Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-12-12 r MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2000 **************************************************************************************************** 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 Wayne Connor X 18 5 Ronald Gregory, Chairman X 21 2 Kristi Hanson X 17 0 Neil Lingle X 17 3 Richard O'Donnell X 20 3 Chris Van Vliet X 20 3 John Vuksic X 19 2 Staff Present: Phil Drell, Planning Director Steve Smith, Planning Manager Martin Alvarez, Associate Planner Daisy Garcia, Code Compliance Gail Santee, Senior Office Assistant II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 28, 2000 Commissioner O'Donnell moved, seconded by Commissioner Lingle, to approve the minutes of November 28, 2000. The motion carried 5-0-2 with Commissioner VanVliet abstaining and Commissioner Vuksic absent. III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS A. None IV. CASES A. Final Drawings 1. CASE NO.: MISC 00-35 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): Home-Tech Construction Company, 1361 Luna Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of 17' 6" single family residence t wrro' REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12, 2000 MINUTES LOCATION: 77-682 Robin Road ZONE: RE 40,000 Staff presented the plans for this residence and recommended approval to the Commission. Action: Commissioner VanVliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, to grant approval. Motion carried 6-0-1 with Commissioner Vuksic absent. 4. CASE NO.: MISC 00-37 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LENCH DESIGN GROUP, PO Box 450, La Quinta, CA 92253 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of 18' single family residence LOCATION: 130 Chelsea Circle ZONE: PR Staff presented the plans for this residence and recommended approval to the Commission. Action: Commissioner VanVliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, to grant approval subject to the home owners' association approval. Motion carried 6-0-1 with Commissioner Vuksic absent 3 **MOW,) REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12, 2000 MINUTES Action: Commissioner VanVliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, to grant approval. Motion carried 6-0-1 with Commissioner Vuksic absent 7. CASE NO: MISC 00-33 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RYAN ALOSIO, 46-201 Verba Santa Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval wrought iron fence and gate LOCATION: 46-201 Verba Santa Drive ZONE: R Applicant is requesting two exceptions: one for the height of the fence which would be seven feet and one for the setback. The Commission stated that if they were going to grant exceptions there should be some sort of compelling reasons for it. Staff had recommended approval as the view would go through the fence to the newly installed desert landscaping in the yard. The Commission asked why he was asking for a three-foot setback variance. Staff replied that the applicant was trying to run his new fence along the same lines as the fences/walls on both sides of his property. The Commission then asked why it had to be seven feet tall. Staff asked if there was any agreement to reduce the height to six feet in height, consistent with what is next door with the setbacks applicant has proposed which is 12 feet on both sides. Commission felt that there should be a unique situation to allow exceptions and that doesn't seem to be the case on this request. It was agreed that the wrought iron fence would be OK at six feet within the proper setbacks. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to deny the request as there was no information presented to support granting an exception to the height limit nor the reduced setback. Motion carried 4-0-3 with Commissioners Vuksic, Lingle, and O'Donnell absent. 5 REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12, 2000 MINUTES it would be in competition with the AG Edwards signage, they are too close together. The applicant noted that the AG Edward's letters are 21 inches and Dr. Conrow's are ten inches where the client had originally requested 14 inch letters. Commissioner Gregory asked if there was another location on the east side that would be acceptable. The Commission agreed that it should be placed on the blank wall, first story level with the recommendation of"stacking" the wording. On the west side, there are two options. Both consist of signs twelve feet in length with blue 10" channel letters with black returns. One is located in the facia; the other is just below the facia. It was suggested that the stacking idea could be used on this side of the building as well as lowering the sign. This is for people driving east on Hwy. 111 and they will be able to see the monument sign. Commissioner Gregory felt that the west facing wall-mounted sign was redundant with the monument sign. Commissioner VanVliet asked about the coloring of the monument sign and the directional sign as it looks to be white. The applicant responded that the background is just a shade lighter than the lightest shade on the building. He stated that it helped the blue lettering show up better. Commissioner Hanson was concerned that the sign would stand out and not tie in with anything in the building which is what it is supposed to do. The applicant replied that it is just a shade off, that the building was a little too dark, and the blue lettering would show up better. The lettering will be the same blue as on the building. Commissioner Gregory explained the Commission's concern was that in putting the monument sign in, it created clutter to an already problematic situation. Commissioner Hanson suggested that they stick with the lighter color already on the building. The Commission agreed. Commissioner Connor expressed concern about the footing of the monument sign which is located on a slope. The applicant explained that the footing would be level and that the footing color would match building color. REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12, 2000 MINUTES 9. CASE NO.: SA 00-121 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): IMPERIAL SIGN CO., 46-120 Calhoun, Palm Desert, CA 92201 for INTERNATIONAL LODGE NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval to change existing sign cabinet faces to new logo letters LOCATION: 74-380 El Camino ZONE: R-3 (4) Case was withdrawn per applicant's request. 