Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-09-11 ��•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 11, 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 13 4 Kristi Hanson X 14 3 Chris Van Vliet X 17 John Vuksic X 17 Ray Lopez X 14 3 Karel Lambell X 12 5 Nancy DeLuna X 7 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Ryan Stendell, Associate Planner Renee Schrader, Associate Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant Ill. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 14, 2007 and August 28, 2007 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic, to approve the August 14, 2007 and the August 28, 2007 meeting minutes. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 , with Commissioner Hanson absent. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS V. CASES: . ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 07-24 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EUGENE AND BEVERLY VORWALLER, 72-875 Park View Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a 6-foot block wall with 12 foot setback. LOCATION: 72-875 Park View Drive ZONE: R-1 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to continue Case No. MISC 07-24. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Hanson absent. 2. CASE NO: MISC 07-47 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ROY ASARO ARCHITECT, 42220 Green Way, Suite H Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Reconsideration of a proposed facade enhancement for Larry Grotbeck (Maytag Building). LOCATION: 74-124 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 SP Ms. Schrader presented revisions for the facade enhancement to the Maytag Building. A wrap around metal cladding has been proposed on top of an overhang that would be extended on the wall without having to incur additional structural architecture. Plans include the addition of two (2) trees in the rear parking lot, however after review by the Landscape Specialist they determined that there wasn't enough room to meet the City's code requirement for the size of planter, which is 7- foot by 9-foot. It was also determined that irrigation may be a problem. The rear of the building does not qualify for facade enhancement monies, so this would be completely done by the applicant. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Flles\ARC Minutes\2007\AR070911.min.DOC Page 2 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REW COMMISSION *,"e MINUTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 Commissioner Van Wet asked if the applicant would be doing a new hardscape with all new paving, in which case he felt that they could get irrigation lines in the planter areas. Ms. Schrader indicated that the existing parking lot is currently dirt and not paved and stated that they could get irrigation lines in, however the Landscape Specialist felt that it would have to be under concrete. At this time, they felt it wouldn't work and in order to get a formidable tree that would endure, they would need to have the trees placed in planters that are a minimum 7- foot x 9-foot. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that he wasn't advocating downsizing the planter size, it just seemed important to get some trees in the back because the building is so ugly in the back. He felt that running irrigation pipes underneath the concrete would be okay as long as it was deep enough. Commissioner Van Vliet mentioned the soffit and asked if it was going against a gabled roof. Mr. Roy Asaro, Architect, answered that it would be below the roof and designed to look like an awning. It would be wrapped with oxidized metal to look like an overhang and attached like an awning below the gabled ends. They would touch each end just below where the gabled ends come down and hit at the lowest points. It would then come across horizontally coming out 18 inches and 15 inches tall, flush with the wall. They would also paint the drip edge to match the oxidized metal to enhance the gabled ends. The overhang would be located over the doors and the rest would be a clad fascia. The Commission discussed trees, planter size and parking. Mr. Larry Grotbeck, owner, stated that there was a lot of room in the back parking lot and didn't see a reason not to have 7-foot x 9-foot planters back there. Mr. Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager, stated that a 7- foot x 9-foot planter would fit between a standard 9-foot x 18-foot parking stall allowing for a compact car parking space. The Commission discussed tree expansion and turning a few parking stalls into an area for the trees. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner DeLuna, to grant approval subject to: 1) adding two (2) trees placed in two (2) minimum 7-foot x 9-foot planters; and, 2) applicant working with Landscape Specialist to resolve landscaping details. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioner Hanson absent. C:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\ARC Minutes\2007\AR070911.min.DOC Page 3 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 3. CASE NO: MISC 07-35 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GARY LEMON, 70446 Boothill Road, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of four (4) homes with a maximum of 18-foot high roof elements. LOCATION: 73-020, 73-040, 73-060 & 73-090 Kavanaugh Court ZONE: R1 10,000 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic, to grant approval by minute motion of Lots 5, 6 and 7 and continue Lot 8. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with Commissioner Lambell abstaining and Commissioner Hanson absent. 4. CASE NO: PP 05-12 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WESTERN NATIONAL REALTY ADVISORS, 8 Executive Circle, Irvine, CA 92807 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of 103 multi-family residences. LOCATION: 76-000 Frank Sinatra ZONE: PCD Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic, to grant approval by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Hanson absent. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\ARC Minutes\2007\AR070911.min.DOC Page 4 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REEW COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP 07-08 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PRESTNUKSIC ARCHITECTS, 44-530 San Pablo Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a two-story 15,459 square foot retail/restaurant; Colonnade. LOCATION: 73-999 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 SP Ms. Schrader presented a proposal to demolish the existing Picanha restaurant. The building taking its place would be two-story with retail on the bottom and a restaurant on the second story with contemporary style architecture. This proposal includes a variance request for three (3) distinct items: height increase, side setback encroachment and to allow the building to encroach into the required commercial street corner. The project requires an additional six (6) feet above the 30-foot clearance for commercial and an exemption or a variance for the side street setback. The side street setback normally would require a five (5) foot setback from the property line, but the project would maintain a 2.5-foot setback. However, by doing so the sidewalk would remain the same size on the entire corner so it may not have that much of an impact. Another rationale for lessening its impact is the fact that this second story restaurant element is set back by a 17-foot terrace all the way around the corner. The general average heights of the predominant pieces are between 29 feet 6 inches and 31 feet and still within the limit. There is an elevator and the plans indicate the handicap path of travel. The landscape plan was submitted and reviewed by the Landscape Specialist and the comments were included in the staff report requesting a number of changes. Commissioner DeLuna stated that the color of the colonnade building next door was very light and asked if that would be updated. Commissioner Vuksic indicated that he would be meeting with the building owner about giving the existing colonnade building a fresher look, including paint colors. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\ARC Minutes\2007WR070911.min.DOC Page 5 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REEW COMMISSION *fto� MINUTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 The Commission discussed the water features on the plans. Mr. David Drake, designer, indicated that it was a recirculating fountain and that they were trying to keep the alley a nice place to walk through for parking. Commissioner DeLuna asked if they addressed LEED standards in the design. Mr. Vuksic, architect, stated that they did not, but they were meeting Title 24 energy calculations. Mr. Bagato stated that City standards are above Title 24. The Commission discussed water features and water calculations. Mr. Vuksic mentioned that the reason for the exception of the setback on Lupine is that the property line on Lupine is further back from the curb than it is at El Paseo. They thought it was reasonable to have the width equal on El Paseo and Lupine for continuity. Mr. Bagato stated that it was consistent with how far The Gardens were from the street, so they were not asking for anything above and beyond the normal. Mr. Vuksic referred to the issue of height and stated that the only part that exceeds the height limit was the tower element on the corner. He indicated that they have worked to keep it at 10% of the overall roof area. Mr. Bagato stated this was not considered a variance and referred to Section 25.56, which says tower elements that shall exceed 10% floor area can be approved over the height and would require approval by City Council. The only variance would be for the setback and the daylight triangle. He discussed the daylight triangle and stated that it didn't make sense on El Paseo on the properties with small lots to have a 30-foot tall building set back 60 feet from the corner. It wouldn't be possible for a retail/pedestrian street building. He stated that they would like to come up with a plan that would be more specific to El Paseo; parking, architecture, setbacks, landscaping and hardscaping, so that these issues can be addressed in the future. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that because the top floor steps back it doesn't dominate the corner like some buildings could. The Commission reviewed and discussed landscaping. Mr. Spencer Knight, Landscaping Manager, had concerns with this being such a big building on a small lot and stated that it was under-landscaped and didn't meet the City's parking lot tree ordinance. He said that this was always a problem with El Paseo and the space dedicated to landscaping was minimal at best with not much canopy over the hardscape. Ms. Diane Hollinger, Landscaped Specialist, stated that there were a lot of tall plants and a lot of low plants but nothing in the middle. She suggested having medium size plants to help break up the huge expanse of building and stated that they could have pots that have greenery in them. Mr. Drake agreed with their suggestions. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\ARC Minutes\2007WR070911.min.DOC Page 6 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION �wr VI MINUTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 Commissioner Lopez referred to the pots on the staircase and asked if they were movable or attached to the building. Mr. Drake stated that the ones out in the front were a fire element and would be used by the restaurant to attract attention. The other pots going up the side stairs would alternate between fire elements and planters. Mr. Knight stated that there would be a problem with maintaining the plants. He suggested that they discuss that issue when reviewing the landscape plans. The Commission discussed the issues with the irrigation and maintenance of the pots. Commissioner Lopez stated that maintenance of the pots were an issue. He indicated that it wasn't how they looked but problems with the irrigation. For instance, how the valve sticks on or how they are on too long, then you have a puddle and a mess at the base of them and asked if they would be putting in a drain to alleviate that problem. Mr. Drake stated that they would have a small dry well area underneath for overflow and bringing the irrigation up through the concrete. Mr. Gregory stated that it would be to compacted and it would do it all over again. Mr. Drake stated that there would also be an internal irrigation that would be used. Commissioner Lopez stated again that a drain of some sort was needed. Commissioner Lopez questioned the size of the palm trees proposed for the front of the building. He indicated that they appeared to be only one foot or less from the building and didn't feel that they could get the palms in that location. The Commission and the Landscape Manager discussed the size and location of the trees. Mr. Knight indicated that it would take a higher level of scrutiny to get things in and get it close enough that it might have a chance of working. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lambell, seconded by Commissioner DeLuna, to grant approval subject to: 1) the landscape plan being reviewed and approved by the Landscape Specialist; and, 2) the Conceptual Grading Plan being resubmitted to show the requested comparative data and dimensions of adjacent properties to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioner Hanson absent. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Flles\HRC Minutes\2007WR070911.min.DOC Page 7 of 8 i6—e NOW ARCHITECTURAL REEW COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 C. Miscellaneous Items: None. VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Lambell and Hanson absent. The meeting was adjourned at 1:15 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\ARC Minutes\2007\AR07091tmin.DOC Page 8 of 8