed general building Contractor. -I understand as an Owner -Builder if I sell the property for which this peanut is issued, I may be held liable for any Y financial or personal. ii uries sustained by any subsequent owner(s) that result from any -latent construction defects in the workmanship or materials. . I understand I may obtain more information regarding my obligations as an "employer" from the Internal Revenue Ser ice,'the United States Small Business Administration, the California Department of Benefit Payments, and the California Division of Industrial Accidents. I also understand I may contact the California Contractors' State License Board (CSLR) at I - 800-321-CSLB (2752) or www.cslb.ca.gov for more information about licensed contractors. 1Q_ 1 am aware of and consent to an Owner -Builder building permit applied for in my name, and understand that I am the party legally and financially responsible • for proposed construction activity at the following. address: X17 aS .rrGNtda. �o►el�t2.o LLQ Q u"i -A I _C AA 921l; S3- - I agree that, as the party legally and financially responsible for this proposed construction activity, I will abide by all ap licable laws and requirements that govern Owner -Builders as well as employers. 12. 1 agree to notify the issuer of this form immediately of any -additions; deletions, or changes to any of the information I have provided on this form. Licensed contractors are regulated by laws designed to protect the public. If you contract with someone who does not have a license, the Contractors' State License Board may be unable to assist you with any financial loss you may .sustain .as_a result of.a complaint Your only ,remedy. against, Wicensed,Confractois: ri ay be in civil court. It is also important dor you to. irnderstand that -if an unlicensed Contractor or employee of that .individual or frrrn is injured while working on your property; you may be held liable for damages. If you obtain a permit as Owner -Builder and wish to hire Contractors; You will be responsible for verifying whether or not those Contractors are properly licensed and the status of their workers' compensation insurance coverage. Before a building permit can be issued, this form must be completed and signed by the property owner and returned to the agency responsible for issuing; the. permit. Note:.A copy of the property owner's &-iver's.1kense; form hotarit:ation, or other verification acceptable to the agency is required to be presented when the permit is issued to verify the property• owner's signature. :.e atiR 4 Signature of property owner, &I Date: O Note: The following Authorization Form is required to be completed by the property owner only when designating an agent of the property owner to apply for a construction permit for the Owner -Builder. AUTHORIZATION OF AGENT TO ACT ON PROPERTY OWNER'S BEHALF Excluding the Notice to Property Owner, the execution of which I understandis my personal responsibility, I hereby authorize the following person(s) to act as my agents) to apply for, sign, and file the documents necessary to obtain an Owner-Builde Permit for my project. Scope of Construction Project (or Description of Work): Project Location or Address: i;l7 O$_,gye.i�d� Name of Authorized Agent: 664. 304, re'r1 Tel No(7ko) 7 7 7 Address of Authorized Agent -)OsJ.,,V-0 I declare under penalty of perjury that I am the property oHmer for the address listed above and I personally filled out the',above information and certify its accuracy_ Mole: A copy ofthe owner's driver's license, form notarization, or other YerificAoi n ` acceptable to the agency is required to be presented when the permit is issued to verify the property owner's signature., Property Owner's Signature: B Date:'/ t � . P.O. Box 1504 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92247-1504 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO (760) 777-7000 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 FAX (760) 777-7101 September 15,.2009 Mr. Doug Bogren 51705 Avenida Madero La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: Architectural Design .for Residence at 51-705 Avenida Madero Dear Mr. Bogren: The Planning Commission, at its meeting. on September 9, 2009, approved the proposed design and roof the color for the residence located at 51-705 Avenida Madero. The Planning Commission voted 3-2 in favor of the design and approved it under Minute Motion 2009 -007 -with the following condition: 1. The curve design. of the roof eave shall be no more than twelve inches in height This action is final unless appealed to the City Council within 15 days of the action. Please contact the Planning Department should you wish to appeal. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me at (760) 777-7131 Sly, NkFRANCO Assistant Planner C: Santiago Lopez Greg Butler, Building and Safety Department Manager Planning Commission Minutes FILE- COPY September 8, 2009 Chairman Alderson said he was sure staff had met all the legal requirements that allowed the Commission to go to the next level. The Commissioners would be able to address Commissioner Weber's comments at the public hearing. City Attorney Jenson said all the legal parcel owners would receive a copy of the hearing notice. She also clarified the previous statement of 60% of the properties, saying it is 60% of the lineal footage of property. There being no further discussion it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Weber to approve Resolution 2009-025 approving the Resolution of Intention to Change a Street Name Change 2009-019 as submitted. Unanimously approved. B..,�Ar_chitectural Des.ign_Review, a request by Mr. & Mrs. Doug Bogren for consideration to allow an architectural design that is not compatible with the Cove Architectural Design Guidelines for a residence to be located at 51-705 Avenida Madero; within the La Quinta Cove. