Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-06-10 MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 1091997 I. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 12:30 p.m. Commissioners Present: Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Richard Holden X 17 2 Frank Urrutia X 16 3 Chris Van Vliet X 18 1 Wayne Connor X 18 1 Richard O'Donnell X 18 1 Ronald Gregory X 17 2 Staff Present: Steve Smith Martin Alvarez Steve Buchanan Pat Bedrosian Donna Bitter II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved by Commissioner Gregory, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet,to approve the minutes of the May 27, 1997 meeting as submitted. Motion carried 6-0. III. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO.: PP 86-28 Amendment No. 2 APPLICANT WD ADDRESS). DAVID GEISER c/o MCG ARCHITECTS for BEST BUY, 4180 La Jolla Village, Suite 330, La Jolla, CA 92037; DELLA KOLPIN c/o BEST BUY COMPANY,INC.,7075 Flying Cloud Drive,Eden Prairie, MN 55344 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised free standing monument sign MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 LOCATION: 111 Town Center ZONE: P.C. (3) S.P. Mr. Smith circulated a revised drawing for the monument sign noting that the representative for the applicant, Della Kolpin,was present and prepared to discuss the sign with the commission. He indicated that the proposal would include a yellow background with tile to match the existing ticket sign with black face,back lit letters. The letter size would be considerably smaller than what is shown now. Commissioner Holden felt that the background tile color should match the existing material and color. Ms. Kolpin indicated that what the property owner is going to do with the existing sign has not yet been determined and therefore she was just trying to see what they can get approved for Best Buy. Commissioner Gregory stated that the commission wants to see a design for a monument sign instead of a directory sign. Action It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to approve the revised monument signage for Best Buy using black back lit letters with yellow neon and the background color to match the existing tile background. Size and details to be approved by staff. Motion carried 6-0. Ms. Kolpin thanked the commission for its action of May 27th wherein they authorized the sign to remain until June 25th. Considering that the commission has now approved a replacement sign, she requested one additional week to implement this new sign. Chairman Gregory responded that the commission had gone as far as it felt comfortable and was not prepared to extend the June 25th date. 2. CASE NO.: PP/CUP 96-12 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MULVANNY PARTNERSHIP for PRICE COSTCO, 11820 Northrup Way, #E-300,Bellevue, WA 98005 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised final landscaping plan for fully automated fueling facility LOCATION: 72-800 Dinah Shore Drive 2 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 ZONE: P.C. (2) Mr. Smith reported that when the commission reviewed the plans at its last meeting it was looking for more material. He showed where they have added material on the east, south and north side and ten additional mondale pines. Commissioner Van Vliet indicated that most of the trees in the slope area off Dinah Shore Drive were queen palms so they won't provide much shade. Commissioner Connor agreed and added that he did not want to rely on something that would probably die in a few years (dwarf oleanders). Action It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to approve the revised final landscape plan for the fueling facility subject to adding three (3) additional trees in the south landscape bed facing Dinah Shore Drive and changing out the dwarf oleanders per review by Eric Johnson. (Commission expressed concern with the use of oleander based on the recent Los Angeles Times article indicating the long term effect of the disease problem.) Motion carried 6-0. 3. CASE NO.: TT 23940-3 APPLICANT(AND ADDRESS): FOXX DEVELOPMENT for SUNTERRACE, 73-111 El Paseo, Suite 200,Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of elevations and site planning for Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 11 and 13 LOCATION: Sunterrace (Northwest corner of Hovley Lane East and Eldorado Drive) ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Smith reported that he had a phone conversation with Mr. Foxx earlier that morning and Mr.Foxx had indicated that there had been some sort of agreement with the homeowners association. Mr. Foxx addressed the commission stating that the Sunterrace Homeowners Association's Board members were in the hall discussing the agreement,and therefore he was not sure what their final outcome would be. Mr. Foxx distributed copies of the agreement from Foxx Development along with a copy of the conditions from Sunterrace Homeowners Association. The representatives in 3 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NNE 10, 1997 attendance from Sunterrace were Mr. David Dominik, Dr. Bill Kelly, and Ms. Ellen Kauti. Mr.Dominik addressed the commission expressing that he felt that they have worked very hard in cooperating with Mr. Foxx to make sure that things are compatible