HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-08-26 CITY OF PALM DESERT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
• MINUTES
AUGUST 26, 2003
****************************************************************************************************
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 12:32 p.m.
IL ROLL CALL
Commissioners Current Meeting Year to Date
Present Absent Present Absent
Ronald Gregory, Chairman X 14 2
Kristi Hanson X 13 3
Richard O'Donnell X 10 6
Chris Van Vliet X 15 1
John Vuksic X 14 2
Ray Lopez X 15 1
Karen Oppenheim X 7 0
Also Present:
Phil Drell, Director, Community Development
Steve Smith, Planning Manager
Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner
Donna Quaiver, Senior Office Assistant
Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: AUGUST 12, 2003
Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson to
approve the minutes of August 12, 2003. The motion carried 5-0-0-2 with
Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. None
1
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 2003
MINUTES
A. Final Drawings
1. CASE NO.: CUP 02-22
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HUGH JORGENSEN, 8743 Warren
Vista Avenue, Yucca Valley, CA 92284
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of
architecture and landscaping for new car wash.
LOCATION: 42-185 Washington Street
ZONE: PC-2
Mr. Smith stated that there are no landscape plans for the Commission
to review. The applicant will continue working with Diane Hollinger,
Landscape Specialist.
Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner
Van Vliet for final approval of architecture only. Motion carried 5-0-0-2
with Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
2. CASE NO.: C 02-06
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PREST-VUKSIC ARCHITECTS, 72-
624 El Paseo, Suite B-6, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised
roof plans for a commercial remodel.
LOCATION: 72-760 El Paseo, south end of Palms to Pines central.
ZONE: PC-3
Commissioner Hanson stated that the plans show one of the plaster
roof structures being changed to corrugated metal. The face will still be
plaster, but the top of the roof will be corrugated metal. Commissioner
Van Vliet stated that this looks like a pretty insignificant change.
Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner
Hanson for approval. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners
O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR030826.MIN 2
`'✓
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 2003
MINUTES
B. Preliminary Plans
1. CASE NO.: PP 03-16
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HOWARD HAIT, 44-650 Monterey
Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval
of a new 6,192 square foot, two-story office building.
LOCATION: 44-630 Monterey Avenue, Hearing Healthcare Services
ZONE: O.P.
Mr. Smith stated that the site is immediately south of Hacienda de
Monterey. Mr. Urbina stated that the site is approximately 4' higher with
a combination retaining wall plus a garden block wall. There's an
existing home that's going to be torn down and a big backyard that's
going to become a parking lot. The proposed building is two-story at
25' in height. The applicant is asking for a variance for a zero side yard
setback along the Hacienda de Monterey property line. They're
proposing a raised mural to resemble mountains along that wall so that
it increases the aesthetics of the building and we're not looking at a flat,
mundane wall. The tenants will share a common driveway with
Hacienda de Monterey. The building will be stepped up. It starts off
with one story and then there will be a balcony on the second floor in
order to comply with a 1' of setback per 1' of height limit. Staff
recommends that the Architectural Review Commission grant
preliminary approval subject to review of the landscaping plan by the
landscape staff.
Commissioner Hanson asked if the murals are different layers so that
there will actually be some reveal there. Mr. Urbina stated that there
will be some reveal in this area. Jim Macintosh, applicant, stated that
each layer is 4" thick and there are four layers with different textures
and different colors. Mr. Drell asked if they will be encroaching into the
property line. Mr. Macintosh stated that the actual building wall is set in
one foot so that they have a foot to build out with the layering.
Commissioner Gregory asked if there's any kind of control over what's
essentially an artistic-type element. We have control over architecture
and can tell what a proposal will look like and landscaping can be pretty
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR030826.MIN 3
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 2003
MINUTES
close. However, with an artistic-type proposal, who knows what it'll look
like? Commissioner Hanson asked if the applicant had an example of
the mural for the commission to review. Mr. Maclntosh stated that this
has never been done before with this material. Rod Murphy is the
contractor and he's been experimenting with this material. It's a 3-D
panel system, which is basically styrofoam with wire mesh and then
cement on each side. It's semi-experimental in the fact that they don't
have an example to show the commission or photograph.