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Quill commented on the Oriental and Feng Shui influences on the design of the house. He asked if this was going to be a tile roof and if there was a color board available. Staff responded the color was shown on Exhibit Sheet Two and the tiles would be green. Commissioner Wilkinson asked staff to verify it would be the dark green color; because it looked blue in the lower picture and the dark green was also highlighted. Staff said the two lower pictures were just examples of existing roof tiles of what the applicant wanted to incorporate into his roof. The one on top is what he is proposing. PAReports - PC\2009\9-22-09\PC MIN_9-8-09_Approved.doc 10 Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 2009 Commissioner Wilkinson asked if the tower element was a chimney. Staff said yes and that had been addressed in the plan check comments. It would have to be lowered to comply with the height requirements. ' Commissioner Weber asked if the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) had reviewed this application. Staff said no. Chairman Alderson asked if they were going to look at it. Staff responded no. Commissioner Weber added it was not required but the Planning Commission . could direct that the ALRC review this application. Planning Director Johnson said it could be directed -to them, but the architectural standards in the Cove Guidelines state significant variations go directly to the Planning Commission for consideration. Commissioner Weber said there are guidelines and standards established, for single family homes in the Cove residential area. He drove the area and did not see anything like this architecture. Staff commented they were familiar with the area and did not know of any. existing residence that. had this type of roof design, either in the Cove or elsewhere in La Quinta. Commissioner Barrows asked if the height of the spark arrestors had been addressed. Staff said yes. Chairman Alderson said he did not believe there was any other home, in the Cove, with this type of roof construction. Planning Director Johnson said, several staff. members had driven throughout the Cove and had not seen this architectural style. He did not know if the applicant, or his architect, was aware of any other examples of this architecture within the Cove. He added there were other examples in. other communities, but nothing that he could point to within the Cove, or anywhere else in .the La Quinta community. There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant was available and would like to address the Commission. PAReports - PC\2009\9-22-09\PC MIN_9-8-09_Approved.doc 11 Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 2009 Mr. Bogren 51-705 Avenida Madero, La Quinta CA 92253, introduced himself and said one of the main purposes of this architecture was to do the arched ridges. He said they were a little bit dramatic (the flying eaves), but they would be reduced to about half of what appeared on the exhibits. 'He added, the main focus was to do an arched ridgeline. He acknowledged that the house design reflected Asian influence and it was different from all the homes surrounding it. Commissioner Quill asked if Mr. Bogren was the builder. Mr. Bogren said yes. Commissioner Quill asked if Mr. Bogren .would be the owner or was he building the house for someone in particular. Mr. Bogren said he and his wife would own the house. He said his wife was interested in Asian themes and this was the fifth house he'd built or remodeled. Commissioner Quill confirmed the Asian interest was Mr. and Mrs. Bogren's interest. Mr. Bogren said this was a Feng Shui-designed house. He said, if you looked at the pictures you would see the unusual front entrance and there was a large dragon in the courtyard as well as a waterfall and fountain. He also said their idea was to carry through on the Asian theme. Commissioner Quill .asked for confirmation that the Commission was not being asked to approve any deviation of zoning setbacks or anything of that nature but deciding on a strictly aesthetic treatment type of issue. Staff said that was correct and the language in the design standards -was specific in stating that significant variations required Planning Commission approval. Staff viewed this as a significant variation. Commissioner Quill asked if the roof -mounted equipment would be . going away. Mr. Bogren said yes. Commissioner Weber asked if the second bedroom was actually 69 square feet as he was concerned when he saw • a 69 square foot bedroom. P:\Reports - PC\2009\9-22-09\PC MIN_9-8-09_Approved.doc 12 Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 2009 Mr. Santiago Lopez, 52-608 Avenida Diaz, La Quinta, CA, the architect, introduced himself and responded that it was a 69 -foot addition to the existing bedroom. Commissioner Weber then asked if that was the third, or second, bedroom noted on 'the drawing. Mr. Bogren said that was the front bedroom. Commissioner Weber commented to the applicant that he had indicated that the roof hip curvatures were not really intended to be as depicted in the drawing provided to the Commission and asked if about half of that was correct. Mr. Bogren said the flying eave part (the part that flies up when you come to the eave) is not as dramatic as that. Commissioner Weber asked if he had the updated drawings available for the