HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-11-09 *two 11"W
CITY OF PALM DESERT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
• MINUTES
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
****************************************************************************************************
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 12:32 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioners Current Meeting Year to Date
Present Absent Present Absent
Ronald Gregory, Chairman X 18 3
Kristi Hanson X 18 3
Chris Van Vliet X 18 3
John Vuksic X 20 1
Ray Lopez X 19 2
Karen Oppenheim X 19 2
Karel Lambell X 15
Also Present:
Phil Drell, Director, Community Development
Tony Bagato, Planning Technician
Donna Quaiver, Senior Office Assistant
Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: OCTOBER 26, 2004
Commissioner Lambell moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to approve
the minutes of October 26, 2004. The motion carried 5-0-1-1 with
Commissioner Lopez abstaining and Commissioner Oppenheim absent.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. None.
1
*400
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
MINUTES
A. Final Drawings
1. CASE NO.: MISC 04-58, ADJ 04-09
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GREG & HEATHER RAUMIN, 48-440
Prairie Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of
18' roof height for a single family residence.
LOCATION: 48-440 Prairie Drive
ZONE: R-1
Mr. Bagato asked the applicant if she had any pictures of the existing
house. They commented that they could go take pictures during the
meeting and come back with them for the commission to review.
Upon returning with photos of the existing house, Mr. Drell asked Ms.
Raumin about the existing columns on the front elevation. Ms. Raumin
stated that they're going to replace the columns with cast concrete
columns. The existing columns are metal and they're rusting. Mr. Drell
stated that the house has a flat roof and they're moving the garage.
Commissioner Hanson asked about the materials being used. Ms.
Raumin stated that it's tile that looks like stone. Mr. Raumin suggested
that the commission look at the Stone Tile website for more information
on the tile and to see what it actually looks like. Commissioner Gregory
stated that the parapet exceeds the height limit. Commissioner Hanson
stated that her initial apprehension has been fixed by the choice of
material that they're using. The cast stone will add a lot of richness.
Ms. Raumin stated that the stone tiles can go right over stucco.
Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner
Vuksic for approval. Motion carried 5-1-0-1 with Commissioner Van
Vliet opposed and Commissioner Oppenheim absent.
2. CASE NO.: SA 04-144
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EMPIRE SIGN & CRANE SERVICE,
22816 Cove View Street, Canyon Lake, CA 92587
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR041109.MIN 2
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
AGENDA
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of
business signage for A.G. Edwards.
LOCATION: 73-993 Highway 111
ZONE: C1
Mr. Bagato stated that the applicant had originally told him that they
were going to exchange the signs with signs of equal size. However,
the plans that were submitted were not the same size and they look too
large. Staff's recommendation would be to remain with the existing 12"
high letters. The applicant wants to add the letters "A.G." because
clients are confused with the current signage. Commissioner Van Vliet
asked if they're within their allowable signage requirement. Mr. Bagato
stated that they're within the limits but the larger letters look too big.
The commission concurred. Mr. Bagato stated that the current letters
are 12" with a 24" logo. The proposed letters are 16".
Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner
Vuksic for approval of 12" high letters. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with
Commissioner Oppenheim absent.
3. CASE NO.: SA 04-135
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): OUTBACK STEAKHOUSE, 72-220
Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request to remove an
ARC condition that requires the neon sign and border lighting to have a
dimmer device.
LOCATION: 72-220 Highway 111, Outback Steakhouse
ZONE: PC
Mr. Drell stated that the commission had previously added a condition
requiring that a rheostat be put on the neon tube. It was installed
without the rheostat and there wasn't any significant controversy until
about a year ago when it was noted by a Councilman that it seemed
brighter than it used to be. It turned out that sometime in the fall of last
year, the neon tubing had malfunctioned and it might have actually
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR041109.MIN 3
N"I`
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
AGENDA
been out for a period of time. Then the first week in December it was
serviced and the light went back on. What was noted was that
someone got used to the light being out and suddenly it went back on.
As far as it could be determined, it's exactly the same intensity that it
always was. After the complaint, there was an inspection that
confirmed that a rheostat was not installed. In fact, the type of
transformer used actually precludes the use of a rheostat. For the
rheostat to be installed, it would involve replacement of the entire light.
There's an ongoing Code action with an alternative of removing and
reinstalling the entire light. The applicant is requesting deletion of that
condition.
The applicant, Bill Fancher, was present and stated that the neon
tubing has been used for eight years and nobody from the public has
complained. It would cost about $6,000 to change it to conform to the
condition. It's been fine for over eight years so why force us to spend
that much money. We've never done anything to the neon to upgrade
it. We've simply repaired it or replaced what was broken.
Commissioner Van Vliet asked if there was a specified intensity on the
original approval. Mr. Drell stated that it was the standard wattage that
we usually have for neon, but the requirement for the rheostat was that
we would have the ability to dim it. The sign program for the rest of the
building is neon.
