Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-08-09 ti Yam/ CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 9, 2005 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 12:30 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioners Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ronald Gregory, Chairman X 12 3 Kristi Hanson X 11 4 Chris Van Vliet X 11 4 John Vuksic X 15 Ray Lopez X 14 1 Karen Oppenheim X 15 Karel Lambell X 14 1 Also Present: Phil Drell, Director, Community Development Steve Smith, Planning Manager Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Tony Bagato, Planning Technician Ryan Stendell, Planning Technician Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JULY 26, 2005 Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim to approve the minutes of July 26, 2005. The motion carried 7-0. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS A. Mr. Drell commented that he wanted to speak to the commission about a non-agenda item for their opinion on a set of revised elevations. The final phase of the Palms to Pines East remodel is about to commence. However, in the intervening year and a half his costs have gone up 1 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES about $800,000. Therefore, the property owner is working with the Redevelopment Agency for financial assistance. The portions that are left to work on are the parking lot, Rite Aid and the back building on El Paseo. The original plans for the back building were shown to the commissioners. The problem with it is that it doesn't relate at all to the existing tenants. There are three principal tenants (an Italian restaurant, a Mexican restaurant and a French dress shop, as well as an cell site). The elevations have been revised so that one tenant space looks like it was designed for two tenants. The facades don't relate very well to the skin underneath. The plans were revised again and they look even worse. Basically, they've turned the metal roofs sideways so all their architectural impact disappears and I assume that they're very expensive. The other idea was that maybe they should stay with the Mediterranean theme since the tenants are all European- style businesses. It might be less expensive and it would help to differentiate the tenants. Commissioner Gregory stated that they might need a better design. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he had a similar problem with the Palm Desert National Bank remodel. The decision was to use the structure that was there and the forms that were there and add to it instead of trying to turn a Spanish-style building into something else. The commission agreed and felt that an architect should re-study this building. A. Final Drawings 1. CASE NO.: SA 05-90 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LYNN FOSTER, 1000 Lakes Drive, #405, West Covina, CA 91790 WAL*MART STORES, INC., 2001 S.E. 10th Street, Bentonville, AR 72712 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of signage on gas station canopy for Sam's Club /Wal*Mart. LOCATION: 34-220 Monterey Avenue, Gateway Center ZONE: P.C. Mr. Drell stated that this is the first time that the commission has seen the detail of the canopy of the gas station. They had previously been GRanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 2 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES shown a rough sketch. Mr. Bagato stated that he had some concerns about how the canopy looks, as well as the building. The sign itself is being proposed with red non-illuminated letters. One canopy will have both Wal*Mart and Sam's Club signs. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he's always thought that you can make gas station canopy's look pretty bad by trying to do too much and putting too much mass up there. I like that they've kept it simple because they could've added a lot of "weight" to it. The "bunker" is another story. I don't see any reason why that can't add some articulation to it. It looks extremely utilitarian right now. I could see that easily being articulated in the way that the other buildings were that we looked at and approved in the center. Commissioner Van Vliet asked about the lights that are on top of the canopy and wondered if the purpose was only to light up the signage. Commissioner Gregory stated that the commission has had canopies for service stations come before them many a time. We have to consider whether they should design it and risk over-designing it or should it be as inconspicuous as possible. The posts supporting the canopy obviously do relate to the current "bunker" design. When the bunker is re-designed, I would assume that the posts would follow the same architectural theme generated by the building. Also, there's a cornice detail with a color that doesn't appear to match the current proposed coloring of the architectural details. Does it even need a cornice? Steve Ybarra, applicant, was present and stated that the color does match the building architecture. The light fixture is there to illuminate the sign because the sign is non-internally illuminated. There is lighting under the canopy. Mr. Drell stated that he would like to have a lighting analysis for the underside of the canopy. Commissioner Hanson asked about the face material on the canopy. Mr. Yberra stated that it's a plaster finish. It's a metal backing with a plaster texture. Commissioner Gregory asked about the bunker. Mr. Yberra stated that it's a generic building. It's so small and didn't know if it would even be