Commission. The architect, Mr. Lopez, responded he did not. Commissioner Weber asked Mr. Bogren if he had any conversations with the neighbors. Mr. Bogren said no and pointed out how many vacant properties there were in the area, as well as rentals, and said he had a total of two neighbors. Commissioner Weber said he spoke to some of the people in the area and apparently there were a lot of rentals. He then commented on who/what was in the area. Mr. Bogren said there was only one homeowner and they were across the street. Commissioner Barrows asked the applicant to explain what the arched ridge feature was. Mr. Bogren gave an explanation of what the arched ridge feature was. Chairman Alderson asked if Mr. Bogren, as .the owner/builder, was going to put up a concrete tile roof on top of the existing roof. Mr. Bogren said he was putting ceramic tile. Chairman Alderson repeated the word "existing" and asked if there was any structural consideration because of the doubling of weight on the roof. Mr. Bogren said no, because the ceramic they were using. was a lightweight tile. PAReports - PC\2009\9-22-09\PC MIN_9-8-09_Approved.doc 13 Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 2009 Chairman Alderson said the applicant had some new front entry work in an oriental design and asked if that had all been permitted. Mr. Bogren replied yes. Chairman Alderson said because of the type of application, it was not noticed to the public or to the neighbors. Mr. Bogren said that was correct. Chairman Alderson asked if Mr. Bogren was going to raise the roof any inordinate amount that would affect anyone's view. Mr. Bogren said no. Chairman Alderson commented the applicant was doubling the size of the house. Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. There being no public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the 'matter for Commission discussion. Commissioner Wilkinson said he would suggest • this go to the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) since he did not see this fitting into the neighborhood. It was not .like anything else the Commission had ever approved and nobody 'around them knew what . was going on. He said this could not be done in a new development and if it went to architectural review then they could take a better look at it, since they are more technically versed in this. Chairman Alderson asked if Commissioner Wilkinson was suggesting this be sent to the ALRC. Commissioner Wilkinson said that would be his suggestion; yes. The suggestion was "so noted" by Chairman Alderson. 4 Commissioner Quill said he probably lived within sight of this house, but not within 500 feet. He commented, as a long-time resident, the Cove was eclectic by its very nature. Those that live there like all forms of architecture. He then gave a little background on some of the many different forms of architecture, in the Cove; such as 70'.s P:\Reports - PC\2009\9-22-09\PC MIN_9-8-09_Approved.doc 14 Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 2009 style, Tuscan, Spanish Colonial, and others. He commented this was an upgrade to the neighborhood and he didn't have a problem with it, even though it was a little different and unique. Commissioner Barrows said she would concur with Commissioner Quill's comments because she has lived in the Cove for 20 -plus years and part of the reason that she liked it was because of the diversity and the willingness of the community to tolerate some of that diversity. The guidelines and standards of the Cove, that staff provided the Commission, gave the determination to the Planning Commission. The project was described as a significant variation from the style,- but the neighborhood Commissioner Barrows lives in contains French chateaus, .southwest style homes, and 50's block houses. It has a lot of diversity and looks very interesting. She did not think the applicant's design was radical in terms of design and thought if fit nicely with the neighborhood. She did not see any reason why the Planning Commission could not make a decision about it and was willing to make the decision without sending it to the ALRC. Commissioner Weber said he was less radical and not convinced this design was appropriate for the neighborhood, as it was extremely divergent from the standards in the area. He respected those Commissioners that lived in the Cove, but the reason this came before the Planning Commission was that it was so radically different. He commented you could have a Feng Shui-style house without having the exterior.look like this. He was also concerned that it had not been noticed to the neighbors and they did not have an opportunity to comment on it; whether they were absentee owners or not. He also had a concern that the architectural standards were not more compliant to a more homogenous design pattern for the area and was not in favor of it. Commissioner Quill interjected that homogenous was not what was wanted in the Cove. The Cove was not a tract. Commissioner Weber said maybe that was a bad word to .use, but he did not see anything in the Cove that was similar to this design and questioned whether it was appropriate. PAReports - PC\2009\9-22-09\PC MIN_9-8-09_Approved.doc 15 0 1 0 Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 2009 Chairman Alderson said he had seen the house and the neighbors and came prepared to take a negative look at it until the applicant said he was going to take the eaves down. If the eaves were taken down the "radicakness" of the project would be reduced and then he would be inclined to agree with Commissioners Quill and Barrows that it would be less of a severe