Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-09-23 ��•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 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 15 3 Kristi Hanson X 12 6 Chris Van Vliet X 18 John Vuksic X 16 2 Karel Lambell X 16 2 Nancy DeLuna X 16 2 Pam Touschner X 8 1 Also Present Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 26, 2008 & September 9, 2008 Action: It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic, to approve the minutes of August 26, 2008. Motion carried 5-0- 0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic, to approve the minutes of September 9, 2008. Motion carried 4-0-1-2, Commissioner Touschner abstaining and Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS V. CASES: ARCHITECTURAL REEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: SA 08-347 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): IMPERIAL SIGN CO. 46-120 Calhoun Street, Indio, CA 92201 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a monument sign; Town Center Plaza. LOCATION: 44-250 Town Center Way ZONE: C-1 Mr. Swartz stated that this project has returned to ARC. At the last ARC meeting this request for signage was approved subject to a couple of conditions. The first condition was only three tenants on the monument signs. The applicant had requested eight on one and five on the other. The applicant presented photos of existing monument signs in the city that have five tenants, and he is proposing four tenants on each of his monument signs because the center needs four and not three. Another issue was the location of the sign on Fred Waring and that sign has now been relocated and is out of the retention basin. Mr. Bagato stated that it is sixteen feet from the curb off Fred Waring. Mr. Jim Engle, Imperial Sign Company, stated that the monument signs on Highway 111 represented in the photos were new signs with four or five tenants on them. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that those signs had a little bit more design to them. Mr. Engle stated that they were asking for one color and felt they have done a fairly good job in tying the monument into the same design of the building-scape. Commissioner Hanson suggested making the sign a little beefier by giving the kokopelli design its own element to give it a separate dimension making it one element and recess the sign. The Commission discussed the number of panels in the monuments signs. Mr. Bagato stated that Code doesn't prohibit three tenants, but in the past we have gone with three or less depending on how they look overall on an architectural basis. Staff has approved five where it was warranted and only if it was a very creative sign. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\200MAR080923.min.doc Page 2 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 The Commission was concerned with the proportion of the sign and discussed the size of the panels and lettering. Mr. Bagato suggested three equal bands; the top two bands having one tenant each and the bottom band would be split for two tenants. Mr. Engle stated that would be okay as long as there were four tenants. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner Touschner to grant approval for the Town Center Fred Waring sign subject to: 1) reducing the sign to three horizontal bands; the bottom band split into two signs of a height acceptable to staff; 2) increasing the mass around the tenant signs to have more prominence relative to the signs themselves; 3) observing the line of sight triangle; 4) reviewing irrigation to ensure there is no overspray; 5) reviewing of landscape plans by the Landscape Specialist. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. 2. CASE NO: SA 08-363 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RW FASHION, LLC, 74-140 El Paseo Suite 3, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of awnings with signage: RW Fashion, LLC. LOCATION: 74-140 Ell Paseo Suite 3 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Bagato presented the staff report and stated that this is a proposal for a new black canvas awning that will cover the "Randy Willard" storefront. The applicant is proposing one awning with signage located above their front door. The proposed awning will be made of black canvas with the logo "RW" in green with the words "Randy Willard" in white. An existing sign to the right of the awning is shown in the existing photos and is not included for approval in this review. Although, this sign currently exists on the site, staff approves of the additional signage located on the awning to further identify the separate business entrance from the business next door. He didn't have any concerns with the awning, but was concerned with an existing wall sign on the building and their request for an additional sign. Per code they are only allowed one wall sign and suggested that it be approved with the awning as proposed and eliminating one wall sign. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\200MAR080921min.doc Page 3 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 Mr. Ernie Brookes, representative stated that they could remove one or the other wall sign. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if this met the square footage requirement and Mr. Bagato answered that it does but according to code they could not have more than one sign per store frontage. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it is a creative solution for that site. The Commission discussed the white signage on the glass next door. Mr. Bagato mentioned that they would have to deal with that signage separately. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Touschner to grant approval subject to: 1) eliminating the sign on the awning or the wall signage. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. 