The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007-03-13 , � � ��•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 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 5 Kristi Hanson X 5 Chris Van Vliet X 5 John Vuksic X 5 Ray Lopez X 5 Karen Oppenheim X 4 1 Karel Lambell X 4 1 Also Present Steve Smith, Acting Director, Community Development Tony Bagato, Acting Planning Manager Ryan Stendell, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 27, 2007 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Chris Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, approving the February 27, 2007 meeting minutes. Motion carried 7-0. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS V. CASES: ARCHITECTURAL R�/IEW COMMISSION `''� MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC. 07-02 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SHAWNA RISNES, 73-180 Catalina, Palm Desert, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of a new carport 20 feet from the curb. LOCATION: 73-180 Catalina ZONE: R-1 Commissioner Hanson stated that the applicant did a good job increasing the size of the members and u#ilizing ornamental connections. Commissioner Vuksic asked if the members were 4 x 4 spanning 18 feet. It was determined they were 4 x 4 spanning 16 feet. He recommended changing the members to 4 x 6 because he was concerned about warping and twisting since it was such a large span. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that even the 8 x 12 would probably twist substantially and suggested that the applicant consider laminated members to keep them from twisting and blocking in between to hold it all together. He asked if the trellis would be painted to match the house. Ms. Risnes indicated that the trellis and connectors would be painted to match. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, to grant approval subject to increasing trellis members from 4 x 4 to 4 x 6. Motion carried 7-0. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�ARC Minutes\2007WR070313.min.DOC Page 2 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL R�IEW COMMISSION `'""'''` MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 2. CASE NO: SA 07-08 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIGNTECH ELECTRICAL ADVERTISING, 4444 Federal Blvd. San Diego, CA 92102 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of business signage; Sprint LOCATION: 73-680 Highway 111 ZONE: C1-SP Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant approval by minute motion, subject to one sign. Motion carried 6-0-1-0, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining. 3. CASE NO: SA 07-39 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIGNTECH ELECTRICAL ADVERTISING, 4444 Federal Blvd. San Diego, CA 92102 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of business signage; Sprint LOCATION: 74-930 Country Club Drive ZONE: PC Mr. Stendell stated that this request was for a sign along Country Club Drive and a sign on the side of the building. This was a Sprint location inside an existing Post Net store and the sign program for the center calls for reverse channel or individual channel lit letters. The colors of the sign would either be teal, red or white. He stated that even though these were small signs they go against the sign program and wanted the Commission to review. He also wasn't sure of the validity of signage for a sub-use within an existing location. The square footage of the building allows for more signage. Commissioner Gregory asked if this conformed to the maximum allowable signage area. Mr. Stendell stated that it did conform, but it goes against the sign program approved for this building and our goal was to stay away from can signs. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2007�,4R070313.min.DOC Page 3 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 Commission reviewed and stated that they didn't like the sign because it was a can sign and it was too small. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that he didn't understand why they weren't going with the sign program. Commissioner Oppenheim had concerns with the color. Mr. Stendell stated that they would claim the federally trademark color and then our decision would be individual channel lit letters or halo lit letters. Commissioner Gregory suggested a small, non-illuminated pedestrian sign placed on the column. The commission discussed this recommendation. Commissioner Lambell asked how the placement of that sign deviates from where signs are normally placed, which is usually higher and would we have an option to put it on the pillars. She was concerned that the entire plaza would request signs at eye level. Mr. Stendell stated that each request would be an exception approved through the Commission. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Gregory, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to deny the original signage proposal. Commission approved revised signage request subject to: 1) allow signage to be placed on column between windows and mounted in an appropriate elevation for pedestrian viewpoint; 2) signage to be non-illuminated and stacked; 3) height to be below header height of windows; 4) remove window signage; 5) no signage on Country Club Drive; and 6) submit for staff review. Motion carried 7-0. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2007WR070313.min.DOC Page 4 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL F��IEW COMMISSION �` MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 ----------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. CASE NO: CUP 03-07 amendment APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SPRINT/NEXTEL, Barbara Saito, 310 Commerce #100, Irvine, CA 92620 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of modification to existing 75-foot tall monopalm. LOCATION: 74-665 '/2 Highway 111 ZONE: P Mr. Stendell stated that the applicant was requesting a different style of monopalm with a much larger pod. He also addressed the dead landscaping at that location and recommended that be a part of the approval. Ms. Barbara Saito, Representative stated that due to the merger of Sprint and Nextel they have the opportunity to utilize existing sites to add technology and put the two together at the same location; wherein they wouldn't have to add a pole at a new location. They were requesting one more set of antennas for a total of six inside the pod, but the size of the pod would have to be increased. It currently has a 30-inch diameter and would increase to a 5-foot diameter. It is bigger, but the alternative would be to find a new site for a new pole. She felt that this was a better alternative. She presented a photo of the new design and pointed out that the pod was more tapered and not cut off at the bottom. Commissioner Gregory asked how high the monopalm was. Ms. Saito indicated that it was about 65 feet high. She stated that there would be no change in the overall height of the facility and the pod would not get any longer. Mr. Stendell stated that the pole was 77 feet to the top of the fronds and it called for 68 feet to the top of the pod. Mr. Bagato was concerned with the landscaping at this location because this was the second set of trees that have been planted there. Three of those trees have already died and the ones there now are dying. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�P.RC Minutes\2007WR070313.min.DOC Page 5 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL R�IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 Mr. Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager stated that he has dealt on and off with this particular development. He stated that it has been problematic and recommended strongly that this case be continued until the landscape issues were resolved. There were initial conditions for the development of that cell site to have palm trees and for whatever reason they can't keep them alive. The first people to put that tower in have not complied with their conditions for development. He stated that he would hate to further the development and allow them to make money with their facilities and not resolve the original problem. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it could be approved with the condition that the landscape plan be reviewed and approved. Mr. Knight stated that he was reluctant to agree with that. Commissioner Gregory stated that it would be the same thing as the maintenance requirements. Mr. Knight stated that before they got approval for that cell tower they had to establish the landscape and they never did, but the tower was still there. Commissioner Gregory asked if there was a provision that if they didn't properly maintain an approved landscape that they could be shut down. Ms. Saito stated that for this project there was a maintenance agreement and she would be happy to sign another one now. Mr. Knight stated that maintenance agreements are with the property owner and would fall upon the property owner to enforce that. Mr. Bagato stated that the live palm trees were located outside the fence on the Del Taco site and was concerned that the applicant would have to make an irrigation change to property that wasn't theirs and that is why Mr. Knight was reluctant to have that condition. Ms. Saito informed the Commission that there was an 800 number posted for the public to report damage, trash pickup or dead vegetation. She stated that they were based in Irvine and unless someone calls on that 800 number their regular maintenance was completed in the middle of the night. Commissioner Vuksic suggested continuing the item so that the applicant has a chance to develop an acceptable maintenance program. Ms. Saito asked that if the Commission found the design to be acceptable, would they consider making a condition that prior to receiving their building permit they have a G\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�P.RC Minutes�2007�AR070313.min.DOC Page 6 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL R�IEW COMMISSION `"� MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 maintenance program in place. Mr. Knight didn't think that would work because they are not notified when the permit is pulled. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim, to grant a continuance to allow applicant to provide an acceptable landscape maintenance program for review prior to approval. Motion carried 7-0. 5. CASE NO: C 06-01 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MARK GILES, KKE ARCHITECTS, 525 E. Colorado Blvd., 4t" Floor, Pasadena, CA 91101. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of elevations for a 50,000 square foot retail building; Ashley Furniture. LOCATION: 34-750 Monterey Avenue; Gateway Shopping Center ZONE: PC Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant approval by minute motion. Motion carried 7-0. 6. CASE NO: PP 03-11 Amendment #1 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PREST-VUKSIC ARCHITECTS, JOHN VUKSIC, 44-530 San Pablo Ste. 200, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of Buildings 6-11 at The Village at University Park. LOCATION: 37-825 Cook Street ZONE: PCD FCOZ Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant approval by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0-1-0, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining. G\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2007WR070313.min.DOC Page 7 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL F�C/IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 7. CASE NO: MISC 07-07 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DWAYNE THIESSEN, 69-495 Megan Court, Cathedral City, CA 92234 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of a 15' 10" single-family dwelling. LOCATION: 74-220 Goleta Avenue ZONE: R-1 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant approval by minute motion. Motion carried 7-0. 