Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-03-08 T � �; � �•� CITY OF PALM DESERT -�� _ ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION . � MINUTES MARCH 8, 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 4 1 Kristi Hanson X 4 1 Chris Van Vliet X 3 2 John Vuksic X 5 Ray Lopez X 4 1 Karen Oppenheim X 5 Karel Lambell X 5 Also Present: Phil Drell, Director, Community Development Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Tony Bagato, Planning Technician Donna Quaiver, Senior Office Assistant Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: FEBRUARY 22, 2005 Commissioner Lambell moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to approve the minutes of February 22, 2005. The motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lopez absent. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS A. None 1 , , �rrr, �" ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES A. Final Drawinqs 1. CASE NO.: SA 05-27 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LENNAR, 500 Caile San Rapheal, Suite C-5, Palm Springs, CA NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of monument sign for Lennar. LOCATION: 40-004 Cook Street ZONE: PC Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Lambell for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lopez absent. 2. CASE NO.: MISC 05-11 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of exterior renovation of Laguna Palms. LOCATION: 73-875 Santa Rosa ZONE: R-2 Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Lambell for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0-1-2 with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioners Van Vliet and Lopez absent. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocsWgminWR050308.MIN 2 . , ,� ,�, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES B. Preliminary Plans 1. CASE NO.: PP/CUP 01-30 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RILEY/CARVER, LLC, c/o The Carver Company, 74-947 Highway 111, Indian Wells, CA 92210 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of landscape plans for the Desert Gateway Center. LOCATION: 34-000 Monterey Avenue (Southeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Dinah Shore) ZONE: PC Mr. Drell stated that the landscape plan has been re-designed and the revised plans were shown to the commission. The direction was to try to increase the number of the larger planting areas. Palm clusters will give some relief to what is otherwise a plain landscape. Spencer Knight stated that the Landscape Committee wanted more plant material at the asphalt level. There were some of us who tried to communicate that plants at an asphalt level in a parking lot don't survive very well because people walk over them. We were still tasked to come up with something at the asphalt level. Mr. Drell commented that maybe some intermediate-size and large shrubs would work. Mr. Knight stated that they wanted some kind of plant growth between the canopy top of the trees and the asphalt in some areas. The other comment was that they wanted to make sure that we have lots of color in the shrubs. Mr. Drell stated that this plan has three times the number of trees as the parking lot in La Quinta. Mr. Drell stated that the main entrance to the center has been changed. The goal is to keep the incoming traffic moving and not stopping. The contrasting goal is that they don't want all the traffic being brought up to the storefront. They want to disperse the traffic as quickly as possible throughout the parking field. This plan is to have free movement either left or right without stopping people who are entering. The difference is that at Desert Crossing everyone has to stop at a four-way stop. In this plan, entering traffic will not have to stop. They'll be able to turn right or left. Commissioner Hanson stated that you're going to have to stop because you have people going straight through. Mr. Drell stated that G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocsWgminWR050308.MIN 3 � ' � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES the cross traffic will have stop signs. Commissioner Hanson stated that they'll never be able to cross the street. If you have cars constantly entering, the cross traffic will never be able to get across and then they'll add a stop sign. I can't reinforce enough the fact that this system doesn't work. It doesn't work at Desert Crossing. The problem is that you're assuming that everybody gets into the correct lane and goes the way that they want to go. They never get into the correct lane and they're constantly trying to change lanes. Mr. Drell stated that the good news is that this center has a lot better access. Desert Crossing has two major entries; one off of Fred Waring that people really don't use that much and then one off of Highway 111. This project has four entrances. Commissioner Hanson commented that the one that people will know is the main one. Why can't we make the first entrance a little bigger to take a little more traffic so you don't end up with the lines that you're going to end up with on Monterey? Mr. Drell stated that the main entrance has a signal, which is opposite Home Depot. What we're hoping is that people from Palm Desert will be smart enough to go from Portola to Dinah Shore and then come up Gateway and avoid Monterey altogether. We've provided enough ways to get in so that traffic doesn't back up. Commissioner Hanson stated that traffic coming off the freeway is going to back up. This is a concern. Mr. Drell stated that this is a concern that's recognized by Mark Greenwood and this is the latest solution. Ideally, the ultimate solution is to run people through a little bit further so you have more stacking space. Commissioner Hanson suggested that they spend some time on Saturday and Sunday at the intersection at Desert Crossing and they'll see what I'm talking about. Mr. Drell stated that at Desert Crossing, you do have to stop. Commissioner Hanson commented that she was sure that they're going to add a stop sign at Desert Gateway. Mr. Drell stated that there's been a tremendous amount of argument and discussion about this issue. It was unsure if Public Works has approved this site plan. Mr. Knight commented that the first time that he saw it was at the Landscape