architectural change. He asked for the applicant's assurance that the eave angles would be made less severe, then he would .be included to support the request. Commissioner Weber said that was one reason why he specifically asked whether drawings were available. , He said it was entirely appropriate for the Planning Commission to ask for a copy of those drawings. He said he had a problem with the Commission being presented with an application and a design that was not what was being approved. He assumed that the architectural design was going to be re -worked on this before construction and said it was entirely appropriate that it come back before the Planning Commission at that time to make the decision. Commissioner Wilkinson concurred with Commissioner Weber. He said if the design was going to change the Commissioners should have the opportunity to look at the design and to confirm the angle and pitch of what was going to be approved. Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant had his architect with him, which he did. Chairman Alderson addressed Mr. Lopez, the architect, saying you've seen and heard the dilemma that we're faced with. It's within our power to continue this and have you come back and bring revised architectural drawings showing' this roof element -altered per the testimony tonight, we can approve it as is, or we can disapprove it. City. Attorney Jenson told the Commission they could conditionally approve it, just carrying out the representation that the angle is going to be reduced a certain amount. Chairman Alderson responded that Commissioner Weber would like to see that. Mr. Lopez said, at this time, you could see the elevations on the screen, but the total part of the corner was just one foot. PAReports - PC\2009\9-22-09\PC MIN_9-8-09_Approved.doc 16 Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 2009 Chairman Alderson asked if the kick -up was one foot. Mr. Lopez said the fascia, the higher part, was one foot. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if the exhibits shown represented what the applicant was going to do. Mr. Lopez said that was what was represented. Commissioner Quill asked for confirmation that this was less than what was depicted in the example pictures but was, in fact, the correct scale of what was going to be built. Mr. Lopez said yes. Mr. Lopez said the photographs were just examples of what the applicant wanted. Commissioner Quill said he was prepared to approve it as submitted. He said the applicant was not suggesting that they want to change it, he was okay with it and .ready to make a motion to approve it as submitted. Commissioner Weber said he heard something different than Commissioner Quill. What he heard was the photographs did not depict the correct dimensions. He also heard that the architectural submittal did not depict what was going to be built either. Also that the eave was going to be a foot on the outside and the architectural plans submitted did not correctly depict, the scale. He asked if that was correct. Mr. Lopez said it was in scale and it was one foot at the corner. Commissioner Weber asked if the renderings,. provided to the Commission, were going to be revised to reflect a foot on the corner, not what was currently being shown. Commissioner Quill said they currently reflect one foot and that was what was going to be built. He said typical fascia was six inches and this was basically six inches taller, at the corners, than the typical fascia. At the corner the fascia goes up, with that curve to it, twelve inches. Chairman Alderson said it was a six-inch kick -up. Commissioner Weber wanted to make a clarification and said he was looking at the rendering and did not think it was to scale. He saw a six-inch reveal on the fascia and the corner was more than double of what he was seeing. He said the drawings they had were not PAReports - PC\2009\9-22-09\PC MIN_9-8-09_Approved.doc 17 Planning Commission Minutes. September 8, 2009 correctly reflecting the actual dimensions and scale. He then pointed out the corner appeared to be more than six inches. There. being no further discussion it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Barrows to approve Minute Motion 2009-007 allowing the architectural design as submitted; understanding that the change at the corner of the eaves will not exceed 12 -inches in height. AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, and Chairman Alderson. NOES: Commissioners Weber, 'and Wilkinson. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Report on City Council Meeting of August 4, 2009, from Commissioner Weber. He gave a brief rundown of items for that meeting and commented on the discussion of speed postings. Chairman Alderson was unable to attend the meeting of September 1, 2009; however Commissioner Wilkinson was in attendance and gave a brief rundown of the meeting. He commented on several items, including: 1. The fact that several dust control fences, around the City, were looking tattered and torn. He said one resident commented. on actually taking down the fences. 2. Stan Ford (CV Parks & Recreation) gave a presentation of coming events in the City. 3. The date of the Joint Council Meeting; which is scheduled for October 27, 2009. (Staff commented they would confirm the starting time and advise the. Commissioners at their next meeting.) B. Chairman Alderson noted Commissioner Wilkinson was scheduled to report on the City Council Meeting of September 15, 2009, but since he attended the September 1' meeting, Chairman Alderson offered to attend that meeting. PAReports - PC\2009\9-22-09\PC MIN_9-8-09_Approved.doc 18