8. CASE NO: PP/CUP 05-24 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR, TODD KOVALCIK, 14594 7 Street, Victorville, CA 92395 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of 1) new business signage, and 2) revised exterior colors. LOCATION: 73-086 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Bagato stated that this item included two requests. One request was for new business signage, which included an Option A and an Option B. Under Option A there was an architectural step in the building that the sign would cover. On Option B, on the Highway 111 side there was a band covering another architectural step that was similar in architectural detail, so they moved this up to the top covering the stepping detail of the building. He indicated that there would be a monument sign as well. The other request was for a revision in the exterior colors. Mr. Todd Kovalcik, Representative stated that in the beginning they had requested gray for the building color, which was not popular with the Commission. The applicant then submitted G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�ARC Minules\2007�,4R070313.min.DOC Page 8 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL �/IEW COMMISSION `"� MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 colors that were acceptable and now Corporate has decided to go with all new color schemes and new signage. Mr. Bagato presented a color board with the new colors that he felt were "dumbed" down from the approved colors and felt they were a little too simple. Commissioner Hanson stated that it was possible to deviate from Corporate. Commissioner Lambell agreed that the colors did appear to be "dumbed" down. She stated that this was a fabulous looking building with the colors previously approved, and felt that the requested change would not catch your eye. Perhaps if Corporate saw what was around it, they may wish to deviate from colors that have no impact. Commissioner Hanson concurred and stated that they would have to do a really great job on the colors or they would lose the building. Mr. Kovalcik wanted to make sure that he understood that the Commission did not approve of the new colors being proposed. The Commission indicated that was correct. Mr. Bagato presented the signage request and stated this had not been approved when the plans were first submitted. The Commission just saw it on the building plans. Commissioner Hanson felt that they did a poor job of taking this beautiful architecture and overlaying it with some sort of a can sign. Mr. Kovalcik agreed and stated that the more he looked at these plans he felt they could do away with the stripe on the east elevation without any problems. Commissioner Hanson stated that with the way this building had been designed she recommended not using a can sign. Mr. Kovalcik stated that channel letters would definitely be an option. Commissioner Vuksic stated that on the "Rent-A-Car" and "Car Sales" signs they looked like can signs and recommended they not be used. Commissioner Hanson stated that the monument sign was ok. Commissioner Gregory stated that the proposed signs were not what the Commission was looking for. The signs should flow with the attractive architecture of the building and be interesting. He stated that this Commission didn't like can signs on a building that would serve as a billboard. The monument sign was ok, but the colors should be commensurate with the building. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�ARC Minutes\2007\AR070313.min.DOC Page 9 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL �/IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Kovalcik asked if the placement of the smaller sign, Option B located above the door, was agreeable to the Commission. He stated that this sign would maintain the architectural element of the building. The Commission indicated that Option B was better than Option A. Commissioner Vuksic stated that if these were single letters it would be larger than what is shown. Commission and representative discussed ratios for the signs. Commissioner Hanson suggested that the "Rent-A-Car" and "Car Sales" signs be individual letters and not lighted. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to continue Case No. PP/CUP 05-24 subject to: 1) redesigning the sign with individual letters, and 2) color of monument sign to correspond with building colors. Motion carried 7-0. It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell to deny request to revise exterior colors. Motion carried 7-0. 9. CASE NO: C 06-15 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RJ VENTURES, LLC., 1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 920, Los Angeles, CA 90067 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request final approval of construction; Kohl's Department Store. LOCATION: 34-940 Monterey Avenue ZONE: PC-3 The Commission reviewed and discussed the building plans. Mr. Bagato informed the Commission that there were some landscaping issues. Mr. Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager stated that on the south side of the building there wasn't any landscaping that was tall. It goes from ground level right into the wall, which is relatively tall. We have requested that they get something there that is vertical to help soften that wall. He stated that he was working with Stan Rothbart to get some large planters in there G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�ARC Minutes\2007�AR070313.min.DOC Page 10 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 and whatever goes there would be intermittent as you work your way from ground level up to the rooftop. He asked the Commission if that would be acceptable. The Commission stated it would be acceptable. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to continue Case C 06-15 subject to: 1) all parapets returning back 2/3 of the width of the element; 2) tile roof element to include a slope of no more than 4:12; 3) the wing wall at the backup loading dock section to return back into the building and not into the single wall element; and 4) pursue vertical landscaping elements to soften the south side of building. Motion carried 7-0. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP 06-18 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PATRICK YANG, 529 E. Valley Blvd., Suite 228-A, San Gabriel, CA 91776 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of revised plans for a four (4) story hotel, 88-unit hotel with restaurant and related amenities; Candlewood Hotel. LOCATION: 75-144 Gerald Ford Drive ZONE: PCD Mr. Stendell stated that most of the comments from the last meeting were in reference to the restaurant. There were concerns with the steepness of the pitched roof and the roof materials. They revised the materials from a tile roof to concrete flat tile. They have taken the restaurant building and increased its mass by about six feet and simplified it. He indicated that it was a bit larger, but he didn't feel that they were moving in the right direction. Commissioner Hanson stated that she looked at the restaurant building separate from the hotel as its own element. She stated G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2007WR070313.min.DOC Page 11 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL �/IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 there was too much verticality in its detailing that