in the neighborhood and that the street scenes are compatible. He stated that they now do not have an agreement with Mr.Foxx. Mr.Dominik explained that there are a great deal of encroachments from the front of the houses and noted that the city's code requires that garages are to be set back 20' from the curb. He indicated that many of the Foxx plans have 4' projections from the garage doors making the setback from the curbs at 16'. Mr. Dominik explained that they do not want a canyon effect and do not want the developer taking up all the space in the front yards. He added that they have a nice, spacious, quality neighborhood and are asking the city to do all it can to protect this. Mr. Dominik felt this could be achieved by Foxx meeting all their conditions listed on the June 9th list. He added that they want homes that are a minimum of 2500 square feet. Dr. Bill Kelly expressed his concerns and indicated that he was very disappointed when he saw the Foxx model home. Chairman Gregory stated that the commission could address the setback issue,but when there is an impass they have to look at the developer and homeowners association to work things out. Mr.Foxx addressed the commission stating that he felt he did not belong back before the commission except for Lots 7 and 11 because on February 26, 1997 they received approval from the Sunterrace Homeowners Association for nine (9) lots. He indicated that at the time he applied for building permits for Lots 3, 4 and 9 the former members of the Sunterrace Homeowners Association sent a letter to the city rescinding their approval. Mr. Foxx feels they are entitled to build these houses based on the city's approval. He met with the homeowners on Friday, June 6th and was under the impression that an agreement was made until he arrived at the meeting today to find out that they do not agree with the conditions until he withdraws his complaint against Mr.Pat Leahy. Mr.Foxx stated that he is unwilling to do that. Dr. Kelly stated that the reason Mr. Varner and Mr. Leahy rescinded their approval was because they approved the original plans for floor plans only and did not have a site plan to review. He thought that the issue of Mr. Foxx actually having an approval was a question here. Mr. Dominik asked that if the city wants to accept both pages of the agreement, to please look closely at both pages and what was approved in February. Dr. Kelly stated that he could live with the compromises of both sides of the agreement. 4 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 Action: It was approved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to approve the elevations for Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 13 subject to the terms of the agreement between Foxx Development dated June 6, 1997 and Sunterrace Architectural Committee conditions dated June 9, 1997. Foxx Development to provide a revised site plan for final approval. Motion carried 6-0. 4. CASE NO.: PP 97-4 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GUY EVANS, INC., 31-276 Dunham Way, Thousand Palms, CA 92276; ROBERT H. RICCIARDI, A.I.A. & ASSOCIATES, 75-090 St. Charles Place, Suite A,Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of final working drawings with landscaping plans LOCATION: 75-165 Sheryl Avenue ZONE: S.I. Mr. Alvarez presented the plans noting that the landscaping plans have been revised with some changes made on the east side to conform to the city's shade tree requirements. Comments were also noted by Eric Johnson. Mr. Ricciardi was present to answer any questions. Commissioner Connor stated that he agreed with Mr. Johnson's comments. Chairman Gregory felt that the gray crushed rock should be a brownish colored rock to blend in better with the desert. Mr. Ricciardi stated that the gray rock makes the plant colors look more vivid and added that it is not actually crushed rock but rounded river rock. Action It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the final working drawings as submitted. Commission approved the landscape plan subject to changes noted to Eric Johnson and plans to specify "rounded river rock"in place of the"gray granite ground cover". Motion carried 6-0. 5 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 5. CASE NO.: TT 24254 APPLICANT(AND ADDRESS): CENTURY HOMES for SONATA AT PALM DESERT, 1535 South"D"Street,San Bernardino,CA 92408;R.J.CUNNINGHAM COMPANY, 33282 Golden Lantern Street, Suite 201,Dana Point, CA 92629 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of final working drawings and revised preliminary landscape plan LOCATION: North of Hovley Lane, 1900 feet west of Portola Avenue ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Smith presented plans noting that Eric Johnson had reviewed the landscape plan and listed his comments. He indicated that the working drawings for the homes are consistent with what was approved in the preliminary stage. Action It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to approve the final architectural plans as submitted and the landscape plan subject to changes noted by Eric Johnson. Motion carried 6-0. 