Commissioner Hanson stated that she doesn't see it as an issue. I've
driven by it a hundred times and it's never offended me. Honestly, to
even think about it right now I can't even tell you where the neon is.
That's how much it didn't make an impression.
Mr. Drell commented that the applicant doesn't want to make the neon
a higher intensity but would like to maintain it the way it is. The
recommendation of the ARC will go to the City Council. Commissioner
Van Vliet stated that if this was a new building coming in with a request
to add a neon stripe on it, would the commission approve it. Mr.
Bagato stated that the commission approved the neon lighting at Arco
with the understanding that if the City doesn't like it, they would take it
down. Commissioner Van Vliet commented that if there haven't been
any complaints in eight years, then it's probably okay the way it is. The
commission concurred.
G:Planning0onna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR041109.MIN 4
• ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
MINUTES
Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner
Hanson for approval to remove the ARC condition requiring a dimmer
device for the neon lighting. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner
Oppenheim absent.
4. CASE NO.: MISC 04-59
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DENNIS RIVIZZIGNO, 73-312
Ironwood Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of
17' roof height for entryway.
LOCATION: 73-312 Ironwood Street
ZONE: R1-20,000
Action: Commissioner Gregory moved, seconded by Commissioner
Lopez for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with
Commissioner Oppenheim absent.
5. CASE NO.: SA 04-147
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): QUIEL BROS., 272 S. "I" Street, San
Bernardino, CA
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of
tenant signage for new building. Lyle Commercial
LOCATION: 78-000 Fred Waring Drive
ZONE: O.P.
Mr. Stendell stated that the commission was given revised Coldwell
Banker sign plans to review. I discussed the plans with the applicant
and persuaded them to come up with something that's a little smaller
because the original submittal was too big. The revised plans show
signage that's a little bit on the high side, but it's definitely a
compromise.
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR041109.MIN 5
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
MINUTES
Commissioner Van Vliet asked what the height is on the sign. Mr.
Stendell stated that it conforms to the second-story requirements.
Commissioner Van Vliet asked if the fascia is 4' because the original
documents show it not being 4'. Mr. Stendell stated that it is 4'.
Commissioner Van Vliet commented that on page three it shows 1'9"
for the fascia. Neil Bohmen and Steve Lyle were present to answer
questions. Mr. Bohmen stated that the bottom level is 3' and the upper
level is 4'. We're proposing 21" letters on the second floor. Coldwell
Banker requires that you use the actual brokers name with it, otherwise
they probably wouldn't add "Lyle and Associates".
Commissioner Van Vliet stated that his problem with the proposal is
that there's a lot of signage on the building and there's no plan that
really shows what the signage really looks like. All the signs need to be
shown on the elevation. The presentation shows some elevations with
two signs and then it'll show the elevation again with one sign on it.
Everything should be on one elevation. Commissioner Hanson stated
that they need to have a plan that shows everything so they know how
it's actually going to look. Commissioner Van Vliet commented that
they need scaled elevations. Mr. Drell stated that we have a maximum
height of 20' but almost every building has an exception.
Commissioner Hanson stated that the Keller Williams sign seems way
out of proportion. Mr. Drell stated that the scale is so small so there's
really no way to evaluate it.
Commissioner Lambell asked if the letters shown on the frontages are
conceptual and the letter, size and color will vary. Is there a reason
why they're saying that the size will vary. Mr. Bohmen stated that this
is just put on the plans as a disclaimer. Commissioner Lambell stated
that the commission needs to see the whole building with its signage on
all four sides. The colors of the signs are green, red and blue. Mr.
Bohmen stated that Keller Williams always has red signs on all of its
offices because it's a national company. Commissioner Vuksic stated
that it's rare that high signs are allowed up on the parapet and one of
the mitigating measures on other buildings was that they all matched.
Mr. Drell stated that he doesn't know that it's a positive value for all
signs to match. It's a question of the colors being appropriate and do
they compliment each other. Commissioner Vuksic commented that
when a sign is in a prominent location then having them match makes
them go away a little bit. Mr. Drell stated that the purpose of signage
on a commercial building is to identify the tenants, not for them to go
away. If the signs are unattractive, then you don't want the signs at all.
Commissioner Van Vliet commented that the signs have to compliment
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR041109.MIN 6
rr► fir'
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
MINUTES
the building and architecture as well. Mr. Drell stated that we don't
require the signs to be all the same color. Commissioner Vuksic stated
that on a building where the architecture is the dominant element, I can
see some value to having some consistency in the signage. Mr. Drell
stated that on large office buildings, you usually don't have a sign for
every tenant. Commissioner Hanson commented that in this case, it
seems like we have a sign for everyone. Mr. Lyle stated that not every
tenant has a sign. Coldwell Banker insists on having a blue sign and
Keller Williams insists on having a red sign. Mr. Drell stated that if it is
a federally trademarked sign, we have a procedure for reducing its size
below what the entitlement is. Commissioner Hanson commented that
in order to look at this more clearly, I want to see every building face
with all the signage on it to scale to make the determination.
