Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-07-22 fir✓ �1•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES July 22, 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 12 2 Kristi Hanson X 9 5 Chris Van Vliet X 14 John Vuksic X 13 1 Karel Lambell X 13 1 Nancy DeLuna X 12 2 Pam Touschner X 5 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Missy Grisa, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 8, 2008 Action: Minutes to be approved at the next meeting. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS V. CASES: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION `""oe MINUTES July 22, 2008 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 08-282 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FREDDIE DIAZ LANDSCAPE, 80-360 Ave 43, Indio, CA 92201 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a six foot high tan slump block wall and a six foot wide wrought iron gate; 13 feet from face of curb. LOCATION: 43-151 Balsam Lane ZONE: R-1 9,000 Mr. Swartz presented the project and summarized the staff report. The applicant is requesting an exception to the wall ordinance to replace an existing five-foot high wood fence with a six-foot high block wall and six-foot high wrought iron gate located thirteen feet from street side property line. In the past, Commission has made the finding that corner lots are generally deserving of exceptions. The fifteen to twenty foot setback can sometimes be difficult to achieve in established neighborhoods with variables such as trees, location of patio covers, equipment, and existing residents. In most instances, Commission has approved either a five-foot wall set back twelve feet from the curb or a six-foot wall set back seventeen feet from the curb with an acceptable landscape plan. In this case, the proposed block wall would be located thirteen feet from street side property line. Per building code the applicant must have at minimum a five-foot high wall around the swimming pool. All walls adjacent to a public street shall be designed to provide undulation offset of at least 18 inches or pilaster at least every 30 feet of linear extent of the wall; the applicant is proposing six-foot high columns. Staff recommends that due to the condition of the existing wood fence and the location of the existing residents and pool equipment that the applicant is granted an exception. Commissioner DeLuna asked how high the other walls were in the neighborhood and if the applicant would be landscaping. Mr. Freddie Diaz, applicant, answered that they would be re- landscaping with desert landscape and that the wall north of this house was seven feet high. The Commission and the applicant discussed the proposed landscape, height of the wall, the double wrought-iron gate at the entrance and undulation of the wall. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\.Minutes\2008\AR080722.min.doc Page 2 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES July 22, 2008 Commissioner Vuksic stated that it would be better if there was some undulation in the wall especially if the neighbor's wall is just as long as the one proposed. The Commission discussed the columns on the walls. They recommended 24-inch columns on both sides of the gate and columns near the ends of the house; 18 inches out and flush with the wall. They requested a photo to understand the street better, a photo of the neighbor's seven-foot wall and a landscape plan. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Lambell and seconded by Commissioner DeLuna, to grant a continuance subject to: 1) staff's recommendation of 18 inches out on columns or undulation of the wall; 2) submitting additional photos of the surrounding neighborhood; 3) submitting photos of neighbor's seven-foot wall; 4) submitting a landscape plan; and, 5) submitting columns to scale. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Gregory absent. NOTE: Staff requested that an additional item be added to the Agenda. Commission concurred. It was moved by Commissioner Touschner, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic, adding Case No. PP 08-215 to the agenda. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Gregory absent. 2. CASE NO.: MISC 08-215 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GARY BAZIK, 45-751 Edgehill Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of house color change. LOCATION: 45-751 Edgehill Drive ZONE: R-1 Mr. Bagato stated that the color of the home was denied by Architectural Review Commission (ARC) and the applicant filed an appeal. The applicant appealed to City Council and they upheld the ARC action denying the colors and recommended that he come back to work with the Commission. The applicant submitted new color samples and the Commission reviewed them. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080722.min.doc Page 3 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL RhIEW COMMISSION `""f MINUTES July 22, 2008 Commissioner Hanson stated that the color presented would be tough colors to get approved and going darker is a good idea. Going really gray is very cool and typically the Commission would want colors that are more desert or warm colors. Commissioner Hanson explained that this was a Spanish style house and the applicant should think along those terms; considering the roof colors as well. Doing a gray house that relatively has a mission style roof with some burnt colors in it, would make it stand out. Commissioner Hanson pulled out color options in the range that the applicant might consider and what the Commission might be able to approve, along with keeping the original charcoal color as a trim. The Commission reviewed the color options and discussed the colors in the neighborhood. The applicant expressed that there were a lot of colors on the homes on Pitahaya. Mr. Bagato stated that part of the problem with the HOA homes when they were initially approved was that they are a forefront of the mountain, so the City looks at them in a different context than homes found on Pitahaya. The homes on Pitahaya are individual homes with full lush landscaping in front of them with colors that work on a stand- alone basis, but the homes on Edgehill were done as a track home. When Planning gets the track homes we look at them a little more carefully. The Commission and applicant reviewed the colors that Commissioner Hanson pulled out and the applicant selected Dissent and Barge. Commissioner Hanson stated that using either color as the main color, along with the original charcoal color as the trim would be fine. Action: It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna and seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant approval of colors as presented by the Commission subject to the application of Frazee paint colors Dissent CL2725D and Barge CL2695D. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Gregory absent. G1Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080722.min.doc Page 4 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES July 22, 2008 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP 08-251 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PREST VUKSIC ARCHITECTS, 44-530 San Pablo Ave #200, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of a four-story Holiday Inn Hotel. LOCATION: 36-400 Technology Drive ZONE: PCD Mr. Swartz presented the project and summarized the staff report. The applicant is requesting approval to construct a four-story Holiday Inn Hotel which will include: 128 rooms, a restaurant, an outdoor pool and spa, meeting room, exercise room, and 198 total parking spaces. The site is part of the Wonder Palms Master Plan and the Regional Commercial standards under Planned Commercial District apply. The applicant is proposing a building designed to a LEED Silver building for New Construction with 36 points out of a maximum of 69 points for Platinum status. He stated that this would have to Planning Commission and City Council for the height, but staff feels that the proposed height would not adversely impact neighboring properties since the building is screened from the existing three-story Hampton Inn and is located below the freeway pass and the grade on Cook is down about 18 feet. Therefore, staff is recommending approval subject to landscape and sign approval. Commissioner Touschner asked about the code requirement for height. Mr. Swartz stated that this was the Wonder Palms Master Plan and the height in that area is 35 feet, but applicants are allowed an exception that would be approved by City Council through a Precise Plan. He pointed out that the tallest point on this building is 54 feet. Commissioner Touschner asked about the mechanical units and Mr. Swartz stated that everything is up on the roof and screened, that is why they went up four stories. Commissioner Touschner stated that it is a very handsome building and doesn't necessarily look residential at all. She expressed her thoughts that the 3-D drawings don't come together well yet, and felt that this has the GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080722.min.doc Page 5 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ` MINUTES July 22, 2008 potential to be better than what it is. She discussed the center piece, the front element in the entry way, and the pillars at the base. Mr. Vuksic expressed his thoughts on her suggestions and they both discussed and reviewed the plans. Commissioner DeLuna stated that she liked the architecture but was concerned with a fourth story just to hide the roof elements and felt that this could be done with screening. She feels that architecture refers to the definition of space, both defined and open space. She stated that you have a foot print as well as an air print for a building and 36 of those rooms will be eighteen feet above the highest point at Cook Street and more highly visible from the south. She didn't see any reason to take it to the fourth story, however if you remove the fourth story then that changes the dramatic and very attractive entry way. She also stated that there are three other hotels in the north sphere that already have three stories and one that has four stories and felt that she could not justify going up to a fourth story. Commissioner Touschner wanted to clarify what Commissioner DeLuna was saying that this should be a three story building with a parapet enclosure and 35 feet. Mr. Bagato stated that anything above 35 feet requires a height exception per the ordinance. Every hotel in the City has been approved with an exception. Commissioner Touschner didn't understand why we would start penalizing this project. Commissioner DeLuna stated that she didn't want the north sphere full of four story buildings. She feels that the City of Palm Desert has a resort type atmosphere and wants to preserve that and doesn't want to see it turn into every other city where it's building upon building, getting higher and higher. If we start approving four stories then people will come in and want five stories. Commissioner Hanson pointed out that if you look at the view and this was held at the third story the only thing you would ever see is rooftop equipment. We would rather see a taller building done architecturally better with the equipment on top that nobody will see. Commissioner DeLuna asked what it would take to screen the equipment. Commissioner Hanson stated that you would have to build something around it that was about eight feet high and it would still require a height exception. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080722.min.doc Page 6 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION *00 MINUTES July 22, 2008 Commissioner Touschner stated that what was nice about extending the parapet is that not only would it be safer for the workers to be up there, but everything is hidden. It has to be high enough that you can't see the units. One of the problems with screening is that a lot of times they don't want to have a door on the screen because it gets left open or gets blown off, so they'll juxtapose the entrances and always from some location you can see that equipment. Commissioner DeLuna expressed that this would not be in keeping with the best use of the defined space or the open space. Mr. Bagato stated that this is why staff went with this approach is because they are surrounded by a three-story hotel, a 200-foot tall bridge next to it and the railroad and freeway to the north. Commissioner Lambell stated that each piece of property is unique. This property is sitting down from Cook Street and most of the people are going to be seeing it from that height. If we knocked it down to a third story we still have to hide the equipment on the roof. I would rather see an important statement of the architecture rather than just a dumb little parapet. Commissioner Hanson asked if the wall units on all the rooms would have the decorative metal grills. Mr. Vuksic answered that they would and on the same plane as the glass. Commissioner Hanson stated that the stone at the bottom was a compliment to the building, and suggested using more stone. She also suggested extending the trellis element out more for shade. She discussed and reviewed the plans with the applicant. Commissioner Hanson mentioned that height in the City is an issue, however there are times when it is appropriate and times when it is not. When you have good architecture then the Commission tends to give people the option of increasing the height because it is a much better presence to people coming into our community when roof equipment is covered. The Commission and the applicant discussed the site plan and reviewed the entry way to the main part of the hotel. It was suggested to make it a little larger to give it more outdoor area. Commissioner Touschner asked if there were tubs or showers in the handicap rooms. Mr. Vuksic stated that there would be a combination of rolling showers and ADA approved tubs. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2008WR080722.min.doc Page 7 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES July 22, 2008 Commissioner Touschner hoped that they would keep the same amount of trees as shown on the landscape plans because it is very important to the success of this project. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Touschner, to grant approval subject to Commission's comments. Motion carried 4-1-1-1, with Commissioner DeLuna voting NO, Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioner Gregory absent. C. Miscellaneous Items: VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Gregory absent. The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080722.min.doc Page 8 of 8