CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE
JULY 16, 2026
Subcommittee Members Present: Chair M. Steven Camp, Vice Chair Cameron Cosgrove and Alternate Brett Freeman
Subcommittee Members Absent: Member Scott McKhann
Staff Present: Zach Rehm, City Planner
Sarah Chmielak, Contract Planner (Virtual)
Chair Camp called to order the Design Review Sub-Committee (DRSC) Special Meeting for the City of San Clemente on July 16, 2026.
1. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
A. Selection of Design Review Subcommittee Chair and Vice Chair To be continued to the next regular meeting when all regular members are present.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Receive and File Minutes from the May 13, 2026 Regular Meeting There being no changes to the Minutes of the May 13, 2026 Regular Meeting of the Design Review Subcommittee, the Minutes were received and filed.
B. Receive and File Minutes from the June 24, 2026 Regular Meeting There being no changes to the Minutes of the June 24, 2026 Regular Meeting of the Design Review Subcommittee, the Minutes were received and filed.
3. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
A. Public Hearing Project (PHP) 26-212, AT&T CXL00159, 2441 S. El Camino Real
A review of a roof-mounted wireless telecommunication facility to replace an existing small cell site located at 2441 S. El Camino Real.
City Planner Rehm summarized the staff report. A copy is available by contacting the Planning Division.
Contract Planner Chmielak highlighted the following points:
• Purpose of the project is to replace an existing small cell telecommunications site and improve cellular service in the area.
• New design needs a larger Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) enclosure to support four antenna facing different directions, at a max height of at least 47 feet.
DRAFT
Design Review Subcommittee Special Meeting Minutes July 16, 2026 Page 2 • Three alternatives were provided by the applicant
o Option 1 (47 ft high):
▪ Description: "basically an enlargement of the existing box out there... attached or surrounds the elevator shaft."
▪ Appearance: "pretty similar to what's there now, which is a white box.
This would be a slightly bigger white box."
o Option 2 (Staff Preferred, 51 ft high):
▪ Description: "further expanded on the box so to speak for the equipment in order to make it match the window placement." ▪ Features: Added faux windows and covering treatments, higher to incorporate Spanish tile roof.
▪ Appearance: "almost looks as if it were another story with two rooms added on."
o Option 3 (47 ft high):
▪ Features: Flat roof line (no Spanish tile), faux windows and window treatments.
▪ View: From the angle from the south and in the back, lined up with a vertical element (not visible due to trees).
Committee members provided the following comments:
o Options 2 and 3 were described as "clunky," "ridiculous," and looking like a "shoe box on the roof." Option 1 (smallest) was generally preferred over the others.
o Concerns that they would "look silly" and not appear as depicted in renderings, lacking depth as they would be made of fiberglass plastic. o Proposed additions would use FRP material for awning and railing, painted to mimic the existing sand-finished plaster/stucco finish of the building. o The existing building has a Spanish style with a tile roof, but it's a gable roof terminating in an extended parapet, which is "unique for Spanish architecture" and "not prominent" from all angles. The front has a flat parapet extension. o Another alternative could create an "extended parapet with this pitch" (mimicking the existing gable pitch) on both sides, with a "float roof" in the middle. This would relate to the existing architecture and potentially have a "little less profile." The tip of the proposed parapet would need to be at least the height of the antenna (51 ft).
o Another alternative would add "two rows of the tile roofing around the edges" or "a couple layers of a tile" to create a "faux roof on top" or a "little crown on DRAFT
Design Review Subcommittee Special Meeting Minutes July 16, 2026 Page 3 the top" (a "cornice" or "mansard" style) attached to the outside of the box, to add texture without extra walls. This was aimed at making it "better than just a plain box."
o Confirmed that applicant previously attempted to contact the City golf course for an alternative with fake palm tree antennas, but no response. The City Planner present preferred the proposed location over a fake palm tree. • DRSC Recommendation:
o Keep the design simple due to the building's utilitarian nature and function. o "We want the minimum footprint and height with just a screen with the color that matches the building."
o No cornice or additional architectural details. The enclosure should "just make it look like a utility box on top of the building."
o Material must be FRP (Fiber-Reinforced Polymer), not metal. The box will have no top, just four sides, open to the sky.
o Match the texture and paint color to the existing stucco. Paint color is considered the primary need.
The Subcommittee forwarded the project to the Planning Commission for review.
3. NEW BUSINESS
None
4. OLD BUSINESS
None
5. ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
None.
6. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved to adjourn the meeting to a Regular Design Review Subcommittee meeting on July 29, 2026, at 3:00 p.m., San Clemente City Hall, First Floor Community Room, 910 Calle Negocio, San Clemente, CA.
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________________
Chair M. Steven Camp, Chair
Attest:
_______________________________
DRAFT
Design Review Subcommittee Special Meeting Minutes July 16, 2026 Page 4 Zach Rehm, City Planner
DRAFT