G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 3 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES looked at. It is utilitarian. Mr. Drell stated that we still want it to look nice even if it's small. Commissioner Hanson stated that the light fixture above the canopy is more obnoxious than if you just illuminated the sign. Mr. Yberra stated that at night you won't see the source of the light. Commissioner Hanson stated that you will see it during the day. Commissioner Van Vliet agreed with Commissioner Hanson regarding the light fixture and commented that it looks odd. It was suggested that they could possibly incorporate it into the cornice or use a different type of light fixture. It might look better to have internally lit letters. Commissioner Hanson stated that reverse channel letters would be nice. Mr. Yberra stated that this sign is consistent with the building sign in terms of the material and the application. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he tends to like externally illuminated signs, especially when it provides some variety in a center. I am concerned about the current proposal because it looks pretty bulky. It could be done in a more elegant way. Usually externally illuminated signs have some sort of spots of light and they're not as intense as normally a gas station would be. What I see here is that they're trying to get some intense light on the sign. Commissioner Gregory wondered if it costs less to do it this way than having internally illuminated signs. Part of our focus here is that we want things to be nice. Mr. Yberra stated that the issue here doesn't have to do with cost. It's because of the Sam's Club prototype. Commissioner Hanson stated that she would prefer to see a reverse channel illuminated letter. Mr. Yberra argued that it wouldn't be consistent with the building. Mr. Drell stated that this structure isn't consistent with the building to begin with. Mr. Yberra commented that it's a gas station with a canopy. It's consistent with any other gas station. Commissioner Gregory stated that we could give Mr. Yberra some examples of other gas stations that have done a better job. There's an Arco station on the west side and a Mobile station on the east side of Cook Street. Both of those have come up with designs that are a lot better than the norm. Mr. Yberra stated that he would revise the elevations. Commissioner Vuksic asked him to provide dimensions of the surface so that it can be scaled. Mr. Drell stated that the center is supposed to be done in a Santa Barbara style architecture and this G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdoos\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 4 ern' Nwle ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES building and canopy do not reflect it. When you're using a traditional design for the center, you have to stick with the details on every building. Mr. Drell asked if the commission thought that the letters were too big. Mr. Yberra stated that he felt that the size is appropriate. Commissioner Lambell stated that usually we see more of a reveal on the top and bottom of the letters than are shown in this proposal. Mr. Yberra stated that he'll come back with dimensions that show the reveal. Action: Commissioner Oppenheim moved, seconded by Commissioner Lambell to continue the request to allow the applicant to (1) redesign the structure so that it matches the architectural theme of the center, and (2) revise signage so that it's internally illuminated or use fixtures that match the architectural theme of the center. Motion carried 7-0. 2. CASE NO.: TT 30438 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DESTINATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 74-001 Reserve Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of elevations for the upper golfer's pavilion for Stone Eagle. LOCATION: 48-099 Highway 74 ZONE: HPR Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 7-0. B. Preliminary Plans 1. CASE NO.: MISC 05-29 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MICHAEL HURST, 78-080 Calle Estado, #203, La Quinta, CA 92253- GRanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 5 IW' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES DAVID & IRENE YAGHOUBIAN, 72-114 Follensbee Street, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of exterior remodel of a commercial building in conjunction with the City of Palm Desert's Facade Enhancement Program. LOCATION: 73-280 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Commissioner Hanson commented that it looks like the architect got tired of drawing and just stopped. They're painting the building and adding stone to the columns and to the face of one wall. Commissioner Vuksic asked for a color/material board, which wasn't available. Commissioner Gregory asked how the stone will continue up and how it ties into the band at the top. Will the stone be stuck onto the existing plaster and how will it stop? Commissioner Hanson stated that it would be helpful if the applicant and/or architect showed up. It was recommended the this item be continued in order for staff to take pictures of the building and for the architect to be present and show more details on the building. Commissioner Gregory asked if there would be an opportunity for something to be done with the landscaping to freshen up the building so it doesn't look like an old building with fake rock stuck onto it. Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Lambell to continue the request to allow the applicant's architect to be present to respond to questions of the commission and to provide more detailing. Motion carried 7-0. 