6. CASE NO.: PP 96-9 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): McFADDEN&McINTOSH ARCHITECTS for COLD CALL COWBOY PRODUCTIONS, 74-929 Larrea, Suite 1A, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of final working drawings for 14,990 square foot warehouse/office building LOCATION: Southeast corner of Boardwalk and St. Charles Place ZONE: S.I. Mr. Buchanan indicated that the final working drawings were consistent with the approved preliminary plans. 6 NNW MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 Action It was moved by Commissioner O'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the final working drawings for the 14,990 square foot warehouse/office building as submitted. Motion carried 6-0. 7. CASE NO.: PP 95-5 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MADISON MARQUETTE c/o ALTOON & PORTER for THE GARDENS ON EL PASEO, 5700 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90036 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of final working drawings LOCATION: South side of El Paseo between San Pablo Avenue and Larkspur ZONE: C-1 Mr. Smith introduced Mr. Louis Kaufinan of MCG Architects. Mr. Kaufman stated that the project is coming in in sequence and understood that the commission wanted to see all the pieces of the project together before issuing an approval. He indicated that they have submitted construction documents for the Saks building but was not prepared to submit plans for the parking structure or the landscaping. Commissioner Holden asked if there were any conceptual plans for the parking structure. Mr. Kaufinan replied that he did not have plans with him but that they were the same as what the commission saw 18 months ago. Commissioner Holden indicated that the commission was told that the structure had changed because the height was changed. He noted his concern with seeing a building that is a half a block long and has no room for landscaping because it is all concrete. He added that all the screening that was there before will now change. Commissioner Holden felt that the structure is becoming more visible by sinking it because it is more at eye level. Mr. Kaufinan indicated that a design build company has been retained by Altoon & Porter. He assured the commission that the parking structure landscaping, lighting, and trellis elements would be consistent with what they saw 18 months ago. Commissioner O'Donnell stated that he was concerned with the timing because he did not want to 7 VVAW- MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 see the plans for the parking structure later and have the applicant pressing to get it approved because they are ready to start building it. Commissioner Van Vliet asked Mr. Kaufrnan why it was taking so long to get the plans for the parking structure. Mr. Kaufinan replied that the design build firm was still working out the details. Commissioner Holden stated that there was a concern initially because of the change in grade in the sidewalk. Mr. Kaufinan showed on a drawing the relationship between the trees and the sidewalk. Commissioner Urrutia stated that since they have not seen how they intend to treat the parking deck, their comment about not being able to have any landscaping up there concerned him. Commissioner Holden stated that the commission wanted to be assured that Mr. Kaufinan is present along with the design build team when the parking structure is presented to them. Commissioner Connor noted that he had issues that were brought up in the conceptual stage that still had not been addressed and that was there was not enough softness for the parking area and treatment for the Saks building. Commissioner Urrutia added that they also tried to point out that the Saks entrance is the primary entrance and there was not enough attention given to this area. Commissioner Holden added that they talked about holes in the structure to place landscaping that will extend to the top level. Mr. Buchanan indicated that the building and safety department should be done with the final structural review for shell buildings A, B, C, E,F and G and noted that the Saks building had been made longer in depth. Chairman Gregory noted that the commission discourages deciduous trees and noted that the trees planted adjacent to the sidewalk would need to be in boxes. Action It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to approve the plans for Buildings A,B, C, E, F and G. Motion was defeated by a 2-3 Vote with Commissioners Connor, O'Donnell and Van Vliet voting No. Commissioner Connor discussed his concern with not seeing the whole picture, but seeing it in pieces. Commissioner O'Donnell agreed and noted his concern with how the parking structure will integrate in the overall architecture. Mr. Buchanan asked if the building department could issue the foundation permits only for Buildings A, B, C, E, F and G when the plan check is complete. 8 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 Action It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to have no objection to the building department issuing a foundation permit only for Buildings A, B, C, E, F and G to allow the applicant to continue with construction. Motion carried 6-0. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO.: C 97-8 APPLICANT WD ADDRESSI: BRINKER INTERNATIONAL c/o TRG INC. for ROMANO'S MACARONI GRILL, 1224 E. Katella Avenue, Suite 105, Orange, CA 92867 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of changes to building elevations,patio addition, and signage LOCATION: 72-920 Highway I I I ZONE: C-1 Mr. Smith presented photographs of the existing site. The representatives for the applicant,Mr. Lorenzo Reas and Mr. Steve Lewis, were present. Mr. Reas outlined the plans showing a modification to the front elevation. He also circulated pictures of the inside of the restaurant showing the exhibition cooking area serving an Italian menu. Chairman Gregory asked if a landscape plan had been submitted. Mr. Lewis indicated that the landscaping would not change. Mr. Lewis asked the commission if they could consider their request for both preliminary and final approval. Mr. Smith noted that he had concerns with the proposed signage. Commissioner Urrutia stated that he was unclear on the south elevation on how the center portion ties into the back of the building. Mr. Lewis explained how they would be adding veneer to the existing equipment room fascia. Commissioner Urrutia felt that in this case the use of stone work was over used and gave it a very massive/heavy feeling. He added that the entrance they created did not integrate well with the rest of the building. Commissioner Urrutia added that the back part looked like a movie set and suggested taking the initial elements and tieing them back to help it blend in better. Commissioner Urrutia's other concern was the trellis out 9 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 front. He liked the idea of the outside seating area and thought it was a good idea but was concerned with the design of the trellis element and how it was going to impact the street side. Commissioners Van Vliet and Gregory agreed with Commissioner Urrutia's comments. Commissioner Urrutia felt that the landscaping should tie-in with the architecture and felt that the architecture looked too massive. Mr. Lewis indicated that they wanted it to look massive as the concept comes from the rural north area of Italy. He added that they are trying to accomplish a feeling of being inside a wine cellar and felt that the massiveness tied-in with the entire ambiance. Commissioner Urrutia stated that he would rather see something more indigenous to the center. Commissioner O'Donnell urged the applicants to use the stone sparingly and selectively. He liked the green and the patio area. Commissioner O'Donnell added that he would like to see the trellis system worked a different way. Commissioner Holden suggested some type of roof structure behind the movie set parapet wall. Mr. Smith reported that the site was part of the original mall site so it is not entitled to its own free standing sign. He added that if they take away the free standing sign than the sign size meets code. Mr. Smith explained that the city allows one monument sign per frontage and the center already has two monument signs because Hahn Development pursued it as an amendment to the zoning ordinance. Action It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to continue the request to allow the applicant to address the concerns discussed by commission as noted above. Motion carried 6-0. Commissioner Urrutia urged the applicants to take the commission's comments strongly and integrate the landscaping more with the architecture, especially in the outside eating area. 2. CASE NO.: PP 97-8 APPLICANT(AND ADDRESS): O. MICHAEL HOMME,Post Office Box 258, Palm Desert, CA 92261 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architecture and landscaping plans for 12,500 square foot professional office/medical building 10 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 LOCATION: Northwest corner of Monterey Avenue and Fred Waring Drive ZONE: O.P. Mr. Smith presented plans for the office/medical complex showing the one story, low profile building. Commissioner Urrutia asked if there was enough parking on the site for medical. Mr. Smith indicated that they did not. Action It was moved by Commissioner Gregory, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to grant preliminary approval of the architecture and landscaping plans for the 12,500 square foot building. Motion carried 4-0-2, Commissioners Connor and Urrutia Abstaining. 3. CASE NO.: PP 97-9 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LOWE ENTERPRISES COMMERCIAL GROUP, INC., 11777 San Vicente Blvd., Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90049 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of preliminary plans for 125,000 square foot commercial project LOCATION: Southwest corner of Highway 111 and El Paseo ZONE: O.P. Mr. Smith introduced Mr. Ted Lennon from Lowe Enterprises. Mr. Lennon outlined the site plan noting that they had eliminated the real big boxes and moved the larger stores away from Sandpiper. He stated that the initial anchor tenants that are proposed add an exciting element to the plan. Commissioner Urrutia discussed his concerns with the golf and pedestrian access from Painters Path and the second story for Borders Books. Commissioner Connor asked why the architecture was so different from Desert Crossing. Mr. Lennon explained that Desert Crossing is a discount retail center and this project is a much smaller scaled themed project. He added that he was given direction from city council not to continue with the Desert Crossing theme. 