Commissioner Gregory stated that his only concern was if there could
be some way to make sure that it turns out looking good. The applicant
is being very candid about it being experimental. If it looks great, then
it's good, but if it's not great then there may be a problem. Mr.
Maclntosh stated that he wouldn't want to make it look bad.
Mr. Murphy stated that he's been experimenting with different textures
including raked textures and chiseled textures and they've been getting
some really nice designs. He has complete confidence that when
they're done with this project, that the City is really going to like it.
Commissioner Hanson asked if the applicant could bring in an example
of the mural at the time of their next submittal. Mr.-Murphy stated that
he has a test panel that he can bring in.
Mr. Drell stated that he assumed that the surface is going to be similar
to a faux climbing wall in terms of irregularity. Mr. Maclntosh stated
that he's not going to go for that. He'd rather try to stay with more of a
textured/chiseled surface. Mr. Drell wanted to know what each panel
will look like . Will they all be 4" out uniformly? Commissioner Hanson
stated that they will be 4" out uniformly so each panel will be flat with
texture.
Commissioner Gregory stated that the mural is an interesting element,
but it's mysterious. The applicant needs to show the commission a little
bit more so that they feel more comfortable with it. It's a good idea, but
we need a little bit more information.
Commissioner Hanson stated that the plans show more murals on the
front of the building and also on the right side of the building. Mr.
Maclntosh stated that he didn't want to apply something on one side of
the building without carrying it through the rest of the design. The
windows on the front elevation face out towards Monterey. Monterey is
pretty busy so he's using a mural as a low screen to hide the traffic.
GRIanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR030826.MIN 4
titer`
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 2003
MINUTES
Commissioner Hanson asked if the roof system is deep enough so that
the mechanical units will not be visible above it. Mr. Macintosh stated
that the rendering doesn't show it, but if you look at the plans it takes
that into consideration. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that the
drawings show 42" on the roof system. He asked Mr. Macintosh if it will
be that high.
Commissioner Van Vliet asked the applicant if he's using scuppers.
Commissioner Hanson asked if they're real scuppers or fake scuppers.
Mr. Macintosh stated that they're architectural scuppers. They're
draining the roof drains in down pipes. They won't drain over the edge
of the building. Commissioner Hanson suggested that they be clearly
called out as "faux" or "decorative". Mr. Macintosh stated that there's
no roofing system on the building because he's using all waterproof
concrete.
Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner
Van Vliet for preliminary approval subject to applicant returning with a
test panel for the mural when submitting construction drawings. Motion
carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
2. CASE NO.: MISC 03-19
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) HENRY A. GOTTHELF, NSD
VENTURES, LLC, 7916 Paseo Del Ocaso, La Jolla, CA 92037
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval
of revised elevations for buildings A & B.
LOCATION: 75-300 Gerald Ford Drive
ZONE: Ord. 837
Action: Application withdrawn by applicant prior to the meeting.
C. Discussion
Stephen Henderson, Sears representative, was present and asked for
comments on the exterior remodel. Mr. Drell stated that trellises work in some
places, but look like foreign elements in other places and doesn't make any
sense at all. This is one of those instances where it probably doesn't make
any sense at all. It surely doesn't make any sense in front of the entries.
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR030826.MIN 5
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 2003
MINUTES
Mr. Henderson stated that the intent was that at each of the entries, the
canopy piece rotates and the trellis rotates. He would want the trellis at 12' so
that it's at a different plane than the rest of the trellis, which is at 10' in height.
He would like to tie the two trellises together to provide some shade along the
walkway and not try to deal with the existing building, not that they're not going
to paint it and dress it up. The building is what it is. Mr. Drell stated that it's
actually one of the nicer looking buildings in the mail, which is not necessarily
a compliment.