2. CASE NO.: C 05-04 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CARVER COMPANIES, 74-947 Highway 111, Indian Wells, CA 92210-7113 MARK GILES, KKE ARCHITECTS, 525 E. Colorado Blvd., 4`" Floor, Pasadena, CA 91101-5226 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of four retail buildings at Desert Gateway Shopping Center. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 6 fir+ `4"01 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES LOCATION: 34-300, 34-380, 34-460, 34-580 Monterey Avenue ZONE: PC Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim to continue the case at the request of the applicant. Motion carried 7-0. 3. CASE NO.: C 05-05 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CARVER COMPANIES, 74-947 Highway 111, Indian Wells, CA 92210-7113 MARK GILES, KKE ARCHITECTS, 525 E. Colorado Blvd., 4th Floor, Pasadena, CA 91101-5226 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of Del Taco restaurant building at Desert Gateway Shopping Center. LOCATION: 34-540 Monterey Avenue ZONE: PC Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim to continue the case at the request of the applicant. Motion carried 7-0. 4. CASE NO.: C 05-06 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CARVER COMPANIES, 74-947 Highway 111, Indian Wells, CA 92210-7113 MARK GILES, KKE ARCHITECTS, 525 E. Colorado Blvd., 4th Floor, Pasadena, CA 91101-5226 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of new Bank of America building at Desert Gateway Shopping Center. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 7 r+' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES LOCATION: 34-420 Monterey Avenue ZONE: PC Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim to continue the case at the request of the applicant. Motion carried 7-0. 5. CASE NO.: PP 05-15 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): OCHOA DESIGN ASSOCIATES, 73- 626 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 EDMOND BERKELEY, 75-100 Merle Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of elevations for a new industrial building in Gateway Industrial Park. LOCATION: 34-501, 34-601 Spyder Circle ZONE: SI Mr. Urbina stated that the proposed project is on two parcels located on the west side of Spyder Circle, south of Dinah Shore Drive. The property line goes down the middle so it's two buildings with a zero lot line but it really will appear as one building. They will share reciprocal access via two driveways on the north and south sides. There are solar panels proposed on the roof of the angled projections. The applicant is requesting an exception to the service industrial 30' height limit to allow some architectural elements to project up to a height of 35'. Mr. Drell stated that a lot of other buildings went to the 30' height limit and then the projection was above 30'. The base height of this building is 24' so they have a little better argument that they're gaining articulation, not just by going above the limit, but they're also substantially below the limit as well. The most significant projections have solar panels on them. Commissioner Hanson asked if that's the purpose of the angled roofs. She wanted to know the reasoning behind the blue cube. Everything else ties into the design, but then they have this odd element and was wondering if there was some reason for that. Edmond Berkeley, applicant, stated that the blue is the coloring in the G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 8 *40d ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES glass. It's not a fair representation of the actual element. Commissioner Hanson asked why that element is all glass versus something else. Mr. Berkeley stated that there's glass at the other end too. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that it looks like the glass is in the roof. Commissioner Hanson stated that the material change sticks out so much and if there was a reason for it, then it might make sense. It was suggested that the architectural elements extend back into the buildings' interior so that they do not appear to be just parapet wall elements. Depth shall be at least 2/3 the width of the element. The applicant was asked to submit a front elevation drawing that shows the differences in the pad elevations between the two lots. The applicant was also asked to submit real samples of the proposed glass. Also, the parapet walls shall be high enough to hide all roof-mounted mechanical equipment. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to continue the request to allow the architect to be present. Motion carried 7-0. 6. CASE NO.: PP 05-13 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SPYDER BUSINESS CENTER, LLC, 471 Old Newport Blvd., #301, Newport Beach, CA 92660 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of revised elevations for four industrial buildings. LOCATION: 73-770 Dinah Shore ZONE: SI Mr. Stendell described the project and explained that this was the second time that it has come before the commission. The applicant seemed to have made all of the changes that the commission had requested. The architect, Bill Skinner, was present to answer questions from the commission. Mr. Skinner stated that the glass was extended all the way up, as requested by the commission and agreed that it looked much better. The back side of building 2 had been redesigned and more interest was added. Commissioner Vuksic commented that he liked the way