Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-01-08 `'�rrrr � ���•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT / , � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES January 8, 2008 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 1 Kristi Hanson X 1 Chris Van Vliet X 1 John Vuksic X 1 Karel Lambell X 1 Nancy DeLuna X 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Ryan Stendell, Associate Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: December 11, 2008 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to approve the December 11, 2007 meeting minutes. Motion carried 6-0. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS V. CASES: � ARCHITECTURAL REViEW COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: C 06-08 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ROTHBART DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 920, Los Angeles, CA 90067. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of Circuit City (formerly approved as Office Depot). LOCATION: 34-860 Monterey Avenue ZONE: PC-3 Mr. Bagato summarized several changes to Circuit City. On the front elevation they increased the height of the trellis; recessed the planes to create three planes on the front; added stone to create more texture to the building; reduced one of the arches and brought it up to create an offset; removed the score lines on the building to read as a whole arch; removed floating trellis above canopy; and added two colors on the screen wall. In the loading dock area they came out two feet; removed planters; added a score line and color change to match other planter areas. On the west elevation they will get rid of the sidewalk and keep the curb to protect the building; increased pop outs; addition of planters with vines; thickened up the columns to match the front elevation. On the north elevation they beefed up the trellis; proposed a decorative pattern to go around doors or planters with vines. He mentioned that they eliminated the light color and the black and red color because they will not be using their corporate colors; it will be all one color. Mr. Bagato stated that we have 95% of what we were trying to achieve and recommended approval of these changes as well as working out the landscape with the Landscape Specialist. Mr. Phil Woodyatt, Senior Development Manager, stated that they did try to reposition the doors on the rear elevation. The door locations weren't spaced as such where they could slide things a little without changing the scale of the arches and pop outs. It didn't seem to have the same affect in relationship to the rest of the pop outs on the other side of the building. So they came today with the odd door locations within those pop outs that they felt was the best alternative rather than changing the scale or redesigning the back side of the building. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2008WR080108.doc Page 2 of 12 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�EW COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 Commissioner Vuksic asked how wide the planter was on the west side. Mr. Bagato answered that it was two to three feet except where the pop outs are located, which was actually five feet to the main wall. Commissioner Gregory asked if these were architectural planters on the west elevation and stated that on that exposure they were going to get fried. So they would have to be of enough capacity so they don't run into the same problem as the EI Paseo Gardens, where all of their potted materials died on the roof. He asked how far this raised planter sticks out from the building. Mr. Woodyatt stated that they would be meeting with the Landscape Department regarding the landscaping issues. Ms. Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist, asked if the ADA issues, like ramps and utilities, have been addressed with Building and Safety so you don't all of a sudden lose a planter to an ADA ramp. Mr. Bagato stated those issues have been addressed. Mr. Woodyatt stated that is why they have all the strange doors on the back of the building so they can put them where they are ADA accessible. Commissioner Lambell asked if the cart storage was internal or external. Mr. Woodyatt stated that it was internal. She also asked about the roof access. He stated that they have an internal roof ladder. Ms. Hollinger asked about the trash enclosures. The applicant stated that is behind the screen walls and would be a compactor. Commissioner Vuksic asked about the height of the parapets and asked if it was screening their mechanical equipment. Mr. Woodyatt answered that it was below the parapet height of the building. Mr. Bagato stated that all the elements on this building are four-sided. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant approval subject to Staff's comments and approval. Motion carried 6-0. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2008\AR080108.doc Page 3 of 12 • ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 2. CASE NO: PP/CUP 05-24 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIGN RESOURCE, 6135 District Blvd. Maywood, CA 90270 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of wall and monument signage; Enterprise Rent-A-Car. LOCATION: 73-086 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Swartz presented the sign proposal and summarized the staff report. Commissioner Van Vliet asked how the canned sign in the front interfaced with the column. Mr. Bagato stated that it is flush. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if it could be setback a bit so that there is a little offset. Mr. Bagato stated that they will require that the sign be setback. Ms. Jessica Jimenez, sign representative, stated that she was unaware of how much it goes into the building, but that there was a space built specifically for that sign. Mr. Bagato stated that it could be setback towards the back, the middle, or in the front and said that the applicant is proposing that it be in the front. Commissioner Vuksic stated that if this was a two foot column it could be set back 12 inches. Commissioner Hanson stated that it would make more sense if it was centered to see it from the other side and suggested it be centered on those two columns. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if the signage for the Rent-A-Car and Car Sales sign on the west elevation could be seen as you were driving down Highway 111 and Mr. Bagato stated that it would be visible east bound. Commissioner Van Vliet felt that the signage was unnecessary in that location. Mr. Bagato stated that initially the applicant had cans in that area and it was recommended that they do individual letters. His only comment to the applicant was that the letters should be a little smaller. Commissioner Van Vliet felt that the size would take away from the architecture of the building. Commissioner Gregory suggested they be reduced in size so they would be within the columns. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�ARC Minutes�2008�AR080108.doc Page 4 of 12 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 Commissioner Vuksic asked that the applicant provide a drawing that is to scale and judge the size of the lettering from that. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant approval subject to: 1) set back large canned sign (Hwy. 111 side) 12" and center between the columns; 2) reduce the size of the letters on the Rent-A-Car and Car Sales sign and center between the two columns on either side; and, 3) provide a drawing to scale. Motion carried 6-0. 3. CASE NO: MISC 07-43 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHURCHILL PACIFIC, 73-061 EI Paseo, Suite 200, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of fa�ade enhancement changes to existing retail building; EI Paseo Premier Centre. LOCATION: 73-061 EI Paseo #200 ZONE: C1 Action: It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to approve by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-1-0, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining. 4. CASE NO: SA 07-238 (HTE 07-111) APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): COUNTRY CLUB AWNING AND BLINDS, 74-885 Joni Drive, Suite 6, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECTIAPPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of new storefront awning; Palm Desert Fireplace. LOCATION: 73-990 EI Paseo, Suite 5 ZONE: C1-SP G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2008\AR080108.doc Page 5 of 12 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 Mr. Stendell presented the proposed changes for the awning request. He stated that the applicant designed two separate awnings returning back into the central element and radiused at the corners. He presented the fabric color and a color sample of the building. Mr. Stendell mentioned that at the last meeting, the Commission expressed their concern with the span of the awning and requested that it be creatively broken up giving each tenant space their own identity. Commissioner Van Vliet asked the representative how they make the radius work against a square corner on top. Mr. Brian Lanning, sign representative, stated that there is an existing overhang and they would be curving into that. He felt that instead of coming straight down off the existing overhang they would take two feet and radius the corner into the back column. The reason they radius � it is because if they actually squared those corners it would look like one awning again. The two units are divided by a 12" area of stucco that ties the two awnings together to give it a little bit of character. The Commission discussed the radius and the color of the awning. Commissioner Van Vliet asked how tall the awning was. Mr. Lanning answered that it was 36". Commissioner Vuksic asked about the awning coming straight down from the existing overhang. Mr. Stendell stated that at the last meeting the Commission had suggested that it come straight down because of the pitched roof. The sign being proposed has stacked letters and the logo would have been stretched wide. With the awning coming straight down the sign would be flat mounted and be much more conducive with having more fabric to do that on. Mr. Lanning stated that the original sign design had come out from the overhang about three feet with a twelve inch solid balance on it. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the awning would look better if it was set in from the edge. It would certainly look better with an offset at the eave in the corners especially and also how you connect back to the building vertically. If you were looking up at the underside of that cover between the glass line and the existing roof, your awning is set back in so there is some dimension there. It doesn't have to set back in the center it would help its relationship to the edges of that roof. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2008WR080108.doc Page 6 of 12 � ARCHITECTURAL REP�W COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 Commissioner Hanson suggested that if you hold the awning over Palm Desert Fireplace in 6" from the edge and hold the other awning in 12" there is something that is going in and out a little bit more. They are built as two but they look like one and the whole point was to get two different awnings. Mr. Lanning suggested maybe having two different colors. Commissioner Gregory suggested that one awning be squared and the other could be radius and a different color to make the building different. Commissioner Vuksic suggested having a different height to the bottom of the awning. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic, to grant approval subject to: 1) radius on the awning for the vacant building shall be setback 12"; 2) the awning on the Palm Desert Fireplace shall be setback 6"; and, 3) height shall be varied between the two awnings a minimum of 6". Motion carried 6-0. 5. CASE NO: SA 07-247/HTE 07-126 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JOHN O'HEA SIGNS, 71-445 Oasis Trail, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of wall signage; Cypress Estates. LOCATION: 44-450 Village Court ZONE: PR-5 N Action: It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to approve by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2008V1R080108.doc Page 7 of 12 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 6. CASE NOS: PP/CUP 06-09 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): URRUTIA ARCHITECTS, Attn: Francisco J. Urrutia, 165 Luring Drive, Palm Springs, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request for final approval of Buildings A & B. LOCATION: 75-096 Gerald Ford ZONE: PCD/FCOZ Action: It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to approve by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP 07-10 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DAVIS STREET LAND COMPANY, 622 Davis Street Suite 200, Evanston, IL 60201 (EI Paseo Village: EI Paseo Land Company, LLC) NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of EI Paseo Village/The Gardens expansion project which includes expansion of Saks Fifth Avenue and a new 70,715 square foot retail/restaurant/office project; EI Paseo Village. LOCATION: 73-545 EI Paseo ZONE: C-1 Mr. Stendell presented the proposed changes to EI Paseo Village. He stated that the biggest change from the last meeting was the addition of the parking structure to the rear. He felt that the applicants addressed the Commission's concerns from the last meeting by elaborating a little more on the interior paseos and creating niches in the buildings where art work and art programs can be introduced through these walkways to be more inviting. They have created a paverscape all the way out to the si�ewalk. They have taken into consideration the reasons why the existing G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2008WR080108.doc Page 8 of 12 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�EW COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 Gardens is so successful and have tried to incorporate them into the new site, but also realizing that this site is less than half the size. They are trying to address the business aspect of it and making it as inviting as possible. Mr. Gary Dempster, AIA, summarized the concerns that the Commission had from the last meeting. In reference to the wind, he took a look at the restaurant across the street and how they attempted to enclose a space that was never intended to be enclosed. He mentioned that they have some ideas on how to block the wind. They have been in discussion with their structural engineer regarding a wind screen that will span the distance between the end of the wall and the columns. It is an automated system that is controlled by remote control to raise and lower it. They also created more interest in the faCade, getting more shadow lines, changing planes and actually choreographing the facades. There was a challenge on how to make the experience from the paseo a little more interesting and certainly more conducive to the pedestrian experience as you move up and down the street where art work is being planned. He has proposed to their client a canvas like fabric for a more solid roof form and felt that it would be interesting to allow each tenet to have an identifiable color. They have considered giving up gross leasable area in order to increase the width of the paseo. While the entire paseo doesn't necessarily increase in width, the aperture that greets the pedestrian does. So what we are proposing is a combination of the art piece in the opening of the aperture so there is some interaction and interest on the paseo as you walk down the street while recognizing that the width in the Gardens are slightly different. What makes that interesting is that we sort of embraced the street by increasing in width. We took that notion and said what if we carved out a corner of each and made a water feature art piece that can go in the corner and create a paving pattern that greets the sidewalk. We took a look at how to deal with the linear fashion and put a little bit of an angle on the stairs that visually helps to break up that long tunnel like look. We added some recesses that will allow some mosaic artwork on the walls for visual interest and are proposing to include enhanced decorative light fixtures in the cove ceilings. On the upper level we have taken the trellises and moved them out a bit so it comes out a little and changes some planes on the fa�ade. As it relates to the planes on the fa�ade, we have worked very hard to try and create a lot more change in plane. Some are as deep as G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2008WR080108.doc Page 9 of 12 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 three feet, some go to a foot, and some go to six inches depending on where they are on the farade and how it influences the least depth. The changes in planes for the upper floor office space reads as a much more distinctive element and makes for a more interesting elevation. Mr. Dempster stated that one of the things that took place since the last meeting is that they increased the parking count on site. This site is a bit of challenge so we tried to locate one level of elevated parking being cognizant of the topography of the side streets and the location of the residential units in the back. We connected it up to the second level facilitating servicing and access of trucks by