Mr. Henderson stated that he was concerned with the seismic loading of the
building and doesn't want to start hanging things like overhangs off the
building. This is the reason why they went with the trellises. Commissioner
Van Vliet suggested that they could still do some angled supports to integrate
the overhang with the building without having a big load problem.
Commissioner Gregory commented that the CAD-type perspective tends to
make it look kind of weird. If it were hand drawn, it wouldn't tend to make it
look so surreal looking. The idea is good.
Commissioner Van Vliet asked about the type of material that would be used
on the proposed trellises. Mr. Henderson stated that he's still looking into the
different types of materials. He has two concerns: durability and maintenance.
If he can find a decent composition-type material that will wear well he will use
it, otherwise it may be a powder-coated aluminum that's the same color as the
darker color of the building. The columns would be stucco to match the
material of the building. Commissioner Hanson suggested using a texture
such as a 12" x 12" split-face block for the columns. Mr. Henderson stated
that the reason why he wanted to use stucco is because that is the material
that the building is comprised of. Commissioner Hanson stated that it would
be nice to break that up a little. Give it some architecture. They could
consider doing something out of aluminum that would last forever and you
would never have to maintain it and then use split-face block for the columns.
Use aluminum in an architectural fashion (not alumi-wood). Mr. Drell
commented that they should look at our new carport structure. The roof is a
composite with glue-lam cross members.
Mr. Henderson stated that he has no problem in looking at making changes.
Commissioner Hanson stated that by eliminating certain portions of the trellis,
they can spend more money on the trellises that are put in. It would focus the
attention more towards the entry. Put trellises in where they make sense and
maybe add a little bit more landscaping. Mr. Henderson stated that he doesn't
have a problem with that.
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR030826.MIN 6
1400
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 2003
MINUTES
Commissioner Lopez stated that some thought should be put into a seating
area outside the store.
Mr. Henderson stated that he'll go back and put effort into the areas that need
work. He feels that they're still headed in the same direction. The commission
was given extra plans to review. Mr. Smith stated that this item will be
formally added to the next agenda.
Commissioner Hanson asked if they could add fake cables to the overhang on
the front of the Auto Center building. Mr. Henderson stated that structurally
the overhang is supported with steel. Commissioner Hanson commented that
she's interested in the decorative aspect of this feature. Mr. Henderson
stated that there will be a trellis on the east wall of the Auto Center with vines
growing on it. The CAD designer did not put this on the perspective.
Commissioner Van Vliet asked if the a/c equipment will be on the roof. Mr.
Henderson stated that it will be mounted on the roof. You will not see the
equipment from this view. The equipment will be on the west side. You will
see them from the view from the west. This is the high point of the roof. It
faces the fire station and not towards the public. Commissioner Van Vliet
stated that the a/c equipment is required to be below the top of the parapet.
Mr. Henderson stated that there's a higher parapet on the other side of the
roof.
Mr. Henderson asked if the commission was in agreement that the canopies at
the entry are really a detriment and not a positive feature. The commission
agreed that they would be a detriment. Commissioner Hanson stated that she
would rather see a big planter put in with a palm tree as a softening agent.
Mr. Drell asked if there would be enough room to plant a nice shade tree on
either side of the entry. Mr. Henderson stated that they have 15' at the
entries. Mr. Drell commented that they could use a 6' x 9' planter for a shade
tree. Mr. Henderson stated that there are large planters in this area now, but
the planters look old and faded. They have palm trees in them now. Mr. Drell
stated that usually at entrances you can't plant a nice tree because it could
block the signage. However, this entry doesn't have signage. Commissioner
Hanson stated that this is something that a landscape architect should look at
and come up with a unique solution.
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR030826.MIN 7
`#w'
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 2003
MINUTES
VI. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 1:22 p.m.
STEVE SMITH
PLANNING MANAGER
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR030826.MIN 8