Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-11-12 CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING. MINUTES November 12, 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 17 4 Kristi Hanson X 15 6 Chris Van Vliet X 21 John Vuksic X 19 2 Karel Lambell X 19 2 Nancy DeLuna X 19 2 Pam Touschner X 10 2 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Missy Grisa, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Hart Ponder;Code Compliance Manager Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 28, 2008 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner DeLuna, to approve the October 28, 2008 meeting minutes. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Gregory abstaining. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS V. CASES: ARCHITECTURAL REVIECOMMISSION `"100 ' MINUTES November 12, 2008 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: SA 08-420 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BEST SIGNS, INC/Gillian Cross, 1550 Gene Autry Trail, Palm Springs, CA 92264 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a monument sign; KMIR 6. LOCATION: 72-920 Park View Drive ZONE: PR-7 ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner DeLuna to grant approval by minute motion. Motion carried 7-0. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP 08-308 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WARE MALCOMB ARCHITECT, 10 Edelman, Irvine, CA 92618 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of a new 6,474 square foot single story office building for The California Teachers' Association. LOCATION: 75-084 Gerald Ford Drive ZONE: PCD Ms. Grisa presented the project and informed the Commission that the architect was in attendance to discuss the current changes and stated that no changes were made to the landscaping plans. Mr. Bagato informed the Commission that emails sent to the Commissioners as a whole regarding this project have been submitted into record and are a part of their packet for review and comment. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR081112.min.doc Page 2 of 10 4 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES November 12, 2008 Mr. Albert Barcelo, Architect, Ware Malcomb, stated that besides what was previously distributed in their packet he presented plans that included changes to the tenant signage on the building. He realized that the signage for the building would be a separate submittal, but he wanted to make sure it wasn't read negatively with such a strong bold color. Mr. Barcelo discussed the changes that were recommended at the last meeting. The Commissioners were pleased with the overall changes. Mr. Barcelo stated that the stone and plaster is now a dominant element allowing the richness of the material to stand out a little more. The hierarchy issues have been addressed and a few color adjustments have been made. Enhancements to the building have been added for relief by deepening the windows in some capacity with a more furred out wall to give a greater shadow effect. They addressed some of the shade structures at certain locations of the building where it would be more of an issue with the location of the sun and the shade components are in place. They changed the proportions around the windows where they have stone or the furred out walls and reduced them a little bit to give a little more articulation allowing for more shadow effect. Mr. Barcelo stated that at the last meeting the exterior elevation on the right hand corner was discussed stating that it was somewhat unbalanced or top-heavy so they adjusted the proportions and added some thickness into the wall to make it a little bit more of an unique element. They also added a shade structure on the east and north elevation, architecturally as well as for a shading element. Regarding the mechanical equipment on the roof, they have relocated the screen walls and some of the door openings to have access to the enclosed areas. On one of the conceptual drawings it shows that the equipment is properly screened and there is still plenty of height on the parapet wall in the event that the equipment were to get a little larger they would still have room to work around that. He stated that the landscape issues have not been addressed due to the limited time between this meeting and the last meeting to get all these changes incorporated. Those are changes that we can easily address and deal with and have a plan submitted after this meeting to Planning to confirm and show that we are addressing these issues. The Commission reviewed and discussed the shading issues and how the shade structures would be attached to the wall on the east and west elevations. Mr. Barcelo explained that the shade structures would be attached to the wall. The structures on the east and the GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\A1 Minutes\2008\AR081112.min.doc Page 3 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVI E*WCOM MISSION w.r►r ` MINUTES November 12, 2008 north elevation is about 24 inches and the other three are cantilevering approximately 30 inches and will be attached to the mullion system or to the exterior of the wall with the required framing to support the framing and the loads. Commissioner Vuksic discussed the element on the east elevation that was top heavy. He suggested they furr out the entire surface over the windows instead of having the eyebrow above the windows and bring it down between the windows as column elements; flat face with deep recesses for windows. It was suggested that they thicken the furred out wall another six inches or so, but Mr. Barcelo stated that the more he pushes the exterior walls out the more he digs into the landscape. The Commission and the architect discussed the issues with the landscaping. Commissioner Vuksic suggested going with six inches if the landscape specialist will agree to that, otherwise take what they have already furred out and use that dimension to create columns around the windows instead of having that sill and eyebrow. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the color didn't match between the left side of the west elevation and the right side of the north elevation and wanted to make a point for the record that the colors need to change on inside corners not outside corners and didn't want that mistake carried through to the working drawings. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the stone element on the north elevation and the window spacing didn't look tailored and suggested making the stone elements and window spacing on the north elevation equally spaced. Commissioner Vuksic referred to the parapets that enclose the mechanical units and suggested that the access panels need to be flush with the outer edge of plaster and the plaster on those elements should be smooth to match. Commissioner DeLuna discussed the landscaping issue with Mr. Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager regarding thickening the furred out wall on the east elevation. Mr. Knight stated that it depends on the size of the planter and said that typically six inches is not critical. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it was only in one corner and asked if they would look at that later. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\A Mlnutes\2008\AR081112.min.doc Page 4 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES November 12, 2008 Commissioner Touschner stated that this has been simplified and it looks good. She made a motion for approval with comments. Ms. Grisa stated that the landscape plans will need preliminary approval prior to moving on to the Planning Commission. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Touschner and seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to grant approval subject to 1) furr out entire surface over the windows and instead of having the eyebrow above windows bring it down between the windows as column elements; flat face with deep recesses for windows; 2) colors between the left side of west elevation and the right side of north elevation need to change on inside corners not outside corners; 3) make stone elements and window spacing on north elevation equally spaced; 4) carry access panels to the tops of the parapets and flushed with a smooth finished plaster to match; and 5) review of landscape plans prior to Planning Commission. Motion carried 7-0. C. Miscellaneous Items: 1. CASE NO: APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WEA PALM DESERT, LP, c/o Lisa Slaughter, Westfield, LLC, 11601 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90025. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Presentation and comments for future expansion of: Westfield Palm Desert. LOCATION: 72-810 Highway 111 ZONE: PC-3 Mr. Bagato stated that this was a presentation only for the future expansion of Westfield, Palm Desert and introduced the Development Director of Westfield. Ms. Lisa Slaughter, Development Director of Westfield Corporation, stated that the Coachella Valley retail market is changing and it's changing for two reasons, the first being demographics. The valley's permanent residency is starting to approach the 500,000 mark, which indicates that the market is big enough and bold enough to support a luxury stores here. The second reason is that G:Tlanning\JanineJudy\Word FilesW Minutes\20MAR061112.min.doc Page 5 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIECOMMISSION MINUTES November 12, 2008 the population at the peak season is almost $3.5 million and the average income of the seasonal resident is $173,000. When those figures are shown to retailers there is a lot of interest. The other thing about demographics is the growth moving east toward Indio and La Quinta. Palm Desert was smart many years ago when they said they wanted to focus on retail because it is a great source of revenue and other cities in the past five years have woken up and said that was a great idea. So one of the solutions was to speed through the entitlement process quickly, design something that can be constructed efficiently, and reuse as much of the existing building as possible. This mall was built in 1983 and has a retail experience that is 25 years old; one giant entry, nothing outside and everything inside. This is not the experience that the consumers want or what works in this retail market. Ms. Slaughter presented the conceptual plans that included facts and figures of what they are talking about in terms of the scale. They are talking about Nordstrom's with a published opening date of 2011 and that is the date that Westfield is moving toward with all speed. She indicated that they have not only approached major anchors they have also been approached by major anchors. She explained that they will be reusing a lot of the building, which means they are talking about approximately 375,000 square feet of new retail space, about 30,000 square feet of new restaurants and a third floor with a 50,000-square-foot movie and dining complex. She explained that Westfield will be LEED-certified and stated that the retail version of LEED is not out officially at this time. It makes sense from an operational prospective long term and is something they are doing. She stated that their design team has been here in the valley for the past year taking a look at various desertscapes, which include sculpture elements and the desert pallet. She explained that Nordstrom's will be located on the north side and pointed out the entry experience from the Highway 111 side, which is currently impenetrable from the 111 side. The second anchor store on the Macy's side of Highway 111 will have a slightly different pallet; something to give it a different identity. She explained that the remodeled mall would be much more outward facing, be a lot more engaging, have a different landscape pallet and have different textures and tonality to the articulation of the building. She described the rear entrance or the north entrance and stated that they located the two anchor stores back there and created a grand entrance, as a promenade of sorts, where there will also be a valet drop off that Nordstrom's is famous for, as well as for the other luxury anchor store. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2008WR081112.min.doc Page 6 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION `of MINUTES November 12, 2008 Ms. Betty Duffy, VP of Design, Westfield, stated that their team discussed what would be the right thing to do for the center in terms of the massive plans for the next 25 years and what puzzle pieces are that they need to put in place. They started to see the potential of what they had and they realized that they were doing something a little bit too modest and not forward thinking enough to really set all the pieces into play. They strategically have to locate the retail so that it works from an internal standpoint and an external standpoint. She expressed that having a cinema drives traffic into the mall, restaurants, the entertainment district, a food offering that is inclusive of all different levels of people; from a food court offering to a restaurant offering. They originally had the Nordstrom's at the west end which gave them a fashion district, leaving J.C. Penny's, Sears and the food court intact. However, the retail offering at that end of the mall is not great and they wanted to pump it up. So they moved Nordstrom's down to the east end of