Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-11-22 CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 22, 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 17 5 Kristi Hanson X 18 4 Chris Van Vliet X 15 7*excused John Vuksic X 22 Ray Lopez X 19 3 Karen Oppenheim X 22 Karel Lambell X 20 2 Also Present: Phil Drell, Director, Community Development Steve Smith, Planning Manager Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Ryan Stendell, Assistant Planner Donna Quaiver, Senior Office Assistant Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 8, 2005 Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim, to approve the minutes of November 8, 2005. The motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS A. None 1 '`O ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 MINUTES A. Final Drawings 1. CASE NO.: SA 05-142 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MIRAGE LONGEVITY CENTER, 72- 180 Parkview Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of monument sign for Mirage Longevity Center. LOCATION: 72-180 Parkview Drive ZONE: OP Mr. Smith stated that the plans show that the sign would be oriented so that it won't be visible from Highway 111 and wondered if that was the applicant's intent. The applicant stated that they'll put it wherever the commission wants it. Mr. Smith suggested putting the lettering on the awning, which would be more visible than the monument sign. The applicant stated that they want to do both a monument sign and signage on the awning. Commissioner Hanson asked how much signage they would be allowed. Mr. Smith stated that they could possibly have signage on the building, plus one face of the freestanding sign. They would be limited to the amount of building that they have facing each street. The building dimensions are not shown on the plans. The commissioners agreed that it would be redundant to have both a monument sign and signage on the awning. They suggested using the awnings for signage because they're going to be more visible because cars are going to be blocking the monument sign. The applicant agreed that the awnings would provide a better location for the signage. There are two awnings on the building. Commissioner Vuksic requested that the awning signage be reviewed by staff. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval of signage on two awnings only, subject to review by staff. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. 2. CASE NO.: RV 05-02 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ANTOINETTE M. PAIAZZOLA, 42- 841 Christian Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260 GRanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 2 `err' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 MINUTES NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval to store two RV's and a work trailer at a single-family residence. LOCATION: 42-841 Christian Street ZONE: R1 Mr. Smith stated that the property is located on Christian Street which is off of Cook Street. The applicant is requesting approval to store two RV's and a work trailer. Antoinette Paiazzola, applicant, was present and stated that the request is to store one motor home and a trailer. The other RV is going to be moved today. The trailer is not a work trailer, but is used to haul dune buggies. Mr. Smith stated that this came to the commission based on a complaint from a neighbor relative to the screening across the front. The property is on the golf course at The Golf Center. Commissioner Lopez asked about the allowed height of a gate. Mr. Drell stated that it could be 6% but the side yard on this particular property is only 5' so technically the fence in the front that's outside the 5' side yard could be as tall as the building. They could have a higher gate and could be 8' or 9' in height as long as it looks nice. Mr. Drell commented that the goal is to use a screening material that's more attractive than the vehicle. Ms. Paiazzola stated that she was thinking about planting oleanders or palm trees along the side yard to screen the RV. The property in the front is 57' wide and the back is 123' wide. Commissioner Gregory stated that the drawing is not to scale and requested that the applicant return with an accurate plan showing what the commission would consider viable. He suggested that the applicant design an attractive-looking gate that ties in with the architecture of the house and create a landscaped area. Mr. Drell asked about hedge material. Commissioner Gregory suggested that the applicant speak to Spencer Knight about appropriate hedge material. Action: Commissioner Gregory moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim to continue the request to allow the applicant to return with revised plans drawn to scale showing gate to screen the RV and also a landscape plan. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 3 `rrd" ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 AGENDA 3. CASE NO.: SA 05-143 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JGS PERMIT SERVICES, P.O. Box 16659, San Diego, CA 92176 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of business signage for Starbucks. LOCATION: 42-175 Washington Street ZONE: PC (2) Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. 4. CASE NO.: MISC 05-43 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ABBE FLEMMING, 44-836 Santa Ynez Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of a 6' high white vinyl fence in front yard of a single-family residence. LOCATION: 44-836 Santa Ynez ZONE: R1 Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson for approval, subject to approval by the Landscape Manager. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. 5. CASE NO.: TT 30438 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DESTINATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 74-001 Reserve Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210 G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 4 NOW S"Oe ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 MINUTES NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of maintenance facility elevations (including landscaping) at Stone Eagle. LOCATION: 48-099 Highway 74 ZONE: HPR Mr. Smith stated that Mr. Knight is still working with the applicant on the landscape plans but this item could be approved subject to the Landscape Manager's approval. One of the neighbors, Antoinette Carver, was present and reviewed the plans at the meeting. Mr. Knight stated that he and Ms. Hollinger have some concerns about the fact that no matter what you do with landscaping, you're still going to be able to see this area when looking down from above. Mr. Drell commented that he needs to see a photo simulation of the landscape plan in perspective from the location of the Carver's home above the maintenance facility. The goal is to screen the maintenance yard as well as the building. The more offensive view is the yard, not the building. The idea was to have the buildings screen the yard and the landscaping screen the buildings. Commissioner Gregory commented that the idea of a photo simulation is good, but maybe we need it from several viewpoints, not just from the Carver's house, but also from Highway 74. Mr. Drell stated that he didn't think that you could see it from Highway 74 because there are two-story units in front of it. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Lopez to continue the request to allow the applicant to return with photo simulations to show how the building will be viewed from adjacent sites. Plans shall include berming and landscaping. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. 6. CASE NO.: MISC 05-44 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SEFIK DUKIC, 43-820 Carmel Circle, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of a block wall at a single-family residence. LOCATION: 43-820 Carmel Circle GRanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 5 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 MINUTES ZONE: R-1 Mr. Stendell stated that the owner of the home has an existing wood fence which is approximately 6' from the curb and he would like to replace it with a block wall. He lives on a corner lot of a busy intersection. Photos of the fence were passed to the commissioners for their review. The pictures show a tree that's coming through the fence. From our recent approvals of exceptions on walls, the wall should probably go behind the tree which is about 12' from the curb (so that the tree would be on the outside of the wall.) From staff's perspective, we need to see some landscaping and have the wall located 12' from the curb. The proposed wall is 6' in height but the applicant would consider lowering it to 5' if the commission would prefer it. Commissioner Hanson suggested putting a span over the area where the tree is located. Mr. Knight stated that that would be acceptable. Sefik Dukic, applicant, was present to answer questions. Mr. Dukic stated that his house is 20' from the curb and he has air conditioning units in the side yard. Mr. Stendell stated that the plans show undulation in the wall every 30', as required by code. There is existing turf outside the wall. Mr. Drell stated that with exception of the front of the house, the wall would be located exactly where the existing wood fence is. He would be replacing an existing wall. Mr. Stendell stated that some other walls in the neighborhood are 12' from curb. Commissioner Lopez asked the applicant what he has planned for the side yard because usually people park motor homes in areas such as this. Mr. Drell stated that this is an area that he already has. What he's doing is extending it in front of the house. Commissioner Hanson asked why you can't replace something that's already there. Mr. Drell stated that under our City code, if it's more than 50% destroyed then the new improvement has to comply with current code. Exceptions can be granted due to the fact that this is something that's been there for a long time and it hasn't bothered anybody. Commissioner Hanson stated that this would be an improvement, which should be considered as a reason for an exception. Mr. Drell stated that if the new portion of the wall was brought into conformance with the current code, then that would make more sense. Commissioner Vuksic commented that he felt that there should be more give and take. This is all give. It doesn't meet the spirit of the setback ordinance. Sometimes I'd rather keep what's old rather than approve GRanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 6 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 MINUTES something that's not as good as it needs to be and be stuck with it forever. Once they spend that money, they're not going to change it. Commissioner Gregory disagreed. The applicant would likely be inclined to keep his existing wood fence in perpetuity because he won't want to move it closer to his house. There haven't been any complaints about the current location of the fence. Mr. Drell stated that it's legal non-conforming at this point. Commissioner Gregory stated that basically, it's going to stay the way it is, but any new wall outside of that existing location does exactly conform to current setback requirements. The problem is that if we turn this down, then that wooden fence will stay there. Commissioner Vuksic commented that he hoped that the applicant would consider a more artful wall where there's a transition from the existing 6' setback to the new 12' setback instead of just adding a block wall at that point. Mr. Drell suggested doing something unique around the existing tree. As it is, he'll be cutting into the roots on two sides so possibly using a wrought iron feature might reduce the risk of damaging the tree roots. Commissioner Gregory suggested having staff approve the changes to the wall to accommodate the tree. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Gregory for approval of a new block wall in the same location as the existing wood fence (at approximately 6' from curb) and the new portion of block wall shall be 15' from the curb and 5' in height (conforming to all current codes), subject to approval of a landscape plan showing special attention to preserve the existing tree. Motion carried 3-2-0-2 with Commissioners Vuksic and Lopez opposed and Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. B. Preliminary Plans 1. CASE NO.: C 05-05 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CARVER COMPANIES, 74-947 Highway 111, Indian Wells, CA 92210-7113 TARLOS & ASSOCIATES, 17802 Mitchell North, Irvine, CA 92614 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of revised elevations for the Del Taco restaurant building at Desert Gateway Shopping Center. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 7 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 MINUTES LOCATION: 34-540 Monterey Avenue ZONE: PC Commissioner Vuksic stated that he wanted to review a few of the comments that were made at the previous ARC meeting that weren't implemented in the plans. The east elevation doesn't show the area above the entry door on the right side as being popped out. The header was going to come out so it wasn't just a flat surface above the door. Jim Middleton, representative for Tarlos and Associates, was present and stated that this item was taken care of. There is an offset in the door creating an 8" recess. Commissioner Vuksic stated that what he had suggested was that the area over the door be brought out so that there would be some depth there. The window at the drive through is still off-center. Mr. Middleton stated that it is centered and that what he's looking at is probably a shadow line on the rendering. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the boxy form looks just as high as it was on the previous elevation. Mr. Middleton commented that he thought that it had been brought down a little bit. Commissioner Vuksic disagreed and stated that he had asked to have the top cornice brought down by 12"-18". Also, the wainscot was supposed to pop out along the bottom near the tile detail. Mr. Middleton stated that he's added a 6" reveal. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he doesn't see it on the floor plan and what happens when it's not on the floor plan, it doesn't get poured in concrete and then it doesn't get put in. Mr. Middleton stated that it's shown as a dotted line on the floor plan. Commissioner Vuksic commented on the light fixture on the west elevation at the service doors and wanted to know if it was a high pressure sodium wall pack. Mr. Middleton stated that it's a decorative fixture that's supposed to match the shopping center. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it's not drawn like a decorative fixture. The fixtures should be submitted to staff for approval. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for preliminary approval of architecture only subject to, (1) thickening the headers over the doors on the east and south elevations, (2) lower cornice by 12"-18" on the north elevation, (3) show wainscot detail on the floor plans, and (4) exterior light fixtures to be reviewed. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 8 `Vale ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 MINUTES 2. CASE NO.: MISC 05-41 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CARVER COMPANIES, 74-947 Highway 111, Indian Wells, CA 92210 GARY MCGUIRE, 1350 Fashion Valley Road, 41h Floor, CPG, San Diego, CA 92108 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of a new bank building with a drive through. Wells Fargo Bank LOCATION: 34-340 Monterey Avenue; Gateway Shopping Center ZONE: PC Mr. Smith commented that there is an issue in that the pad is 6'-7' below Monterey. This should be taken into consideration when reviewing the roof elements and what's going to be visible. Commissioner Gregory stated that perhaps this is a situation where the burden is put on the architect to make sure that the roof-mounted equipment will be screened. Mr. Drell stated that they may need to add another parapet. Commissioner Vuksic pointed out an area that will need a four-sided form to screen the equipment. Commissioner Hanson stated that the Wells Fargo tower seems abnormally tall and should be brought down. Commissioner Gregory stated that he would like the project to be given preliminary approval with the condition that the architect do site line studies to determine whether or not the inside of the parapets will be visible from different vantage points. If the architect determines that they will be visible, then there are various ways to rectify that, including boxing in one element. This is with the understanding that if it's built and it's seen, we're going to have serious problems. Mr. Smith stated that these issues will be addressed at the working drawing stage as well. Mr. Drell stated that before the project is given final approval, if it's not correct than it will have to be fixed at that point. Commissioner Hanson asked the applicant to lower the Wells Fargo tower so that where the sign exists now and the height from the top of the window detail to the bottom of the sign would be the same from the top of the sign to the bottom of the rafters tails of the top of the roof. The pyramid roof should come down so that the tower is in proportion. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 9 ``rr 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 MINUTES The other tower should be lowered as well, but the two towers shouldn't be the same height. Gary McGuire, applicant, was present and asked about the parking lot trees and wondered if they were required to have one tree for every three stalls. Mr. Knight stated that they are required to have one tree for every three stalls in the entire parking lot. Commissioner Gregory commented that he thought that that was too many trees. The building won't be visible at all. Commissioner Vuksic suggested having one tree for every fourth stall. Mr. Knight disagreed because if you have a double-loaded parking arrangement, it doesn't work because then people would have to walk into the tree. We try to center them in the parking space so people can walk around them. We're looking for 50% coverage. Action: Commissioner Gregory moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic for preliminary approval subject to, (1) lowering both towers proportionally so that the Wells Fargo tower has an equal amount of area on the top and bottom of the signage, (2) architect will submit a site-line study to show that the roof-mounted equipment is screened completely from view from Monterey Avenue, (3) the insets on the south and east elevations shall be inset 12", and (4) subject to approval by the Landscape Manager. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to add Case No. PP 05-25 to the agenda. Motion carried 5-0-0- 2 with Commissioners Van Vliet and Lambell absent. 3. CASE NO.: PP 05-25 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHAD MEYER, P.O. Box 810, La Quinta, CA 92247 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of revised elevations for a new 159-unit residential subdivision. Catavina LOCATION: Southwest corner of Portola and Frank Sinatra ZONE: PC3 GRanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2005 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic for preliminary approval of architecture only. Motion carried 5-0- 0-2 with Commissioners Van Wet and Lambell absent. VI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m. STEVE SMITH PLANNING MANAGER G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR051122.MIN 11