G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 9 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES that this was executed. Mr. Skinner added that he has shown the parapets for the screening of future roof-mounted equipment that attaches to the existing parapet and is cantilevered about 12" back, so it will appear to be a new element. Commissioner Vuksic commented that he liked this approach. Mr. Skinner went on to say that the returns on the parapets have been extended to meet the criteria from the ARC. He added that he did not want to introduce new finishes so they would be hand troweled to emulate the finish of the concrete tilt-up panels. Commissioners Vuksic and Hanson commented that it should look good. Mr. Skinner commented that he was still pushing for medium reflective glass. Two samples were shown to the commission (black glass and medium reflective bronze glass). The reflective side would be on the inside with the least reflective side facing the outside. The commission examined both samples and concluded that the reflective glass was not that bad on the non-reflective side and was a nice color. Commissioner Vuksic commented that it should be a nice change from the normal black glass. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he thought that the changes, while minor, really made a difference, in his opinion, and thanked the architect for making the effort to make these changes. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Lambell for preliminary approval. Motion carried 7-0. C. Miscellaneous 1. CASE NO.: PP 04-08 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): KSC, INC., KEN STENDELL, P.O. Box 3352, Palm Desert, CA 92261 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request change of approved exterior color on two new office buildings. LOCATION: 73-301 & 73-321 Fred Waring Drive ZONE: OP GRanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Color samples on file with the Planning Department. Motion carried 7-0. 2. CASE NO.: MISC 05-20 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DAVID HIDALGO ARCHITECTS, INC., 316 South 1 s' Avenue, Arcadia, CA 91006 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised elevations for the exterior remodel of a commercial building in conjunction with the Facade Enhancement Program. LOCATION: 73-020 El Paseo (formerly the Columbia Center) ZONE: PC-3 David Hildago, project architect, explained how he addressed the four items previously raised by the Architectural Review Commission. The overhang has been changed from having a wood fascia and now has a standing seam metal piece in this area. On the other side, we added the stone to the Cleaner's area. The other item was a section through to make sure that you don't see the HVC equipment. The parapets are higher than the equipment. The returns on the roof have been increased to 6' and 4', which is shown on the roof plan. Commissioner Vuksic asked the applicant about the Starbuck's roof form. Mr. Hildago stated that it will be standing seam metal running downhill. You'll just see a thin metal edge. Commissioner Vuksic commented that the roof somehow doesn't look like it belongs because everything else is square. Commissioner Hanson suggested that they move the Starbucks sign down just a little bit and then hipped the roof back to create a pyramid. Or it could be done asymmetrically. The rest of the building is contemporary, but the Starbucks architecture is questionable. The applicant disagreed. Commissioner Vuksic suggested making it a standing seam pyramid roof and a little taller. It should be a four-sided element. Mr. Hildago argued that you won't be able to see it from the back side. Commissioner Hanson stated that you'd be surprised at what you can see on the roof-top and used the Tweeter building as an example. Commissioner Vuksic agreed and stated that Tweeter is a very tall building and supposedly you wouldn't be able to see the equipment on the roof because it was so high up in the air and it was in the front of the building so from the back you'd never see over the huge parapet, but you can see it. Mr. Hidalgo G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 11 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2005 MINUTES asked if they could do away with the standing-seam metal roof because doing the pyramid is going to be very involved. The applicant wanted the Starbucks store to look different from the other tenants. Commissioner Vuksic stated that there are a couple of shapes that would work in this area. The applicant asked why the proposed shape doesn't work. Commissioner Hanson stated that she and Commissioner Vuksic don't like it. It's subjective. Commissioner Vuksic suggested that the architect revise the Starbucks roof element and fax the revisions to Mr. Drell and if they have any questions, then they can fax the revisions to the commissioners to review. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic for approval of the plans as revised by the commission at the meeting. Motion carried 6-0-1-0 with Commissioner Gregory abstaining. 3. CASE NO.: MISC 05 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MR. & MRS. DEMORIST, 72-880 Calle de la Silla, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of 18' roof height on a single family residence. LOCATION: 72-880 Calle de la Silla ZONE: PR-7 Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 7-0. VI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 1:47 p.m. STEVE SMITH PLANNING MANAGER G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR050809.MIN 12