Beautification meeting and he wasn't sure if Mr. Greenwood has approved it. Robert Curley, landscape architect, was present and stated that you'll also be able to turn on 35`" Avenue when the next phase is built to the south. Mr. Drell stated that people coming from the south have several choices. On the other hand, we hope that people coming from the north will be able to enter the project easily. Mr. Drell stated that the commission has been directed to look for additional larger planters where you have both shrubs and palm clusters so you have some low material and tall material. Mr. Knight G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocsWgminWR050308.MIN 4 ' � �' � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES commented that he hasn't approved the landscape plan at this time, but it's pretty close. Commissioner Vuksic stated that Commissioner Hanson made a good point regarding the main entrance to the center. She's right when she said that there's going to be a stop sign added, otherwise it's going to be chaos. It looks like they could push the T-intersection back to the middle of the site and they could have parking east of the pads, which would probably alleviate that problem. It looks doable and the developer should think about this so that they don't have problems later. Commissioner Hanson stated that she brought up this issue the . first time she saw this plan. You have to make sure that you get more people off the road and into the center. Right now, Highway 111 backs up past EI Paseo because of this same problem at Desert Crossing. You can sit through two light signals trying to get onto Highway 111 and if you're in the wrong lane you can't get over to go around either. Because of the size of the Desert Gateway Center, I think you really need to look at this. When iYs on paper, it's a lot easier to fix than when it's built. Action: Commissioner Gregory moved, seconded by Commissioner Lambell granted preliminary approval subject to (1) additional planters incorporating palm trees and larger shrubs be submitted for staff approval, and (2) landscape palette and layout be approved by the Landscape Manager. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lopez absent. 2. CASE NO.: TT 33120 APPLICANT�AND ADDRESSI: ROBERT MAYER CORP., LARRY BROSE, 660 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1050, Newport Beach, CA 92660 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of revised plans for a mixed use residential and commercial project. LOCATION: NE corner of Monterey and Country Club ZONE: PR-7 Mr. Drell stated that the elevations look too "busy". There are too many elements jammed into a relatively small space. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs�AgminWR050308.MIN 5 ' � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES Commissioner Vuksic stated that the design is confusing. It's got a little bit of Big Bear, a little bit of high tech/contemporary on some of the corner towers and a bit of strip mall style. These three styles are all mashed together. Mr. Drell asked if the architect was present. Hank Gordon, representative from Laurich Properties, was present and stated that the architect was not available. Mr. Drell suggested that one of the commissioners meet with staff and the architect in the future to review the elevations. Commissioner Lambell stated that the revised elevations are a huge improvement from the original submittal that showed brick on the exterior. Mr. Drell stated that the driveway on Country Club was moved east and it was combined with another access from the residential area. Public Works rejected it and said that the driveway was too close to the intersection. Now there's a direct vehicular connection between the residential and the commercial sites. Larry Brose stated that this is an emergency exit only. There will be a man-gate on the east side of that driveway. Mr. Drell asked why it would be for emergency only. Rod Grinberg, representative for Transwest Housing, was present and stated that they could make it an egress only from the residential site to the commercial site. Mr. Drell asked if the residential portion has a common amenity. Mr. Grinberg stated that they have a small passive park area. Mr. Drell stated it's very small and that most of our other projects like this have provided a common amenity, which was actually a significant marketing tool. It could be something like a sand volleyball court with a picnic area or a swimming pool. Mr. Grinberg stated that the lots are big enough for a swimming pool. Mr. Drell suggested a swimming pool that people could actually swim in. This is something that might be brought up at Planning Commission. Commissioner Hanson stated that she's more concerned about building 34, which is one of the commercial buildings. According to the plan, there is approximately 11' from the property line wall of the houses to the building. The people in the houses are going to be looking at the back of a wall, which doesn't seem right. Mr. Drell stated that there are going to be trees in this area. Commissioner Hanson suggested possibly putting the houses more towards the back of the G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs�AgminWR050308.MIN 6 ' �rr� `�r� ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES lots and putting the pools in the front yards so they're not looking out at the back of a commercial building. Commissioner Gregory asked if we really care about that. Commissioner Hanson stated that she cares about the people who are going to live there. Commissioner Gregory stated that they don't have to buy the home. Our concern is good design. Some people may not care. Mr. Drell stated that these are two-story homes so the mass is comparable to the mass of the commercial building. Commissioner Gregory thought that some people might feel more claustrophobic if they're squished closer to the commercial building. Commissioner Vuksic stated that on shop building A, looking at the east elevation, it shows elements that pop out but they don't go down to the ground. The columns are actually just painted onto the wall. It looks okay in the drawing, but in reality it's going to look really odd because you're going to have architectural masses hanging out there that look like they want to come down to the ground and they're just going to stop. On the north elevation of shop building B, the same thing is happening there. Commissioner Hanson stated that iYs never good to do false elements. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the elements need to come down to the ground. The concrete tile roofs on east elevation of shop building A come out 2' past the building wall. The roof eave is at least 3' below the building wall and it goes up and over the wall on the sides of the mansard roofs. If that's correct, then that means that the roof has a really steep pitch to go back that short distance and climb that high. This is a real steep mansard. Judging by your dotted-in roof, that doesn't make any sense. You need to re- articulate it. It was suggested that they get rid of the mansard roof. The parapet is 20' high and he wondered how high the roof structure is. The roof has to be low enough so that they can get substantial mechanical equipment there and keep it below the parapet line. It doesn't look like they have enough space there. That's something for the architect to look at. Mr. Gordon stated that they are well versed in hiding mechanical equipment. In this particular case, we tried to move the mechanical equipment toward the west side of the building to keep it away from the houses. Commissioner Vuksic stated that on building A on the north elevation, he has the same thing where it's popping out and then it goes around the corner to the east side and wondered about the top part where it's hanging out, but it's not hanging out on the sides. He asked about the material for the trellis that's up on the high- tech towers. Mr. Gordon stated that it's made of steel tube. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it looks like a mixture of Big Bear G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocsWgminWR050308.MIN 7 , , � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES architecture, high tech and strip mall and I think that that needs to be addressed. The steel trellis, as a sole piece, is okay. Commissioner Hanson stated that she felt that some of the elements could work if they had more consistency of materials. Instead of using a wood fascia and wood eaves they could use more of a metal setup so it looks a little bit more high tech. Mr. Drell commented that they should decide what the building is and stick with it, both material-wise and design-wise. Commissioner Vuksic stated that on the auxiliary elevation of the drug store, the elements look pretty shallow. If you're going to stick with something like that, it's going to have to go back a lot more so it looks like a real space underneath. The awnings over the windows with concrete tile on them looks really odd. Commissioner Gregory suggested that they change the concrete overhang to canvas. Commissioner Hanson concurred and suggested possibly using a metal awning. Commissioner Vuksic stated that they could simplify the architecture and improve it at the same time. The concrete tile roofs are "strip-mall like" because they're going to be steeply pitched mansard roofs. The area that shows a Walgreens sign looks like Big Bear architecture. The gable roof with the beams and beam angle supports look very cabin-like. Mr. Drell suggested using steel. Commissioner Vuksic stated that that direction would get them to where they need to go faster, as opposed to making everything in a Big Bear style. Commissioner Gregory wondered if the architect would be able to understand the comments, since he is not present. Mr. Drell stated that he's going to have a meeting with him. Mr. Gordon stated that at the last meeting they were told that the commission didn't like the architecture so the elevations were changed. I would like to bring the architect in to meet with staff and any members of the commission to get some direction to work with. You never know whaYs going on in your minds and he's sitting in Pasadena. Mr. Drell stated that there are elements shown in the plans that have potential. They're an improvement over the previous submittal. It was noted that in the landscape plan, there is no plant material whatsoever in front of the buildings. Typically, in this situation we create some areas for plant material in front of the buildings, possibly in islands. Commissioner Hanson commented that there's currently signage indicated on the side of the drive-through facing the residential site. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocsWgminWR050308.MIN g ' ' �rr�' �` ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES The only people who will ever see that are the residents. It does not make sense to put signage there. The applicant agreed to eliminate this signage. The residential architect displayed a streetscape of the homes. Mr. Drell stated that there's 10' between the homes and the buildings jog in and out. The architect made the changes that were requested by the commission at the previous meeting and created four-sided architecture. The commission agreed that the houses look good. Mr. Drell suggested that the residential architect consult on the commercial project. Commissioner Vuksic volunteered to be on a subcommittee to meet with the commercial architect and staff. Action: Commissioner Lambell moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson for approval of the residential portion, subject to approval by the Landscape Manager. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lopez absent. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Lambell to continue the request with direction that (1) the architect meet with a subcommittee consisting of staff and a member of the ARC to create a more cohesive style for the project, and (2) approval by the Landscape Manager. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioner Van Vliet and Lopez absent. 