3. CASE NO: MISC 08-364 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CARLYLE SMITH, PLANNING AND DESIGN, 2200 Hamilton Mill Road, Charlotte, NC 28270 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of interior remodel; Rangoni Firenze Shoe Salon LOCATION: 73-130 El Paseo Suite F ZONE: C-1 Mr. Bagato presented the staff report and summarized the project and stated that there are changes in the architecture of the building and awning. He presented photos of the existing building and one with the new window trim and the new awning color. Staff does not have any concerns with the awning as proposed, the only concern he had was that on the plans the new awning was shown as having the storefront signage and then there is signage letters shown above the awning. Code only allows one sign per frontage and recommended that they only have the awning sign because it looks much better than the letter signage. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to grant approval of the awning with no signage on building. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080923.min.doc Page 4 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 4. CASE NO: SA 07-129 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIGN-A-RAMA, Attn: Kim Sanson, 41-945 Boardwalk #L, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of monument signage; Best Buy & Cost Plus. LOCATION: 44-419 to 44-491 Town Center Way ZONE: PC (3) SP ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Touschner to grant approval. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. 5. CASE NO: MISC 08-244 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RED CARPET CARWASH, 44- 440 Town Center Way, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a new monument sign, repainting a portion of exterior building, and the addition of awnings to rear of property; Red Carpet Carwash. LOCATION: 44-440 Town Center Way ZONE: PC 3 SP Mr. Bagato stated that this project has returned to ARC. He reminded the Commission that Red Carpet Carwash has been to ARC previously on a couple of codes issues; they repainted the building without approval and changed the face of the monument sign. Ms. June Wachs, sign representative, stated that she was brought in to design the sign and is proposing to do a facelift on it. She stated that they will be adding high density foam with smooth stucco over it. The light part will still light up but it will look like it is cut out of the stucco. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if the old one would be demolished out. Ms. Wachs stated that instead of having the whole thing removed they will keep the can and add the high density foam around it; it will be re-faced and posts will be added. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\.Minutes\2008\AR080921min.doc Page 5 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL RE®IEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 The Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed changes. Commissioner Touschner reviewed the plans and asked where the mound of dirt was in relationship to the monument sign. Ms. Wachs pointed that out and described the changes that they would be making to the sign. Commissioner Touschner felt that the columns might hit the sidewalk or be very close to it. The plans showed that the columns are narrower than the center part of the sign and stick out past the columns a couple of inches. She felt that the applicant was being more symmetrical and that is probably causing more problems. Doing something that grounds the side of the sign that comes up asymmetrical is a good idea. Commissioner Hanson presented a sketch for the sign. Mr. Swartz mentioned the lighting and stated that they are requesting red letters. Mr. Bagato explained to the Commission that currently the whole face lights up. It will be refaced so that only the letters light up not the whole panel. Mr. Bagato stated that the color of the building has not been approved. Ms. Wachs pointed out that the color on the proposed sign was not the approved color. She was basically looking for feedback on the design and concept of the sign. When she returns she will bring a materials board and colors. Commissioner Touschner stated signs that match the architecture of the building are more successful and felt that there wasn't any arches on the building as proposed for the new sign. The Commission suggested submitting a PDF of the design to staff for their review. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna and seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to continue subject to: 1) making sign asymmetrical to ground the side of sign; 2) matching sign to building color; selection of color to be approved by ARC; and 3) selecting a design to match architecture of the building. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080921min.doc Page 6 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 6. CASE NO: MISC 08-270 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHRISTOPHER MCFADDEN, ARCHITECT, 72-925 Fred Waring Drive Suite 204, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a facade remodel and a 419 square-foot addition; El Paseo Retail. LOCATION: 73-750 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 Mr. Chris McFadden, Architect, presented the changes that have been made to the plans. The Commission discussed the cornice detail in front of the stone gable. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it is something that could be easily adjusted so they had a nice solid piece and transition behind. He noticed in the rendering that the intent for the stone gable is to be a massive three-dimensional element but in the section there is no transition between the gable and the ceiling behind it; it was all flush. He suggested either the ceiling goes up or to make the gable thicker. They also reviewed and discussed the soffit detail on the sides and the recesses on the walls and windows. Mr. McFadden explained that since they don't have the depth to push the facade back they are actually accentuating and bringing it out past the front and returning it back to the corners so it steps over past the line and makes a good shadow break there. Commissioner Vuksic stated that it is bothersome because it looks like the intent was to make it the same. Commissioner Touschner stated that it does look like the windows and walls are recessed back and that the recess doesn't look as deep on the back. Mr. McFadden stated that they are recessed back a little, but there's not quite enough to do that step. He stated that he would look at that and see what they could do. Commissioner Hanson was concerned with the large open area of Canterra stone on the rear of the building and felt that someone would try to put a big sign there and suggested an awning to narrow it down. Mr. McFadden stated that there was a sign program with limitations and the owner did not want awnings on the back side of the building. Commissioner Hanson said that either GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWA Minutes\2008\AR080923.min.doc Page 7 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION �rrr MINUTES September 23, 2008 they have to limit that space to something else or pull it back down and repeat it around the building. Commissioner Touschner discussed the signs. She stated that the two signs seemed so narrow and maybe they weren't drawn correctly. Commissioner Touschner stated that if they took the numbers off the sign then it may look better because it looks so thin and it didn't look like they aligned with anything. She suggested thickening up the awning line. Mr. McFadden stated that they could pull the fascia line down. Commissioner Hanson stated that they either get one sign or the other; not both. Commissioner Van Vliet asked about the parapet heights in the back of the building and wanted to make sure that there was enough height to screen the equipment. Mr. McFadden answered that it was 22 feet and the equipment is below the parapet height. Commissioner Hanson asked about the roof access. Mr. McFadden stated that they would be adding a roof hatch without ladders. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to continue subject to: 1) front triangle entry element shall be at least a few inches in front of the cornice on either side; 2) lowering the rear fascia detail sufficiently to reduce the overall height of the Canterra stone; 3) the detail on the left side of the building be minimized and not brought out in front of it or eliminated on the rear and brought down lower; 4) eliminate the step detail on the back and the side to be consistent; 5) the ceiling behind the stone gable raised up six inches; 6) planters, pots and landscape to be reviewed by the Landscape Specialist. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. 7. CASE NO: MISC 08-370 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FKC PROPERTIES, INC., 101 S. Kramer Blvd #136, Placentia, CA 92870 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of facade renovation; minor demolition and resurfacing of exterior walls and removal of existing roof. LOCATION: 42-065 to 42-33 Washington Street ZONE: P.C. (2) GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080923.min.doc Page 8 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner Hanson to grant approval. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. 8. CASE NO: MISC 08-368 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WD PARTNERS, Attn: Jeff Jacobs, 7007 Discovery Blvd., Dublin, OH 43017 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a facade enhancement and sign program; Golfsmith LOCATION: 72-700 Dinah Shore Dr. ZONE: P.C. (3) FCOZ Mr. Bagato presented the staff report and summarized the project. He stated that this is a proposal for two wall signs and a facade remodel that would rebrand the entrance for a new Golfsmith store. The new Golfsmith store would be located in a tenant space previously occupied by Home Base and is shared with Arizona Tile. Staff recommends that the Architectural Commission consider the proposed corporate branding signs with the new entrance and advise the applicant to return with revisions per the suggestions made at a previous review meeting. He stated that staff had a couple of concerns with the rear signage. One is the proposal to paint the wall red and having white letters light up in front of it. Staffs concern was painting the wall red in general, because the wall becomes a billboard. The other issue is the two signs that are catty-corner at the edge of the building and staff would prefer to see a sign more centered and matching the architecture of the building. Mr. Chris Tennison, Director of Store Environment, explained the addition of the mega word "Extreme" with their logo. He stated that the company is currently deciding on the mega word and wants a place holder for that space when they come up with the mega word later this month. They had an idea for the facade where they could make something with a little more presence on the front of the building. The thought behind the facade was that this is the modern innovative core design for the Golfsmith stores. The facade is a clear translucent material attached to the front so it has some energy and vibrancy with some light coming through it. It is not a real big clunky heavy object that is taking away from the building. He asked what GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080923.nnin.doc Page 9 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 they can do to make their brand work and make the building look exciting at the same time. Commissioner Hanson didn't have an issue