11 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 Commissioner Urrutia indicated that he liked what has been done planting wise and the colors are great. He noted that he did not think the project belonged here in the desert as it had a very strong tuscany flavor to it and he did not feel that it integrated well into the desert. Commissioner Urrutia felt that a lot of the elements gave it more of a movie type approach(i.e. the windows, shutters,planter boxes, etc.). He liked the elements but had a problem with it not being desert oriented. Commissioner O'Donnell stated that he did not have a problem with the architecture and thought the site itself leads to changing styles. He added that he thought it tucked into the corner very well. Commissioner Holden stated that felt the architecture was acceptable but had concerns with what happened at Desert Crossing where things were constantly being changed because of the tenant's desires. He felt that the nicest thing about the center was the detailing. Commissioner Van Vliet discussed his concerns with the lack of user friendliness. Commissioner Connor stated that a lot of the time the pedestrian amenities don't get used but they add charm to a center and are aesteticly pleasing. Commissioner Urrutia did support the idea of the details. Action It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to grant conceptual approval of the plans for the 125,000 square foot commercial project directing the applicant to address the concerns discussed above. Motion carried 5-1-0, Commissioner Urrutia Voting No. 4. CASE NO.: PP 97-10 APPLICANT(AND ADDRESS): MONTEREY PROPERTIES, Post Office Box 1027, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of preliminary elevations and site plan for 7,460 square foot office building LOCATION: 44-267 Monterey Avenue ZONE: O.P. 12 NWNW 14�0: MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 10, 1997 Mr. Smith presented the plans indicating that this site was immediately north of the Board of Realtors office on Monterey Avenue. After reviewing the plans, the commission took the following action. Action It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to approve the preliminary elevations and site plan as submitted. Motion carried 4-0-2, Commissioners Connor and Urrutia Abstaining. IV. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m. r- �ft VE SMITH PLANNING MANAGER SS/db 13 If 10 NOX Development Corp. p p 73-1 1 1 El Paseo,Suite 200• Palm Desert,CA 92260•619-568-5773 Fax: 619-340-3683 Cont. Lic. #291022 June 6, 1997 COMPROMISE PROPOSAL FOR SUNTERRACE ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS LOT 5 Mediterranean elevation with Portico columns at 14' setback due to knuckle. LOT 6 Garage columns at 16' setback and on California hip roof at & garage & any design on garage columns due to shorter lots. LOT 7 LOT 8 Garage columns at 17' setback and any garage roof& column design we want. LOT 9 17' setback - do straight column versus step & planter. LOT 11 Garage columns at 17' setback and any garage roof& column design we want. LOT 13 Garage columns at 17' setback and any garage roof & column design we want. Any elevation can be placed on any lot if requested by owner/buyer. On Desert Contemporary elevation - set portico columns at least 15' setback on any lot �Jb/�J1/lyJ! Ub:J1 bi J--Jb6-1 f UJ SUNTERRACE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Based on a careful review of the facts and long and detailed discussions with as many homeowners as possible, the A.R.C. makes the following proposal to Foxx 'Homes / Foxx Development. Foxx Development has offered to compromise on the existing plans . 'This compromise is detailed in their June 6, 1997 memo which is attached and is a part of this settlement agreement. Foxx Development must, in addition to the provisions offered in their June 6, 1997 memo, Mtge the following actions and abide by the following conditions : Foxx will not build a house of less than 2,501 sq. ft. , Size of garage is not considered in above figure. All walls that face street or common areas must be stucco h� �70trje and of a color and texture consistent with Sun.terrace. ran -- If Foxx builds 4 or more "spec" homes, at leae;t one must have a flat roof . This will be consistent with existing? . , : developement. Above referenced 4 does not include lots 12,9, 3,4. All side gates, including the current foxx model, will have '.'solid" not "see-through" gates. Of a size, quality and color consistent with existing homes. -- All homes, except Foxx model which is completed, must have lights over each garage door that turn on automatically at night. This is for the safety and security of the community. _- All front yards, including Foxx model , must have at least two landscape flood or spot lights. Low voltage lights must be at least 20 watts, each. -- Front yard grass must include one or more contures or mounds consistent with existing homes in the development. -- All mailboxes must be very similar in size, color, texture, design to all other mailboxes in Sunterrace. -- Landscaping on common area between lot 11 side wall and curb must be grass with bushes and or vines and have automatic watering connected to home on lot 11 . Approved June 9, 1997. With Attached Foxx memo as part of agreement.