10. CASE NO.: SA 00-126 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PARAGON SIGNS, 17-650 Enfield Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92211, for MAIL and MORE NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identification signage LOCATION: 73-965 Hwy. 111 ZONE: C-1 Applicant submitted a new proposal which includes an internally lit cabinet sign mounted on the front of building which reads Mail and More" and below that "alla prima gallary". The sign is 2 x 12 feet. Per the applicant, the preferred reverse channel letters are astromonically expensive and he can't afford it. Mr. Alvarez also reminded the Commission that the building will have another tenant and that this decision will affect the other half. There is an abundance of other can signs in that area. The applicant provided photos of those signs. Mr. Alvarez stated that once staff and the Commission have the opportunity to bring buildings up to speed in current sign specifications, they certainly want that opportunity. But, there are definitely can signs in the area. 9 REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12,2000 MINUTES 12. CASE NO.: PP 99-13 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HUGH JORGENSON, 45-355 Taos Cove, Indian Wells, CA 92210 for JIFFY LUBE, Homa, LLC, 9200 W. Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90069 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of revised color scheme LOCATION: 42-275 Washington Street ZONE: P.C. Applicant provided the Commission with the proposed color scheme for the Jiffy Lube facility. Mr. Alvarez stated that it is the same color scheme that was approved for the adjacent center. Action: Commissioner VanVliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, to grant approval to the revised color scheme. Motion carried 6-0-1 with Commissioner Vuksic absent. B. PRELIMINARY PLANS 1. CASE NO.: PP 99-17NAR 00-07 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SANBORN ARCHITECTURE, 1227 S. Gene Autry Trail, Suite C, Palm Springs, CA 92264 for DONALD PECK, 3927 Valle Del Sol, Bounsall, CA 92003 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of revised retail building plans LOCATION: 73-300 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 The revised preliminary architecture indicates the building as been expanded by 1500 sq.ft. by adding about 13 feet in length. This is one of the last remaining vacant lots on El Paseo. The 11 REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12,2000 MINUTES 2. CASE NO.: PP/CUP 99-21 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WILLIAM G. SMITH, FOREMOST BUSINESS PARKS, 25351 Alicia Parkway, Suite A, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 LEE ROTSHECK, Development Manager, Mammoth Equities LLC, 25383 Alicia Parkway, Suite L, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 RICK WALLACE, Valli Architectural Group, 81 Columbia, Suite 200, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised preliminary drawings for self-storage facility LOCATION: 78-001 Country Club Drive ZONE: PC-2 (FCO) Commissioners were provided with revised plans. Mr. Smith pointed out that on the east elevation, Building G is adjacent to an existing shopping center so that portion of that blank wall will not be visible. Commissioner Hanson asked if it would be visible to anyone. Mr. Smith responded that you may catch a brief glimpse in passing. The wall is painted precision block articulated at the end because that's where it will be seen. It is also articulated at the top because it might be viewable from the shopping center. Commissioner Gregory felt that there is a considerable view from Washington. It was agreed that finishing the wall with plaster to match the rest of the building would be beneficial. On the west, east, and north sides, there are retention basins which will have landscaping. The landscape architect has met with Spencer Knight. The Commission noted that the client had done an excellent job of picking up the comments from the last meeting. Commissioner O'Donnell asked about the diameter of the beam ends. The posts will be 12xl2" posts and the beam ends will have 10" diameters. 13 REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12, 2000 MINUTES The monument signage: The center has virtually no architectural presence on the street. Mr. Drell's suggestion had been that the monument signage could, if it had architectural quality, substitute for a building presence and because of its location it could be bigger than what was normal. Commissioner Hanson stated that she felt that monument signs were almost useless because when someone gives directions, they don't say "go to the Monterey Shore Center", instead they say "it's located next to Costco". In her opinion, monument signs don't really work. Commissioner Gregory stated that for some of the lesser visible stores which people might not know they are back there, a monument sign would provide some representation. Unfortunately, it doesn't usually work that way because the larger stores usually get their name on top. Commissioner Hanson asked why the client had deviated significantly from the architecture of the existing buildings. The applicant responded that there was no significant unification in the center and they were looking for an opportunity to take something already out there to incorporate into their design. One element on one of the northside shops has tubular steel gridwork which they recognized as the only strong architectural element in the center. They tried to incorporate an interpretation of that element into a lot of the facade and at the same time, letting each tenant have its own identity. For instance, for a lighting showroom tenant, called the Lighthouse, the applicant did an abstract version of a lighthouse at the front of their shop incorporating the tubular steel gridwork into that element. Hopefully, they are creating a standard or character that the rest of the development in terms of renovations or additional construction will follow. Mr. Drell asked if it was conceivable that, since this project will be planned in phases, as tenants sign on, the elevations could change or be customized. The current architecture out there is "big box". This is not big box, these are small users. One of the problems for small users near big boxes is they are overwhelmed by the mass monolithic architecture and don't do well. This proposed design creates some individuality for the store fronts. 