with the front of the building. She stated that what the Commission wants to see is some detailing to make sure it details out the way it is represented. She stated the elements were very interesting and had a lot of pizzazz, but stated that the back sign is the biggest issue. Commissioner DeLuna wanted to know the size of the red sign. Mr. Tennison stated that it was the entire front section that was the red swirly design. He directed them to a photo of their Pleasanton store with some windows that had some athletic players with a red scroll design behind it. This is the pattern they are using. They are using a fluted material on the glass to play off the light and to add some translucency. He stated that once he had the Commission's basic okay they would go back and work on detailed drawings. They are still working on how far back the red screen sits and how to make sure that the white pops off the red. He also mentioned that they weren't for sure on the detailed construction of it yet. Commissioner DeLuna still wanted to know the approximate size of the red sign. Mr. Bagato directed the Commission to page 22 and they reviewed the plans. He stated that you would not see it from Dinah Shore because it is further back in the center and sunken down. Mr. Tennison stated that since the building is a giant they wanted to play with a couple of different facades because they wanted something that had a presence. He indicated that he would put that into their detailed drawings along with a detail of the swirl design. The Commission discussed the size of the letters and Mr. Bagato stated that they have complied with the square footage. He did not have any issues with the overall signage on the front, but he did have concerns with the rear wall painted red as proposed. He expressed his concerns about the rear sign facing the freeway and stated that he noticed on the new submittal that the rear wall sign shows the addition of "Extreme" and "Golf and Tennis". He stated that when they approved "Arizona Tile" next door it was a simple and clean lettered sign with 30 inch letters. He felt that the rear signage needed to be modified. Mr. Bagato stated that the monument sign on page 29 needed to be reviewed and informed Mr. Tennison that the center was changing the monument sign. Mr. Tennison was not aware of this change. Mr. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080923.min.doc Page 10 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL RIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 Bagato mentioned that the Commission approved new monuments signs and directional signs for the whole center and should be a much better design then what is there currently. Mr. Bagato stated that Golfsmith would have a certain panel size on that sign. The Commission discussed the size and illumination of the rear signage and that the "Arizona Tile" sign next door does not light up. Mr. Bagato stated that they didn't want to make the same impression that other cities in Southern California make with signage facing the freeway. Mr. Tennison stated that they could go back and make the suggestion for non-illuminated letters in the back so that it complies with the sign next door. Mr. Bagato also suggested centering the sign more in the space and asked to see an elevation. Commissioner Vuksic stated that there is extremely limited information about what is going on with the rear signage. He stated that the Arizona Tile sign is quite stylish and seems to be a nice layer to the building and we have to be careful so that it doesn't start to look cluttered. He asked that they convey that with their presentation. Mr. Tennison stated that if they have to go with black monument letters then they would go that route. He stated that they were submitting "Golf and Tennis" on the sign because as a company they are debating if these Extremes stores have the "Golf and Tennis" moniker with it or is it just "Golfsmith Extreme". Mr. Bagato stated that less is better because it reads as too much clutter and suggested "Extreme" be to the right of"Golfsmith" and stated that stacking "Golf and Tennis" doesn't read right. He explained that the sign code allows for two lines; "Extreme" would the second and "Golf and Tennis" would be a third. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner DeLuna and seconded by Commissioner Hanson to continue subject to: 1) submitting detailed drawings of facade with the red showing through; 2) revising the panel sign; 3) submitting detailed drawings of the logo on the back of the building; 4) modifying rear signage to two lines only; and 5) non-illuminated rear wall signage with black letters and centered in the space. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2008\AR080923.min.doc Page 11 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL RIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 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 Mr. Bagato presented the staff report and summarized the project. This request is to have the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) provide direction to the applicant regarding the design of a new single story office professional building located at 75-084 Gerald Ford Drive. Staff is requesting that ARC deny the proposed single story building as proposed and provide direction to the applicant regarding the design of the proposed building. Mr. Bagato presented the site plan along with other site plans for that area and pointed out the architectural style of the other buildings. He stated that Staff is working with the representative because there were still some concerns with the building design. He pointed out that there were two options for review. Staff initially had expressed some concerns with the design and stated that this center as a whole has a lot of contemporary looking buildings