the mall, creating a great run on the interior along with anchor number two. They have identified three areas conceptually that they can touch that would make the most impact. They described the arrival court as being something that is elegant, refreshing and cool and they are working with landscape to provide that same kind of conceptual oomph to it. Ms. Duffy stated that the building would be a little more classic, not to say that it is classical architecture, but classic. She stated that in the back area they wanted the warm desert tones and the purple grays of the mountains. Mr. Randy Purnell, Landscape Architect, stated that they would be working with agaves, Texas Rangers, cool gray colors that are elegant, sculptor type of planting, a minimal simple approach tied into the architecture. Ms. Duffy pointed out the entry court adjacent to Macy's and stated that it will have a softer more hand-worked pallet integrating stone details, stone caps, deep shade structures, high store fronts with the integrated canopies, and stone accent on the tower. Some of the exterior retail elevations will have high canopies but they felt that it wouldn't be enough shade over high storefronts, so they are proposing a second layer that would be done in canvas. Commissioner Vuksic asked if they saw those as a number of small tenants in that area. Ms. Duffy stated that potentially it will be restaurant tenants with other out facing retail. The Commission reviewed and discussed the plans for that area. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR081112.min.doc Page 7 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIeWCOMMISSION MINUTES November 12, 2008 Ms. Slaughter discussed the north face where the Nordstrom's valet drop off was located and stated that the front has a lot of activation/integration but they need to activate the back as well and make it more than a drop off. She pointed out that this is a great area for another outdoor restaurant experience located around one of the main entrances. Commissioner Gregory asked if the proposed entrance to Nordstrom's is what will happen or was that Westfield's concept. Ms. Slaughter stated that Nordstrom's requested an entrance off of Highway 111, so the rendering on the plans is what was presented to Nordstrom's and they expressed that they liked it and they will be filing their Precise Plan and have a formal application for Architecture Review on November 25cn Commissioner Hanson stated that they did a beautiful job creating the cinema complex and that by having restaurants there with the mountain views would be a very stimulating place for people to dine and would help the retail as well. Ms. Slaughter stated they knew height would be an issue so it is tucked in and is very stunning. Ms. Slaughter briefly went over the interior changes to the mall and the Commission reviewed the materials for the building. Commissioner Hanson requested that they expand the excess points coming in and out of the new parking structures to help traffic flow. Ms. Slaughter stated that they are taking several things into consideration to help with the circulation issues and mentioned that they will request a signal at Monterey and the north facing entrance. Commissioner Touschner agreed that the circulation was a big issue and said that having valet would be important, especially for people with mobility issues. Commissioner Touschner applauded them on the sustainability issue and suggested that they consider pushing beyond the Silver certification and look at all the issues so they can do the right thing for the future. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that it is important to make the remodel pedestrian-friendly, which the current mall lacks. He liked the proposal of several walkways, seating areas, and shade. He then discussed the new parking structure and felt that it was important to use good architecture. They discussed the architecture of other parking structures in Southern California. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR081112.min.doc Page 8 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION *4401 MINUTES November 12, 2008 Ms. Slaughter also mentioned that they looked at subterranean parking but the cost was literally double and the time involved to complete it didn't fit their schedule. Commissioner Touschner stated that it was much more sustainable above ground for natural ventilation and the best thing for the environment, but it was really important to make it look good. Ms. Slaughter discussed the cinema project and the Commission watched a DVD of the cinema experience. Ms. Slaughter stated that the architecture would be designed within the context of desert architecture. She stated that the demographics are here. This is an area that is over-indexed with movies; people go to movies here a lot, much more than the average population. Commissioner Hanson requested that they submit an animation around the building. Ms. Slaughter stated that they have discussed that and is something they definitely want to do, but they may not have it ready for the 25cn Commissioner Hanson requested that they not do trellis elements that are vertical and to take into account the sun angles to create the shade and suggested a section cut from Highway 111. Mr. Bagato suggested placing a 3-D model in front of the section cut so that Council will see what it looks like in the massing views and perspective before seeing something flat view, which will throw off their appearance. Commissioner Gregory stated that if they couldn't do the fly by in a timely manner, he suggested doing pretty pictures perspectives from a couple of key points. Commissioner Touschner suggested submitting photos of the existing site to compare them with the changes. Commissioner Gregory asked Mr. Purnell to review the landscape plans with the Landscape Specialist. Ms. Aylaian stated that the biggest concern was the existing plant material and what can be reused and what can be removed. Mr. Purnell stated that he would elaborate on the language and Commissioner Gregory suggested that they submit photos. Commissioner Vuksic suggested creating variation in the tenant placeholders so the awnings don't have a strip like quality. ACTION: Presentation only; no action taken. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008WR081112.min.doe Page 9 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIE*ffCOMMISSION MINUTES November 12, 2008 VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Lambell, seconded by Commissioner DeLuna to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 2:25 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER GAPlanningWanineJudy\WordFiles\AMinutes\2008\AR081112.min.doc Page 10 of 10