made it feel too tall. In relationship to the restaurant it's better, but it now looks stretched. They need to create horizontal elements that soften the stretched look. Mr. Michael Song, Architect, stated that originally the proportion of the windows was narrow and because it was narrow it looked like a direct reduction from the four-story building. They increased the vertical elements and widened the windows. Commissioner Hanson stated that this was a very tall element, which reinforced the tallness of the space. She again suggested that they create some horizontal elements that break up the tallness. Commissioner Hanson and Mr. Song discussed ways to decrease the tallness. Commissioner Lambell suggested that the horizontal elements be something other than stucco and stated that it all looked one- dimensional. Commissioner Hanson stated that there was tile at the bottom of the buildings and different colors of stucco. Mr. Stendell stated that at the last meeting it was suggested they vary the stucco textures from smooth to rough to differentiate certain areas. Mr. Stendell stated that at the last meeting the hotel had received preliminary approval, do now they were focusing on getting approval for the restaurant elevation. There were still a few minor things on the hotel to be reviewed, but this review should be for the restaurant so they can get on the Planning Commission agenda. Commissioner Vuksic stated that some of the restaurant tower elements from the side views looked odd. They look spindly and didn't wrap back into the building nearly enough. He noticed that the parapet heights were about 42 inches high and recommended at least five feet because of the roof mounted equipment. Mr. Song stated that the height was currently 48 inches, but he would increase the parapets to five feet. Commissioner Gregory stated that his initial impression of this building was that it was cheap. He realized that this was a mean comment, but he wanted to state his concerns. For its size the building looked very inexpensive. Another concern he had was the area in which this very tall building would be situated that wouldn't leave sufficient room to soften the building G1Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2007WR070313.min.DOC Page 12 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL R VIEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 with plant material. On one side of the building they have a four-story element with a planter that is maybe five feet wide. With a building of that height and mass there should be larger planters to help the building nestle in and look more comfortable. In looking through the overall site plan there was a lot of building mass placed in a relatively small area. Maybe if it had more articulation in such a way that it didn't just vault out of the ground on all corners of the four stories, there wouldn't be as much of an impact. Commissioner Hanson commented that it was located in the middle of an industrial zone, which has a little different sense. There are other buildings that are interesting, but they typically don't have a lot of landscaping area around them. Commissioner Gregory stated that this has come up so often when doing industrial buildings, it's either done well or it's not. The reasons we have landscaping is to find a better quality of lifestyle in the City. Mr. Song stated that they deepened the walls and the windows were very deep which increased the cost. Even though they build bigger volume the actual usable space is much less than the floor space. He agreed that by changing the color and texture and increasing the stone and tile, it would create interesting building elements. Commissioner Lambell stated that the applicant needed to address landscaping issues, increase horizontal elements and change textures using stucco, tile or stone. Commissioner Gregory didn't want this to be a grind for the applicant but he suggested that they make changes now so that it will flow smoothly through the approval process. Commissioner Gregory felt that if this goes to the new Planning Commission they would have some concerns. Mr. John Wang, co-owner wanted to express the importance of getting this hotel approved. He stated that when he first submitted the drawings to the Planning Department of the Candlewood country style prototype, it was reviewed and suggestions were made to change the design. They made those changes, but the Candlewood Corporation wanted them to go back to the prototype. He explained that what they were trying to achieve was getting something in concrete with what the City G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2007V,R070313.min.DOC Page 13 of 18 �wr "�rrr� ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 --------------------------------------------------------------------- wanted. He stated that he respects the Commission's input and he will respect whatever decision is made because it is the members of the various committees that live in this City. Mr. Wang stated that because of the unique location of the hotel site, they were trying to make this project work. He was warned that this project would cost 25% more than a typical Candlewood project, but felt that it would be worth it because it was the City of Palm Desert. They strongly believe that this would be a good amenity for the college district and help with the growth and planning of the entire university project. He stated that whatever the City wants they will try to accommodate that. Commissioner Gregory asked the Commission what could they do to assist this project getting through a much more stricter Planning Commission. Commissioner Van Vliet remarked that what they needed was better architecture in the building and suggested that they not rely on paint colors to get definition. Commissioner Lopez suggested that the applicant drive around the City and take pictures to see what has been approved and get feedback from Staff regarding those buildings. Commissioner Oppenheim pointed to another building that was previously approved and stated that it was a massive building for the City. She noticed that a lot of different materials had been used which created a lot of interest; it had softness about it and good architecture. Candlewood compared to that building, appeared stark and industrial looking and didn't have the flavor that the City was hoping to have. Commissioner Lambell agreed and stated that there were different roof elements and horizontal elements. This Commission is asking that you go back and look at horizontal features, adding stone or some sort of texture and not rely on paint color or stucco change to give it more personality and to also adjust the planting area for the landscaping. Commissioner Gregory and Mr. Song discussed appropriate landscaping. Mr. Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager stated that they reviewed the landscape plans and have made significant comments. He indicated that bigger planters would be better and the applicant would need to follow the minimum criteria. He mentioned that when they do their design they have to be considerate of the root development, the three- G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2007�AR070313.min.DOC Page 14 of 18 `t�1w '�r+r ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 dimensional environment below soil level and the three- dimensional element with the head of the tree above. He offered his assistance to the applicant. Commissioner Gregory referred to the roof design on the other building and stated that even though it was multi-storied it had a soft edge to it, which created less of an impact. On the applicant's building it was the opposite. The corners are pronounced which enhanced the verticality and the hard edge look, and because iYs four stories it's more pronounced. He stated that this was a tall building for the city and suggested incorporating elements to reduce the tallness. The Commission and Mr. Song discussed the pitch of the roof and the horizontal elements of the building. Commissioner Gregory suggested that they email a sketch in PDF format to Staff prior to the next meeting. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to continue Case PP 06-18 to: 1) allow applicant to address vertical aspect of design and explore ways to soften vertical elements; 2) add stone elements and vary stucco textures; 3) provide additional landscape design; and 4) submit sketch in PDF format to staff for review. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic absent. 2. CASE NO: C 07-02 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PREST-VUKSIC ARCHITECTS, JOHN VUKSIC, 44-530 San Pablo Ste. 200, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of construction of a Carl's Jr. at The Village at University Park LOCATION: 36-879 Gerald Ford ZONE: PCD FCOZ Commissioner Van Vliet asked if the HVAC equipment was ground mounted. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the equipment would be roof mounted, and the parapet would be somewhere between five and six feet high with a roof access in the middle. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that this was great G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2007WR070313.min.DOC Page 15 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 architecture. Commissioner Hanson stated that it was exciting to get new looking buildings for drive-thrus that have big corporate entities. Mr. Stendell stated that they would be receiving a landscape plan and if there were any issues that couldn't be taken care of at Staff level, it would be presented to ARC. He stated that since this was a drive-thru they would need a significant amount of screening. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim, to grant preliminary approval. Motion carried 6-0-1-0, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining. 3. CASE NO: PP/CUP 06-17 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MD&R ARCHITECTS, 18207 McDurmott, Ste A, Irvine, CA 92614 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of revised elevation for Building C; Westin Desert Willow Resort Villas. LOCATION: 39-500 Portola Avenue ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Bagato stated that the Planning Commission didn't approve the fourth story and recommended approval of three stories. The applicant was moving forward with the design. Commissioner Hanson stated that while the 3-story is acceptable, it is not as architecturally interesting in volume. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant preliminary approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-2-0, with Commissioners Vuksic and Oppenheim abstaining. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2007�P,R070313.min.DOC Page 16 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL�VIEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 C. Miscellaneous Items: NOTE: Mr. Bagato presented Case PP 06-01 C/Z 06-02, which he requested to be added to the agenda. It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, to add this item. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic absent. 1. CASE NO: PP 06-01 C/Z 06-02 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): TERRA NOVA PLANNING AND RESEARCH, 400 S. Farrell Drive, Ste B-205, Palm Springs, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Seeking confirmation that preliminary drawings up to this point are adequately reflected on working drawings; The Vineyards LOCATION: 37-755 Cook Street ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Steve Smith indicated that this was a two story apartment complex with 260 units total. The architect and project manager were looking for direction from the Commission in order to avoid getting too far with some changes that they were contemplating. Mr. Bob Ricciardi, Architect indicated that he was contracted to prepare working drawings based on preliminary drawings, which had been prepared by another architect. He presented his interpretation of drawings and the Commission concurred that was the direction expected. Mr. Gary Wilson, Project Manager was hoping to achieve some value engineering in the design of working drawings. The Commission indicated that without reviewing the actual ideas in plan form it was difficult to say how that would be looked at. They felt that the garage door design was an area that might be acceptable, however they reserved the right to review the drawings. G:\PlanningUanine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2007�AR070313.min.DOC Page 17 of 18 ARCHITECTURAL�VIEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 13, 2007 --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Action: No action taken. VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 p.m. TONY AGAT ACTING PLANNING MANAGER G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�ARC Minutes�2007WR070313.min.DOC Page 18 of 18