3. CASE NO.: MISC 05-03 APPLICANT �AND ADDRESS): ALLEN BIXEN, 41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 106, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of revised elevations for a facade enhancement of Matsuri Restaurant, Pete Carlson's Golf& Tennis, and Chinese Antiques. LOCATION: 73-741 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Bagato presented revised elevations for the commission to review. Mr. Urbina stated that one of the comments that the ARC had on the G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocsWgminWR050308.MIN 9 ' ' �,'° ,,,�` ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES previous elevations was that they wanted the Matsuri restaurant elevation facing Highway 111 to look more like an entrance. In the revised elevations, the architect, Charlie Martin, has added two circular windows and expanded the opening and included a door for an entrance. The color has been changed to a light grey with an accent color on the tower element. Future signage will go in the round element on the roof. The windows on the north elevation of the Pete Carlson Golf & Tennis elevation were changed from round windows to rectangular windows. An additional window has been added on the north elevation. There's also a fire/emergency door on the north elevation, as well as an entry door. Mr. Martin stated that the way that the building is put together, there are other walls within the building so they're required to have a fire door in this area. Mr. Martin stated that there was a comment by the ARC at the last meeting regarding the colors. We changed the intensity of the colors and used them throughout all three of the buildings. Matsuri will be a dark red/brown, Pete Carlson's will be greens and blues and the Chinese Antique store will be a pumpkin color. Another comment was about the way the buildings turn and go back in and how this is being handled. All the ends of the roofs, whether they're curved or pitched, are all closed off. Mr. Urbina stated that a significant effort has been made to break up the larger windows and smaller windows that appear to be recessed. Matsuri restaurant will have metal louvers that go across that space with a fire door in the middle of it that will be painted to match the louvers. We're going to cut off the beam ends of the overhangs to clean them up. The four windows on the north elevation of Pete Carlson's will be for display purposes only. Mr. Drell stated that signage is the only thing that will identify this as the front of a building and not a back. He asked Mr. Martin if a sign program was being developed. Allen Bixen, applicant, was present and stated that he's working with a sign company to develop a sign program. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it's going to be really important that all the view angles from the sides are articulated. There are some offsets and they look like they're more than 6". Mr. Martin stated that they may be 12". Commissioner Vuksic commented that on a building of this scale, there's an important difference between 6" and 12". I would say that 9" is a good dimension. 6" is still going to look pretty flat. The changes made to the south elevation are an improvement. The Matsuri restaurant looks a little odd where the louvers meet the door. It was G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocsWgminWR050308.MIN 1� ' ' ��Irr'' � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES suggested that he carry the louver material across the door or do something else so that it doesn't look like you've just painted a stripe across the door. Mr. Martin stated that there's a series of windows on the Japanese restaurant that are recessed and some are actual glazed windows and some are stucco. The louver is being used as a design detail in order to break up a wall with six windows in it. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it looks unfinished. On the east elevation, the sides of the metal roofs don't step back at all. They're flush and wondered about the design intent. Mr. Martin stated that he's trying to get back to what's existing there, which is a series of windows that go across there. Commissioner Hanson suggested attaching a piece of louver to the door of the Matsuri restaurant. The detail on the east elevation at the bottom of the pitched roofs looks good. She suggested doing something similar in place of the wooden trellis. They could use a metal post instead of a wood post so it doesn't look so much Iike a hitching post. Mr. Martin stated that he could do that and get rid of the wooden trellis. We could build it out of inetal with the diagonal supports. Commissioner Lambell suggested removing the picket fence that's existing on the wall. Commissioner Vuksic asked about the material on the tower elements. Mr. Martin stated that they're plaster. Commissioner Vuksic asked about the discs where the sign goes. Mr. Martin stated that they'll be a metal element. Commissioner Vuksic asked about the texture of the plaster of the building. Mr. Martin stated that he isn't sure yet. Commissioner Vuksic suggested using different plaster textures for each building. This is a project that's going to be important to take a pretty good look at the construction documents when they're done. I saw some of the hand-sketched details, which was helpful. I think that the details are going to be really important in this project and we'll look at those in the construction documents. We'll be looking at this more closely than usual in the construction docurnents. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for preliminary approval subject to (1) adding louvers across door on the south elevation of the Matsuri restaurant or design facade in some other way, and (2) working drawing construction details will be closely studied before final approval. Motion carried 4-1-0-2 with Commissioner Hanson opposed and Commissioner Van Vliet and Lopez absent. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocsWgmin�AR050308.MIN 11 . , �,,: � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 8, 2005 MINUTES 4. CASE NO.: C 05-02 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): THE ART OFFICE, PHILLIP SMITH, 83-810 Vin Deo Circle, #101, Indio, CA 92201 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of architecture for prayer chapel and shade structure at Palm Desert Community Presbyterian Church. LOCATION: 47-321 Highway 74 ZONE: P Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Lambell for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lopez absent. VI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 1:55 p.m. TONY BAGATO, ASSISTANT PLANNER for STEVE SMITH, PLANNING MANAGER G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocsWgmin�P,R050308.MIN 12