Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-03-25 , y� � t ��•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES March 25, 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 6 Kristi Hanson X 4 2 Chris Van Vliet X 6 John Vuksic X 5 1 Karel Lambell X 5 1 Nancy DeLuna X 5 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 12, 2008, February 26, 2008 and March 11, 2008 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Gregory, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the February 11, 2008 meeting minutes. Motion carried 4-0-2-0, with Commissioners Hanson and Lambell abstaining. It was moved by Commissioner Gregory, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the February 26, 2008 meeting minutes. Motion carried 5-0-1-0, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining. It was moved by Commissioner Gregory, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the March 11, 2008 meeting minutes. Motion carried 4-0-2-0, with Commissioners Hanson and DeLuna abstaining. , ARCHITECTURAL R�IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 25, 2008 IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: SA 08-119 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RAY MARTIN DESIGN & ASSOC. & INC., 78-150 Calle Tampico Suite 200 J, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a monument sign; Sevilla Apartments. LOCATION: 73-373 Country Club Drive ZONE: PR-5 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant a continuance. Motion carried 5-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining. 2. CASE NO: MISC 08-120 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): KIRK & SUSAN ANDERSON, 47- 963 Sun Corral Trail, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of height and setback exception for a 6'0" garden wall with 6'9" columns and an 8'9" arbor over the gate at a setback of 18' from curb. LOCATION: 47-963 Sun Corral Trail ZONE: R-1 10,000 Mr. Swartz presented the staff report and summarized the project. The applicant is requesting approval of an exception to the wall ordinance to allow a 6-foot block garden wall in the front yard with a gate and six columns that are capped at 6 feet 9 inches with an arbor over the gate at 8 feet 11 inches; 18 feet from front yard property line. Currently there is no block wall or gate located on the G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW,RC Minutes\2008�AR080325.doc Page 2 of 8 � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 25, 2008 property. The applicant is proposing to construct the garden wall with a gate to give the house more privacy, along with creating an enclosed front yard. The applicant is proposing to use stone veneer for the columns and a stucco finish on the wall painted to match the house. Mr. Swartz stated that the code says 20 feet and the applicant is asking for 18 feet. The applicant feels that with the arbor and the wall it would give them more of a front yard. Commissioner Van Vliet was concerned with how the architecture of the arbor ties into the house; it seems big and massive. Mr. Kirk Anderson, applicant, stated that the elements match up with the front with the beams coming out over the front door, and since the street sits down a bit you won't see much of the house. Commissioner Hanson stated that when they put the 6 foot wall in front of the house the house will disappear, so the arbor will add some architecture. She reviewed the height and recommended coming down 4 or 5 inches and notching all the trellis members into the beams to reduce twisting. The Commission discussed the construction of the arbor. They recommended incorporating glue-lam beams into the heavy timbers, notching all elements, and that no hardware fittings are exposed. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Gregory and seconded by Commissioner DeLuna, to grant approval subject to: 1) using glue-lam beams; 2) notching trellis members; and 3) no hardware fittings exposed. Motion carried 6-0. 3. CASE NO: SA 07-202 (HTE #07-56) APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LYLE COMMERCIAL C/O STEVE BRAIN, 121 s. Palm Canyon, Ste 216, Palm Springs, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a new monument and directional signage; Monterey Shore Plaza. LOCATION: 72-600 — 72-800 Monterey ZONE: Mr. Bagato presented the project and made a correction to the name and case number listed on the agenda. He stated that this project came before the Commission November, 2007 and at that G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes\2008�AR080325.doc Page 3 of 8 . ARCHITECTURAL R�/IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 25, 2008 time they had two signs at the one entrance point at the signal. The motion at that time was to continue, subject to combining the two monument signs shown as D1 and D2 into one triangular sign; providing an accurate site plan; super imposing the signs in front of the buildings; and to show how the landscape will hide the base of the sign. They have provided those plans and because the tile was busy at the base of the monument sign they have presented different materials. Commissioner DeLuna stated that the sign seemed big. Mr. Steve Brain, Facility Manager, stated that they hadn't changed the size of the signs. As suggested by the Commission at the last meeting they addressed the location of the signage at the entrance, where the signal is, and provided more detail. Dimensions of the signs were not changed. Commissioner Hanson stated that the signs were big, but the traffic was a problem and the signage needs to be big in order to be visible and landscaping is there to serve as a buffer. Mr. Bagato stated that Sign A is the tallest sign and is proposed in the County area. So at this time, staff doesn't know if that location will be approved until discussed with the County. Staff and Commission discussed the location of Sign A. Mr. Bagato stated that he spoke with the applicant regarding concerns with how the triangular sign will work in relationship to the street. As a triangle sign it will definitely be visible. If they move it over, America's Tires is right there on the corner and it wouldn't be as visible. Commissioner Hanson stated that it is one of the few places that larger signs are in order just because of how congested it gets. Mr. Bagato stated that signage is the number one compliant from the tenants there, especially the tenants in the back. They put up their own signs and then receive code enforcement violations. We have been working with them to try and get them some nice presentable signs to help achieve what they need out there. Commissioner Van Vliet asked how many tenants the City usually allows on a monument sign. Mr. Bagato stated that typically it is three or four. Mr. Swartz stated that you could have three and with a well designed monument sign you could have more. Commissioner DeLuna stated that she didn't care for the tile base and felt that it was too busy. The Commission discussed the colors and agreed on a tan color. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minules\2008�AR080325.doc Page 4 of 8 � ARCHITECTURAL R�'C/IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 25, 2008 Commissioner Gregory stated that it was important to address landscape in certain areas where signs would be going into a turF area because the overspray will very quickly damage the sign. He recommended that the applicant submit a landscape plan for review. The Commission discussed the locations of signs D1, D2, E, and E2 and the traffic congestion in those areas. Mr. Brain and the Commission discussed the signage and the number of tenants on each of those signs. Commissioner DeLuna suggested having fewer signs with fewer tenants on each sign. Mr. Brain stated that by placing only the tenants located on the upper section of the complex on the signs they might be able to have fewer signs and suggested moving Sign D1, the sign in front of Taco Bell, further north to the second parking lot entrance to help alleviate some of the traffic congestion. Commissioner Gregory had concerns with the directional arrows on signs D1 and D2 and found them to be confusing. Commissioner Hanson suggested organizing the arrows by grouping them together depending on which side of the center the businesses were located on. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant approval subject to: 1) using a tan base on the new Monterey Shore Plaza monument signs, with the addition of landscaping below the sign and reviewed by the Landscape Specialist; 2) moving sign D1 further north to the second left turn entrance to the parking lot; 3) organize arrows on the directional signs grouping them together depending on which side of the center the businesses are located; and 4) working with staff on the location of the triangle sign so not to impede visual viewing into the street and the addition of landscape. Motion carried 5-0-1-0, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2008WR080325.doc Page 5 of 8 . ARCHITECTURAL R�VIEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 25, 2008 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: MISC 08-111 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PET DRx CORPORATION dba ELDORADO ANIMAL HOSPITAL, 215 Centerview Drive, Suite 360, Brentwood, TN 37027 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of a fa�ade enhancement and interior renovation of existing facility: Eldorado Animal Hospital. LOCATION: 74-320 Highway 111 ZONE: C.1 SP Mr. Swartz presented the staff report and summarized the project. He informed the Commission that this project had a change of architects and staff feels that this design is a lot better. Mr. Randall Dover, Architect, presented a materials board and indicated the different locations where the materials would be located. The building is currently stucco finish so they will only be changing the colors. The Commission reviewed and discussed the colors and materials. Commissioner Gregory had a concern about competing materials. Mr. Dover stated that the color palettes were the same; they were just using different stone shapes. Commissioner Lambell asked about the roof. Mr. Dover stated that it was gray concrete tile that is in pretty good shape and they will probably try to use that and the rest of the roof is a recessed well for equipment with parapets around it. Commissioner Van Vliet said that they didn't show any parapet heights or detail on the plans. Mr. Dover stated that they wouldn't be changing anything on the main building. The Commission discussed and reviewed the roof height and parapets. Commissioner Vuksic felt that the materials and colors were nice choices, but he didn't know what style of building this was trying to be. It looked like it was trying to be a classical building, but it's not. He discussed the end forms, offsets and the roof eave. Mr. Dover stated that they were trying to work with the roof and the structure that is already there and asked if they were suggesting new end caps on the roof and putting another flat top on it to add more G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2008WR080325.doc Page 6 of 8 . ARCHITECTURAL R�JIEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 25, 2008 weight. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it needed to be a three dimensional mass. He felt that this building was going away from a desert motif and if they didn't want to do something that is typically not in the desert then it needed to be a better design and not something that was just tacked on. Mr. Dover stated that it was the cornice that was making it look traditional classical and felt that if they changed to a different cornice it would change that look. He said that the applicant wanted to do a good job, but it wasn't their building so there is some degree of limitation to their budget. Commissioner Vuksic stated that what he was suggesting wasn't asking them to spend one penny more. Commissioner Gregory asked if he was suggesting that they go more classical or more contemporary desert. Commissioner Hanson stated that because of the shape of the building they would be hard pressed to make it more classical without spending more money. The applicant would be more apt to get away with desert detailing and a simple cap on top as opposed to doing a cornice. Commissioner Vuksic suggested that they put their bang into simpler, stronger elements instead of having the columns and the cornices. Commissioner Gregory was concerned with the columnar elements or the pop outs not going back and asked if they could be brought further back as opposed to just abutting the roof. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it would work unless the structural engineer said that the roof was at maximum and couldn't accept any more weight. Mr. Dover stated that it only made sense to stop at the roof that was already there because you would not see anything beyond that. He indicated that they wouldn't be changing the parapet that already slopes because that was all structure. Commissioner Gregory stated that traditionally this group is weary of things which appear to be just facades or stage set storefronts. So if it could be brought back that would be better. The applicant and the Commission discussed the side and back elevation and what could be done in that area. The Commission suggested trellises with vines on the back wall. Ms. Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist, stated that she will be working with the applicant on their landscape plan. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2008WR080325.doc Page 7 of 8 � ARCHITECTURAL R�IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES MARCH 25, 2008 Mr. Dover mentioned that there may be a name change and they will be submitting signage for staff review. The idea was to have some kind of pin-mounted letters. Commissioner Van Vliet said that when they bring their plans back for review to complete their roofing plan. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant a continuance subject to: 1) defining building style; using simpler, stronger elements; 2) having stronger end caps; 4) submitting a roof plan; and 5) submitting changes in PDF format to staff for review. Motion carried 6-0. C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Lambell to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER G:1PlanninglJanine Judy\Word FilesWRC Minutes�2008WR080325.doc Page 8 of 8