Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-12-14 �_•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • MINUTES December 14, 2010 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 12:35 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Commissioners Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ronald Gregory, Chairman X 21 2 Chris Van Vliet X 22 1 John Vuksic X 21 2 Karel Lambell X 21 2 Pam Touschner X 15 8 Allan Levin X 22 1 Ken Stendell X 22 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Missy Grisa, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Pedro Rodriquez, Senior Code Officer Christina Canales, Assistant Engineer Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 23, 2010 Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to approve the November 23, 2010 meeting minutes. Motion carried 6-0-1-0, with Commissioner Touschner abstaining. V. CASES: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2010 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 10-356 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHRISTOPHER MORGAN GALLERIES, INC. 4206 E. Cornwall Avenue, Orange, CA 92867 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of two new awnings with signage; Christopher Morgan Galleries, Inc. LOCATION: 73-375 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 Ms. Grisa stated these two awnings - Christopher Morgan and Nita Roberts - came before the ARC previously for approval. At that time, the ARC recommended reducing the size of the awnings to eliminate any encroachment into the public right-of-way and adding awning details to portray the architectural entry surrounds. Ms. Grisa stated that the applicant has reduced the width of the awning to bring it outside the public right-of-way and changed the bottom border design on the awning to match the pop out surrounds around the window. Staff still suggests moving the awning down away from under the eaves and to have the awnings touch to hide the pop out surround beyond. The awnings still shows a little gap in between them and the pop out is visible. Other than those changes staff is recommending approval. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he was okay with the gap between the awnings as opposed to touching, but asked if the intention of the awnings were to be centered over the windows. Mr. Jim Sadler, American Awning stated that they will be centered over the entire width. He said that if they want it balanced over the entire width he could pull in the width a little bit on the outside edge so the width distance clearing that trim piece on either side will be the same. Commissioner Vuksic recommended that the outside edges be pulled to the edge of the white trim. The Commission discussed the logos for the two stores located on the awnings near the gap. Mr. Sadler stated that the owner designed the awnings and was satisfied with them near the gap. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2010\AR101214min.doc Page 2 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2010 ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved and Commissioner Stendell seconded, to grant approval subject to pulling the outside edges into the edge of the white trim pop-out detail to create a more balanced appearance over the storefront windows. Motion carried 6-0-1-0, with Commissioner Touschner abstaining. 2. CASE NO: MISC 10-367 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BRIAN BAKER, 43-645 Texas Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a material front yard wall exception. LOCATION: 43-645 Texas Avenue ZONE: R-1 9,000 Ms. Grisa stated that this proposal came before the ARC previously for approval and was continued subject to the Commission's review of commonly used front yard wall materials within the neighborhood and the applicant providing clarification on installation details. She also stated that there were two neighbors in attendance at the last meeting who had issues with the property line and drainage and the applicant has worked that out with his neighbors. She said that the applicant will move the footings for the side wall onto the concrete portion of his yard and will remove part of the tree planter on the north side and put it into his yard so he can run the wall straight down that side. The side wall is still proposed to come around to the front to match the other composite wall on the other side of the house. This does meet code and staff is recommending approval. She stated the applicant was not able to attend the meeting due to his work schedule. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if this material meets code and Ms. Grisa stated that the material requires an exception approval from the Commission. She mentioned that the Commission has approved similar material in the past in different areas of Palm Desert. She pointed out that there is one on Texas just down the street from this property that will be going in shortly. The Commission asked if they approved that one and Mr. Bagato stated that they did. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\A Minutes\2010\AR101214min.doc Page 3 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2010 Ms. Grisa stated that wood fencing is allowed on the sides and rear of a property but is not allowed in the front because of the deterioration of wood; hopefully composite fencing won't do that. Mr. Bagato stated that the problem with the wood was the wear and tear and at least in the past composite fencing has looked nice enough to be approved and presented to ARC. He also said that he has been thinking about adding this as an approved material. Commissioner Vuksic pointed out that the Homeowner's Association has approved this. Commissioner Lambell stated that she didn't have a problem with the composite fencing coming down the sides of the house and felt that it will last far longer and look better than wood. Her issue was approving it across the front of the house where normally they approve block walls. She asked about the property that was approved for the composite fencing and Mr. Bagato retrieved the plans and the Commission reviewed and discussed. Commissioner Levin pointed out that this approval was for 8' and not across the front; it was for a small return coming down from the side. Commissioner Gregory stated they have struggled a long time with walls. At first they didn't like walls in the front of houses then they agreed that masonry or steel would be a material that would look good years later. Commissioner Vuksic stated that at the last meeting the representative from the HOA was here and stated that they approved the material because there was nothing in their design guidelines to prohibit it. Mr. Bagato stated that the Commission and staff have approved it in the past as well. Commissioner Vuksic stated that once they approve this there is a precedent for putting wood fences in the front of houses and is it something that the HOA wants to do or should they put something in their design guidelines. Commissioner Stendell asked for a landscape plan and Mr. Bagato stated that if the applicant gets the permit he is required to submit a landscape plan. Ms. Grisa stated that a landscape plan was submitted and reviewed by Public Works. Commissioner Lambell again stated that she didn't like it in the front and Commissioner Levin stated that it would be pretty stark looking. Commissioner Van Vliet thought that it may be a cheaper alternative than block. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2010\AR101214min.doc Page 4 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2010 Commissioner Vuksic moved to deny the request and Commissioner Lambell seconded. Commissioner Vuksic stated that because the proposal is to put it across the front of the house, it is a lot of wood fencing close to the street as opposed to having a small amount in a corner. The Commission discussed the transition from the composite fencing on the side to masonry fencing in the front. They stated that the entire front yard would have to be block. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved and Commissioner Lambell seconded, to deny composite fencing for the front yard and recommended block around the entire front yard of the house. Motion carried 6-0-1-0, with Commissioner Touschner abstaining. 3. CASE NO: MISC 10-419 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RUBEN ANGUTANO, 31-121 Avenida Valdez, Cathedral City, CA 92234 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval to build a carport/trellis in the front yard. LOCATION: 74-773 Leslie Avenue ZONE: R-1 Ms. Grisa presented the project and stated that the homeowner illegally converted his garage into studio space and has submitted plans to build a carport on the front side of his garage and bring the garage into compliance. A section of the code allows a side entry carport to be built 16' away from the back of the curb to rehabilitate older homes or neighborhoods allowing the applicant to bring their garage conversion into compliance. Ms. Grisa described the plans and stated that the carport is the same height of the house and extends straight out from the existing roof structure. Commissioner Van Vliet asked the applicant if he could meet all the egress requirements on the garage to make it legal and asked what is happening to the garage door. Mr. Ruben Anguiano, contractor stated there will be a door and a window on the side and the garage door will be removed and replaced with a fire wall. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2010\AR101214min.doc Page 5 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2010 Commissioner Levin stated that he drove down this street to take a look at the applicant's house and the neighborhood and noticed that a significant number of houses on the street have converted garages with no carports. He asked the applicant if the concrete in front of the garage will be removed once the garage door is removed. The applicant stated that they were hoping to leave the concrete as is and maybe adding some type of landscape. Commissioner Gregory thought that if the concrete is no longer necessary in front of the former garage it would be more appropriate for a planter to be there since it would look odd to have a driveway going to a part of the house that is no longer a garage. Commissioner Touschner asked if they considered alternate locations for the carport. Mr. Anguiano stated that the reason why he decided to place the carport on the north side of the garage as opposed to the west side was because on the west side the carport would cover the whole house. Commissioner Vuksic liked how it creates an "L" coming down the one side giving it a sense of entry. In reference to the concrete he said it is kind of set up to potentially have a lot of cars in the driveway. The area that is no longer needed should be removed and landscape should be placed there. Mr. Anguiano stated that he will talk to the owner about removing some of the existing concrete and making it a planting area. Commissioner Lambell stated that it was imperative to plant landscaping around the carport as depicted on the plans by using 5 gallon plants. Commissioner Gregory suggested they submit a landscape plan to the Landscape Specialist for review and Mr. Anguiano stated that a plan has already been provided to Ms. Hollinger. Commissioner Vuksic asked if the beams coming off the garage are a little lower than the parapet of the garage and Mr. Anguiano stated that was correct. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to grant approval subject to: 1) removing the driveway paving past the carport; and 2) submittal of a landscape plan to the Landscape Specialist for review and approval. Motion carried 7-0. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2010\AR101214min.doc Page 6 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2010 4. CASE NO: CUP 09-236 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): T-MOBILE WEST CORPORATION, 3257 E. Guasti Road, Ste 2100, Ontario, CA 91761 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval to construct a 60' ft high monopalm wireless telecommunication facility; Living Desert. LOCATION: 47-900 Portola Avenue ZONE: P Ms. Grisa presented the project and stated this is an approval of a 60' high monopalm which has come to the ARC twice before. It was originally located just east of Portola and south of the main entrance then it moved to the maintenance yard and now is proposed to be located immediately adjacent another maintenance yard. It will be placed in an existing grove of palm trees, however it sticks up higher than the existing palms because they need the clearance to maintain service. She stated that even though it sticks out there is nothing back in that area at this point and it blends in from the main street. This was originally approved at Planning Commission for the first location, but it was called up by City Council. The concern was that it was too close to Portola and to the adjacent residences. She stated that 60' does meet code and staff recommends approval of this location. Commissioner Levin referred to the rendering and asked what the equipment was about half way down on the palm and Ms. Monica Moretta, representative stated that this was the microwave dish. Commissioner Levin asked if the dish would be on the back side of the palm as you were driving into the Living Desert and Ms. Murietta stated that was correct. The Commission discussed the type of palms surrounding the monopalm and Commissioner Gregory didn't have any concerns. Commissioner Touschner had a concern with the enclosure around the monopalm. Right now there is nothing back there, but eventually some day there will be and it will need to be better hidden. Ms. Moretta stated they are not opposed to putting some type of vine on the wall to camouflage it. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2010WR101214min.doc Page 7 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2010 The Commissioners discussed the growth of the trees. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if they could integrate the microwave dish into the trunk to make it less visible. Ms. Moretta stated they were unable to do that because of how the antennae are placed on this palm. Commissioner Van Vliet felt this was not an appropriate spot for the palm and was surprised that the Living Desert is promoting it. ACTION: Commissioner Gregory moved and Commissioner Touschner seconded, to grant approval subject to the condition that should the adjacent vacant land be developed, it is understood that at that time the equipment enclosure shall be screened with landscaped. Motion carried 6-1-0-0, with Commissioner Van Vliet voting NO. NOTE: Staff requested that an additional item be added to the agenda. Commission concurred. Commissioner Vuksic moved and Commissioner Lambell seconded. Motion carried 7-0. 5. CASE NO: MISC 10-377 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RIGOBERTO GARCIA GONZALEZ, 73-325 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of new exterior paint colors; Fresh Agave. LOCATION: 73-325 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Bagato stated that the applicant has changed their exterior colors again and presented samples to the Commission and described where the two colors would be located. The Commission felt these colors were much better. ACTION: Commissioner Stendell moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to grant approval of new exterior colors Venturina AF-445 and Kona AF-165. Motion carried 7-0. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2010\AR101214min.doc Page 8 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2010 B. Preliminary Plans: None C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Levin moved and Commissioner Stendell seconded to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 1:40 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2010\AR101214min.doc Page 9 of 9