and the building being proposed is in the middle of the center and felt that it would stick out like a sore thumb. He stated there are no guidelines for the center or for the City, but when it is done it should be done well; and Staff felt that this building was a little boxy and details weren't carried through very well. He went on to explain the details of this building. A lot of the style just didn't make any sense and mentioned that he had given the representative some examples of the Wal-Mart shopping center, Citibank and El Pollo Loco; which is similar to the architecture they are proposing. Mr. Bagato stated that after discussing with the Landscape Specialist, the building is really tight into the pad with only about two feet of area for the planters and there is some concern about the planter space not having enough room for planting. He stated that they need to work with getting more planting space around the GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080923.min.doc Page 12 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 building; either downsize the building or somehow expand the pad out. He stated that the building is significantly over-parked and that there is room to work with that if they decreased the building or increased the pad around the parking. He mentioned that they are thinking about modifying the perimeter landscaping that has already been installed. He had some concerns with that because it won't match the rest of the center. He informed the applicant that if that is something they want to do then they have to look at getting them to modify the landscape pallet for the whole common area or don't touch that area at all. Ms. Leila Daneshkhad, Project Coordinator, presented Option 1 and Option 2 and described the project. She stated that it does have a little more contemporary look than the adjacent building has. She said that they were looking for some direction on the design. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the archway in the loading area looks set in deeper than the previous one. Ms. Daneshkhad stated that it is a little deeper. Commissioner DeLuna was troubled by one of the arches that didn't seem to have a function and didn't follow the style of the building. Ms. Daneshkhad stated that they didn't want to omit the tower element from the design and wanted to give it something to incorporate into the rest of the facade. Commissioner DeLuna asked what that area was and Ms. Daneshkhad answered that it was an electrical room. They didn't want to draw too much attention to it and didn't want to make it an afterthought. Mr. Bagato stated that if the applicant wanted to go with a Spanish theme it had to be done well to look right. He mentioned that one of the things discussed at a previous meeting with the representative was the guideline style for the Wal-Mart center and he had given the representative some examples of that center. He pointed out to the representative the arches that came out good. He stated that in general a retail building with this style of architecture is hard to work with. Ms. Daneshkhad stated that their building is an office building and mentioned that they had some difficulty interpreting some of the examples given because they were more retail focused and stated that she didn't think their intent was to go with a truly Mission or Mediterranean style and were trying to infuse it with a little bit of a contemporary edge. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that this building looked like it belongs in the Wal-Mart center and said that they had a great opportunity because it is a detached site and they have visibility all GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2008\AR080923.min.doc Page 13 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 the way around it to do some really nice architecture; he felt that this hasn't been done. Commissioner Hanson expressed her concerns regarding the arches. She pointed out an internal room that will only receive a part of an arch. She stated that it appears as architecture from the outside but not for the inside and felt that the two really have to go together. She thought they needed to work with awnings on the west face because it will get hit with the sun and asked if they were doing awnings. She felt that the building was utilitarian and thought it didn't have any "wow" factor to it. Commissioner Touschner stated there is nothing that is special. It's like a box and all four corners are treated the same, irrelevant whether it's an entrance or an office. They have an arch that is recessed but there are two doors on either side of it and it should be something special. Plus they are showing a secondary entrance outside of that. There should be something special about it, irrelevant about budget and design. She stated that they have a kit-of-parts and all the pieces are struggling with each other. Some of the windows are framed in white and others are not. She thought having continuity would help tie this together. She mentioned that they have two tower elements on the east and north elevations, one is an entrance and one isn't, so why not treat the entrances one way and the non-entrances another way. She said that we look to architecture to give us clues when it comes to entry and the function of the building and felt they conflict with each other. Ms. Daneshkhah stated that perhaps the presentation is dictating this but you are seeing all elevations straight on. Maybe it does come out that they are all competing with each other, but she thought that if this presentation was given as a rendering or perspective this elevation would appear as the more dominant portion of the square box. She indicated that is something they can work with to make it the same dimension. Commissioner Touschner stated that they do need to look at that and said there is nothing about this that is whimsical architecture, but when she looks at all the pieces it looks like it was whimsically put together; the kit-of-parts. If they are going to do Spanish architecture they have to do it well irrelevant of building type whether it's residential, retail or office. Ms. Daneshkhah felt that is why they are struggling because they are not trying to imitate a Spanish style. They are trying to give it a little bit of an edge and a contemporary feel. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080923.min.doc Page 14 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 Commissioner Hanson suggested centering the arch at the entrance and losing everything else because it doesn't seem to have a certain place where it is focused. She felt it needed a little more study relating it to the inside as well as the outside. She also felt that they needed to study the sun angles. Ms. Daneshkhah stated that they will have insulated glass and an overhang. Commissioner Hanson stated that will happen twelve feet up and won't do much sitting up that high. Commissioner Vuksic suggested awnings or trellises and stated that if they go in a contemporary vein they could introduce metal awnings. Ms. Daneshkhah stated that it would remove them completely from the Mediterranean style. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he didn't want to dictate style but he expressed that they would have an easier time. Ms. Daneshkhah asked if they removed the mansard roof would they be going in the right direction and would that be an improvement. Commissioner Hanson stated that if they weren't trying to do a Mediterranean style then it is definitely an improvement. She said that if you look at most Mediterranean buildings they are long and rectangular; they are not boxes. If they are definitely not interested in emulating Mediterranean and are interested in being a little more contemporary, they can do stone and material as opposed to arches. Mr. Bagato stated that Citibank used the pitched roofs in a manner that didn't look like a mansard roof and they had a lot of different plays on the materials that worked. Ms. Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist, asked what elevation the mechanical equipment was on and asked how tall the mechanical units were. Ms. Daneshkhah stated that they were three to four feet. Ms. Hollinger stated that there wasn't enough room for the landscape screening that is proposed on the landscape plan. Mr. Ware Malcomb, Architect, stated that one of the options they were looking to do were package units on the roof and he also stated that he is aware that if they do the units on the roof that complete enclosed screening is necessary. Mr. Bagato stated that they had discussed metal screenings that integrate into the roof element and the mechanicals would not be seen from the freeway. Mr. Malcomb asked how Building would consider that and would it be an enclosed structure where that square footage would be accounted for and would they have to put in fire sprinklers. Mr. Bagato stated that he would have to talk to Building and Safety about that. Mr. Malcomb asked if the enclosure surface on top could be a louvered system or a grating system that would allow GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\\Minutes\2008\AR080921min.doc Page 15 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 the equipment to breathe and function or a closed system where you could not see in at any angle. Commissioner Hanson stated that it should be architecturally detailed and doing just louvers would not be sufficient. It has to be part of the architecture; a part of the building. Mr. Bagato suggested they perform a line of sight study for the A/C units. Connie with California Teachers Association indicated that she reviewed the surrounding areas and noticed that other buildings in that area had the louvered metal screening that matches the color of the masonry roof and was surprised that this wasn't allowed for their building. Commissioner Hanson stated that their building is quite different from the others. Other buildings in that area are more of a contemporary version. In reference to the A/C units, Connie stated that they were opposed to a split system and putting it down in the landscaping, she felt that landscaping should receive full and undivided attention. She had no problem with enclosing it with the same louvered system as the other buildings. The other item she wanted to mention was that CTAs staff wants the arches. Commissioner Hanson stated that their architect has to work on that. Mr. Bagato advised her to review the buildings in and around their site and look at the architecture; not just the style, but the forms and the attention to detail to get an idea of what the City expects in Palm Desert. Ms. Hollinger discussed her concerns with the applicant that the trash enclosures were not ADA accessible. She also discussed the several Date Palms shown on the plans and stated not to show more than what they have. The planters were also extremely small and the plant choices are not going to work in those small spaces. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Touschner to continue subject to: 1) creating more continuity to tie the building together; 2) eliminating arches if not a Spanish style; 3) additional study of the design; 4) performing a line of sight study for the A/C units; 5) making trash enclosure ADA accessible; 6) landscape plans to be reviewed by Landscape Specialist. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080923.nnin.doc Page 16 of 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 2008 C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell absent. The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2008\AR080923.min.doc Page 17 of 17