15 r� REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12,2000 MINUTES on the north side of the complex. It is an effort to try to create some sort of architectural unity. They are two-sided elements that are 16- inches thick. But the element does not wrap, it is merely a thick face. The projection from the building is about 8-10 feet. The big elements do return to the building, but the smaller elements do not. They are freestanding, but tied back structurally with the steel gridwork. Commissioner O'Donnell asked if the projections could come out even more to 10-12 feet, to the edge of the sidewalk and create a canopy effect. This would create more articulation. Applicant indicated that they could do that, especially to the mid- sized projections. Commissioner VanVliet stated that the monument sign was way too big. He felt that bigger monument signs downgrade the centers. He felt that it should be lower profile, smaller, and more tastefully done. The proposed monument stands at 20 feet. Mr. Drell stated that there is no building there and people need to know that there is a center back there. It is 30 feet back at street level. The Commission asked if the sign could be reduced to 14 or 15-feet tall. The applicant responded that it would have to be re-designed and asked if it were possible to get a decision on the building and come back on the sign. Commissioner O'Donnell said he would consider continuing the case with the acknowledgment that they are basically in approval for what they see with the changes that have been discussed but they need to see the changes before they go for preliminary approval. The Commission needs to see what is going on the other side of the building, other arrangements, alternative finishes on the north end, and pulling out some sections of the front of the building. Landscaping in the parking lot is there, however, in the back, the Commission would like to see a plan. Action: Commissioner O'Donnell moved, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to continue the case in order for the applicant to make the suggested changes: 1) rear elevation - a wall, landscaping, and architectural detailing above the loading doors, 2) north elevation - alternative arrangements and finishes, 3) east elevation - pulling out some of the sections, 4) a landscape plan, and 5) redesigning the monument sign. The motion carried 6-0-1 with Commissioner Vuksic absent. 17 err REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12,2000 MINUTES at the front of the building around to the Dinah Shore (south) side to make it a shaded area for the parking. The trellis is two tiered which gives it more detail and breaks up the large mass. They have added glazing (windows) along the top of the building around all three sides. There had been discussion of adding a shade feature along the top of the structure. Their clients are very concerned about keeping a clean building in the windy area and having ledges that collect birds, dust, or trash. They added an additional tree line in the back to break up the view from the freeway. The Monterey overpass will also break up the view from the freeway. Mr. Nobel indicated that the decorative wall has been extended 150 feet back off of Dinah Shore. And they have added trellis on the front parking lot to provide more shaded parking which will also break up the view. The landscape plan has been changed entirely to desert scape. There is no longer any turf. Along the rear of the property, they propose planting Shoestring Acacias which grow quite tall. A wainscoting will be sandblasted 12 feet high around the building. The sandblasted area will be colored concrete. In terms of the landscaping, Mr. Alvarez advised that the Landscape Manager is pretty comfortable with the content and the materials used. He wanted a little more variety along the rear to break up the height. Commissioner O'Donnell asked if a planting strip with tall palms could be put at the foot of the building on the east elevation near the maintenance shop, exterior wash bay, and the staging area. The east side is under-landscaped. Mr. Noble stated that perhaps that area needed to be under-landscaped because of the truck activity. Commissioner O'Donnell stated that the east elevation in particular is architecturally weak and if possible, some mature landscaping should be put in places that would allow for it and not interrupt the flow of traffic or the truck staging. It is not a significant amount that he is suggesting. How close to the building do the trucks get? The applicant stated that they would be backing into them but this can be addressed. Commissioner O'Donnell believes that the applicant did a good job in addressing the architecture to Dinah Shore and adjusted the north elevation, but the east elevation is begging for some more attention. 19 REVIEW COMMISSION DECEMBER 12, 2000 MINUTES suggested aggregate. Mr. Noble said that was something that could be done. Commissioner Gregory pointed out that every surface of the building is the same material, color, and finish and that so much more could be done. The Commission tends to look for articulation and contrasting elements to provide interest. Again, the palms against the east side of the building would cast shadows on the monolithic building. Mr. Mattias noted that there is an alternate color band and there was no reason it could not be added elsewhere. Commissioner Hanson stressed that something needs to be done, like alternating the colors of the trellis columns, at the pedestrian level where everyone is going to experience this building in order to add more interest. Commissioner Connor asked the applicant if there was a reason why they wanted everything all one color and texture. Applicant replied that the elevations did not reflect reality. In fact, they have one primary color and an accent color. Adding additional bands and detail would not be a problem. Mr. Mattias suggested that the trellis columns could pick up the color of the band. Mr. Noble stated that perhaps they had not given a good definition of their color plan and what was needed was to designate the colors. The columns are cast panel concrete. At the landscape level, Commissioner Gregory wanted to make everything very clear. They would not lose parking spaces by notching the trellis and will give themselves wells to put palms into. This would break up the plane of the building; the berm out front needs to be raised as much as 3-4 feet; the sidewalk should go up and down and be set into the raised berm, it can meander more; and that it could use some boulders. Landscape will be incorporated into the gravel area at the southeast corner to soften that view. Commissioner Connor again stated that getting the shadow lines against the building would go along way to soften the look of the building. The building has been sensitively designed very well for its size, recognizing the function of the building 21