Commissioner Gregory asked the commission if they could give the
applicant some direction on what would be acceptable. Commissioner
Hanson commented that it would benefit the applicant to return with
accurate plans that give all the information required. Commissioner
Van Vliet commented that it's a nice building and he'd hate to see the
signs detract from the building. Commissioner Vuksic asked if Keller
Williams sign would be flexible with the color of red on the sign. Mr.
Bohmen stated that Coldwell Banker is not flexible in any way with the
color of their signage, but Keller Williams may be able to work with
them.
Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner
Van Vliet to continue the request to allow the applicant to return with
elevations showing all the signs to scale on the building. A suggestion
was made to reconsider the color red on the Keller Williams sign.
Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner Oppenheim absent.
B. Preliminary Plans
1. CASE NO.: PP 04-30
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EDWARD OLMEDO, 18111 Von
Karman, Suite 600, Irvine, CA 92612
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval
of revised plans for a new 52,118 square foot concrete tilt-up building.
Bedrosian Tile
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR041109.MIN 7
*41#f
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
MINUTES
LOCATION: 73-550 Dinah Shore
ZONE: SI
Mr. Bagato stated that the commission received revised plans in their
packets. Edward Olmedo, applicant, was present and stated that
they're changing the paint colors and showed the commission a new
color/material board. They're going to keep the same stone and use it
above and below the windows as a wainscot. The building is a lot more
playful and there's a lot more activity going on. Per the previous
discussion when it was felt that there weren't enough recesses around
the building, it was pushed out and returned a minimum of 5' in different
areas. The doors have been incorporated into the design of the
building.
Commissioner Vuksic asked Mr. Olmedo to tell him about the glass
that's being proposed. Mr. Olmedo showed him a sample of the glass,
which has a blue tint. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the building
looks great and he thanked Mr. Olmedo for his hard work and
responsiveness.
Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner
Hanson for approval subject to approval of the Landscape Manager.
Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner Oppenheim absent.
2. CASE NO.: PP 04-16
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): NEDRAC INC., c/o David Carden,
5930 Lakeshore Drive, Cypress, CA 90630
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval
of revised plans for a 6,280 square foot office/warehouse building.
LOCATION: 77-621 Enfield Lane
ZONE: SI
Mr. Drell asked the commission what they thought of the faux
projections. Commissioner Hanson commented that they had talked
about them using spandrel glass.
G:Planning0onna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR041109.MIN 8
*Awe 14000
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
MINUTES
Action: Commissioner Gregory moved, seconded by Commissioner
Lopez for approval by minute motion subject to approval by the
Landscape Manager. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner
Oppenheim absent.
3. CASE NO.: C 04-09
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS: KURT BURKHART-MULVANNY G2
ARCHITECTURE, 601 SW 2"d Avenue, Suite 1200, Portland, OR,
97204
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Exterior remodel of
Jensen's Finest Foods.
LOCATION: 73-601 Highway 111
ZONE: C1
Mr. Bagato stated that the applicant is basically adding stone to the
building and columns, adding trellis structures, adding new light fixtures
and potted plants. Commissioner Hanson asked if they should have a
wall in front of the carts instead of being lined up right in front of the
store. Mr. Bagato stated that they may not have enough clearance.
Commissioner Van Vliet commented that they're trying to hide the carts
with potted plants. Commissioner Hanson commented that generally
pots add a lot of interest, but in this case they're lined up in a row and
people stand out in front of grocery stores and smoke and put their
cigarette butts in the pots. The pots overflow with water and they never
look good. Commissioner Lopez stated that pots are high
maintenance. Commissioner Hanson commented that if the pots were
arranged in a way that there's some design to it versus just a
regimented line of pots where they're obviously trying to hide
something behind it. Mr. Drell stated that they might as well hide the
carts with a wall and then maybe have a couple of bigger pots as
accents.
Commissioner Hanson commented that she doesn't like their choice of
exterior light fixtures. Commissioner Vuksic wondered how bright they
are. Mr. Drell stated that they're unshielded wall packs so they'd
almost have to be non-functional. Commissioner Hanson stated that
they could come up with a better choice. Commissioner Vuksic wanted
to know what the trellis structures are made of. Commissioner Gregory
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR041109.MIN 9
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
MINUTES
suggested integrating the pots with some underground drainage and
irrigation source and then sealed so that they don't drain on the
pavement. It would be pretty barren without any plants. The
commission would like the applicant to be present to discuss any
possible changes.
Action: Commissioner Lambell moved, seconded by Commissioner
Lopez to continue the request to allow the applicant to be present.
Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner Oppenheim absent.
C. Miscellaneous
1. Report on Frank Proulx appeal:
Mr. Bagato stated that the City Council approved the RV screening for
Frank Proulx. Mr. Drell stated that practically speaking, that's how
much room 99% of the people have. To change the standard would
prohibit RV storage in the front yard.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m.
TONY BAGATO for STEVE SMITH
PLANNING MANAGER
G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR041109.MIN 10