maintaining a fourteen foot clear height through that zone. That is what prompts this shape and we thought it would be best to make it a non-building. Similar to the deck on Phase One, it's a smooth trowel concrete surface that gets painted a sage color to green it up a bit and bury it in landscape. That is what prompts the revisions to the landscape. We have suggested that we try to create a really dense landscape buffer between us and the adjacent properties. The landscape around the perimeter is pretty much as the Commission saw the last time; however there have been some modifications. We thought it was important to get some sunlight and air between the building and the edge of the deck so we can have landscape at both levels; a tree experience at the upper level office space and a hedge experience at the lower level. Commissioner Gregory asked how far back the planters were from the building. Mr. Dempster answered they were probably about sixteen to twenty feet. Mr. Stendell reminded the applicant that their landscape plans would have to be reviewed by the landscape specialist. Commissioner Vuksic commented on the plane change. He wished they had taken that into the parapet lines as well in some cases. The one that jumps out is the pink element. He pointed out that it is in the same plane as the other parapets around it. He wondered why they wouldn't take an opportunity on something like that and make it an object that breaks that parapet line. He also saw something similar, not as noticeable on the left side. Mr. Mike Radis, applicant, stated that the plane was actually in front of the plane beyond. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he was referring to the heights and that it is the same parapet heights as the others around it and suggested taking that idea to three dimensional. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2008WR080108.doc Page 10 of 12 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�ii W COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 Commissioner Vuksic liked the idea of the steel awnings, but he was concerned that there was so much of it in the same plane and wondered if that would limit the variety that they would get. He suggested that they change some of the planes and maybe in the center section that is taller, you eliminate the steel awnings and let other store fronts dominate there. Mr. Radis stated that those were reflective of just an awning and the discussion last time was that the tenants were going to create their own images in those storefronts, and then they wouldn't be installing that steel awning. Mr. Dempster stated that they would let that be a part of the tenant composition and similar to what is happening at The Gardens. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the column elements on the ground floor translate into pilasters on the second floor where you have the walkway. On the second floor they appear flat on the plans and don't go back on to the deck at all and are in line with the railings; not completing that squarish shape that they should have. He suggested that they fatten those up so that they look in three dimensions when you are looking up at them from the street because you will see right through the rail. Commissioner Van Vliet pointed out the only shade element they had on the parking structure and asked if they considered additional shade elements. Mr. Dempster stated that a couple of things they were concerned about is staying out of the view corridor of the southernmost edge because of the adjacent property, and they were a bit concerned with complicating the fa�ade �o they thought that one down the center would be adequate. Mr. Bagato stated that there would be 146 parking spaces underground. Commissioner Van Vliet was concerned that it would be a sea of concrete up there and asked if there was any other planting that would be going there. Mr. Dempster stated that as previously mentioned the pots up on the top deck would be very hard to sustain. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that the key would be to try and landscape it out. The Commission and staff discussed the landscape on the parking structure behind The Gardens. Commissioner Van Vliet was still concerned about what the parking structure is going to look like. It would depend on the detailing of it; the concrete and the finishing. It could look good or it could look awful and it may just come down to details. Mr. Stendell stated that the details of the key items identified by the Commission would need to be provided prior to the ARC final. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�ARC Minutesl2008�,4R080108.doc Page 11 of 12 � . ARCHITECTURAL RE`�i W COMMISSION � MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 Commissioner Gregory asked if the planter depths around the perimeter were equal or greater than the existing Gardens, as far as providing opportunity for tree shading. Mr. Dempster stated that their intention was to make the experience identical by increasing the width of the planter edge in order to change the slope of the sidewalk so it will be much more level. The Commission strongly recommended that the applicant begin working with the landscaping department sooner than later. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, to grant approval subject to: 1) parapet heights shall be varied and reviewed by staff; 2) provide details on the corner elements; 3) provide roof plan to review parapets and mechanical screening; 4) provide additiona! details on the parking structure; and, 5) landscape to be reviewed by the Landscape Specialist. Motion carried 6-0. C. Miscellaneous Items: None. VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Gregory to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�ARC Minutes�2008�AR080108.doc Page 12 of 12