Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-02-09 . , � � _ �`•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • ' MINUTES February 9, 2010 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 3 Chris Van Vliet X 3 John Vuksic X 3 Karel Lambell X 3 Pam Touschner X 2 1 Allan Levin X 3 Ken Stendell X 3 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 � Christine Canales, Assistant Engineer Neal Stephenson, Fire Safety Specialist Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 26, 2010 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Levin, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the January 26, 2010 meeting minutes. Motion carried 6-1, with Commissioner Touschner absent. ARCHITECTURAL REv�EW COMMISSION ""'"` MINUTES February 9, 2010 V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 04-297 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SOREN SAMUELSON, 74259 Candlewood Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval to add a carport and entry tower to existing parcel. LOCATION: 74259 Candlewood Street ZONE: R-3 (3) Mr. Swartz presented the project and summarized the staff report. The applicant is requesting to build a carport in the front yard 20 feet from face of curb. The original home had a two-car garage that was converted into living quarters legally. According to Section 25.16.090,C, the applicant must _provide covered parking. The Zoning Code encourages rehabilitation of older dwelling units and provisions of shaded parking for vehicles, by allowing a carport structure with a minimum setback of 20 feet, to be measured from the curb face to the front edge of the carport structure. On July 28, 2009 the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) continued the case and requested that the applicant come back with working drawings and detail of the entry way, and a detailed roof plan. The ARC felt that the drawings were not drawn correctly and the carport didn't look proportional. There was also concern regarding the overhang that it may look odd when complete. The carport would be designed to replicate a trellis at the top of the structure with stucco columns designed and painted to match the existing house. The trellis feature above would be painted to match the fascia of the existing house. Overall dimensions of the carport are 19' 8" across, 16' deep. The structure would be held up by 4" x 6" posts and wood framed. Staff feels that the applicant has addressed the ARC's comments and recommends approval of the proposed carport design with the conditions that the height of the overall structure is lowered to be more in keeping with the style of G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010WR100209min.doc Page 2 of 11 � ARCHITECTURAL F�,,,�1EW COMMISSION �,�,,+ MINUTES February 9, 2010 the existing home. A Notice of Public Hearing for this project was mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the applicant's site. Staff has not received any comments in favor of or opposition to, in regards to this request. Commissioner Vuksic mentioned the entry tower and pointed out his concerns with the roof eave because he didn't want them to be a problem in construction. The architect stated that he would take care of those issues. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to grant approval. Motion carried 4-2-1, with Commissioner Levin and Stendell abstaining and Commissioner Touschner absent. 2. CASE NO: MISC 10-29 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ARC VISION, Leslie Rice, 150 Westpark Way Ste 275, Dallas, TX 76040 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Fa�ade remodel and parapet extension for new signage; Panera Bread. LOCATION: 76075 Hwy 111 ZONE: C-1 SP Mr. Bagato presented the project and stated that this site is located on Highway 111 and was the former Baker's Square and a European bistro. Panera Bread has proposed some exterior improvements to the site as well as the, building remodel. They are showing some new parapet extensions on the elevations to create a new tower entry and new glass going in. From the color of the material board it looks like they are using the existing colors, but adding new colors for the signage. At this time, there isn't enough information or details for the signage, but the square footage complies with what is allowed. He indicated that the signage will come back separately. Some of the site improvements they are showing will require a grading plan and also some landscape revision. There are some concerns with the dead landscaping and staff will work with the landlord and Panera Bread regarding the landscaping. He also stated that Public Works witl require ADA ramps and will forward some comments to the applicant. Architecturally staff didn't have any concerns with the proposed G:\PtanningWanine Judy\Word FilesVl Minutes�2010WR100209min.doc Page 3 of 11 ARCHITECTURAL R�W COMMISSION '� � MINUTES February 9, 2010 � remodel but the bigger concern is the overall site improvements that need to be done. Commissioner Levin asked if it meets the current parking requirements. Mr. Bagato answered that it does. He also stated that there was a patio extension that was approved through a CUP amendment back in 2004. This exception was approved because this is part of a shared center with two other restaurants around it. Commissioner Lambell stated that there are three awnings on the west elevation and asked if the awning colors would be reviewed at this time. Mr. Bagato stated that the Commission can comment on them, but they do not have a full sign package at this time and the applicant will come back with more colors and details on the awnings. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if they were adding additional screen walls to cover the HVAC units on the roof. Mr. Knepper, architect stated there wasn't any additional screening but they are keeping one unit that was already up there and adding three new units on the existing curbs. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if they could be seen and if they were above the parapet. Mr. Knepper couldn't answer that and said that he would bring in shop drawings for a reference. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that they would have to screen the units. Commissioner Van Vliet pointed out the exterior ladder and asked if they could remove that and get interior access. Mr. Knepper stated that it is painted to match the building and right now they are planning on using it. Commissioner Van Vliet mentioned that the City doesn't allow ladders on the outside of buildings and asked the applicant to try to get it inside. Commissioner Vuksic discussed the green tower element that is being added and stated that it looks like it is partially 3-sided although in the elevation it looks like it is 4-sided. He said that it needs to be a complete 4=sided element and needs to go back as far as the parapet they are adding on. G:1Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes12010WR100209min.doc Page 4 of 11 � ARCHITECTURAL PFw.rIEW COMMISSION � � MINUTES February 9, 2010 Commissioner Levin stated that the elevation descriptions didn't match the ones on the black and white and suggested that they submit new color elevations. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he also had some concerns about the entry. He and the architect discussed the entry, glass and fa�ade around the windows. He stated that the north and south wall needs to be a little more substantial and recommended redesigning a more prominent entry feature and front fa�ade around the windows. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to continue Case MISC 10-29 to: 1) redesign a more prominent entry feature and front fa�ade around the windows; 2) verify new HVAC units are screened; and 3) move exterior roof ladder inside, if feasible. Motion carried 6-1, with Commissioner Touschner absent. 3. CASE NO: SA 10-35 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EL PASEO JEWELRY EXCHANGE, 73-375 EI Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of walkway canopy signage; EI Paseo Jewelry Exchange. LOCATION: 73375 EI Paseo ZONE: C-1 SP Mr. Bagato presented this project and stated that many of the signs in this area have gone out to a full canopy where they extend out to the curb. He has discussed an encroachment permit with the applicant because there will be poles in the sidewalk. He described the materials, colors and the construction of the awning. The Commission discussed the awning and its location. Mr. Bagato stated that the applicant was not in attendance and that the Commission could continue this case to request the applicant to submit a picture of the whole storefront to see how many canopies are out there. The Commission expressed their concerns about blocking the line of sight. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FileSW Minutes�2010WR100209min.doc Page 5 of 11 ARCHITECTURAL RE'�t:W COMMISSION "�.r�' � MINUTES February 9, 2010 � Commissioner Levin asked if this would be a conflict with the changes proposed for the EI Paseo Revitalization project. Ms. Aylaian stated that the revitalization will not be happening within the next couple of years. That being said, this is something that staff will probably want to take a further look. The Commission suggested submitting pictures of the area to see what else is in that area and to know how far the canopy will extend out from the building. The Commission recommended that this be continued until the applicant is able to attend and present input regarding the encroachment issue and to have an opportunity to take a look at the line of sight to see if it will hinder the other stores. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Stendell and seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to continue Case SA 10-35 as applicant was not present. Motion carried 6-1, with Commissioner Touschner absent. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: MISC 10-28 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): KB HOME SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, 36310 Inland Valley Drive, Wildomar, CA 92595 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of 64 single family homes with six architectural designs. LOCATION: Kingston/Imperial Court TM 33935 & TM 34391 ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Swartz presented the project and summarized the staff report. He stated that this is for 54 lots on Tract 33935 and Tract 34391 one on Kingston Circle and one on Imperial. Currently the improvements are on Kingston but not on Imperial. Each tract is 32 lots and back in 2006 Toll Brothers was approved for these lots and obviously it was never built. In 2007 Trans West took over the tracts. Both home models came through Architectural Review Commission (ARC), but KB Home recently purchased these homes and are here today for the architectural design. Staff is recommending that the ARC continue the case to a future date providing the applicant with comments. The applicant is aware that G:\PlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010V1R100209min.doc Page 6 of 11 � ARCHITECTURAL �IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES February 9, 2010 this is a first time submittal and is looking for feedback from the Commission. The way this is going to work is that the homes won't be built all at once. As a buyer purchases a lot the homes will be built. The applicant has provided typical landscaping plans and when they come back they will have to come in with a landscape plan for each lot and they will have to be approved. He indicated that he atso has conditions from Landscaping, Public Works, and Building for the applicant. He indicated that the applicant has provided a PowerPoint for the Commission. Mr. Ron Fisher, Project Manager thanked the Commission for the opportunity to present their project. He stated that they have purchased these lots and are now working through the architectural elevations to find something that the City of Palm Desert will be pleased with and meet their marketing requirements as well. He presented his PowerPoint presentation for the Commission. Commissioner Vuksic stated that he didn't want to go through each plan in detail and made some broad brush comments. He recommended thicker wall elements for all elevations, recommended that footings be provided under the wainscot, and to set the windows back to create a shadowbox effect. . He then discussed the Italianate roof plan and stated that it is a big roof element only coming out 12" beyond the roof element behind it. He said that in elevation it looks fine, but in reality it is a small offset to have on a major element. He suggested extending the soffit at least three feet. Commissioner Stendell stated that it would make the garage deeper to give more relief on the front, instead of being so flat. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the same problem exists on the Spanish roof. He pointed out that there are gable fronts on those, but the entry gable is only out about a foot beyond the major gable that is right behind it. Commissioner Vuksic was worried about the French style and stated that the Commission doesn't dictate style as long as the style is done well and has a certain quality. He wasn't sure if it is an architecture that is robust enough to pull off. Mr. Knepper asked what they would like to see in place of the French and suggested a Tuscan style. Commissioner Vuksic agreed. Commissioner Lambell asked what the price point was and Mr. Knepper stated that they haven't established a price point yet, but thought that they may be around the low $200,000. Commissioner Lambell didn't think they look in the low $200,000 and expressed G:\PlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2010WR100209min.doc Page 7 of 11 ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION '�+ � MINUTES February 9, 2010 ' that they need more personality, more articulation, and more detail. While she applauds their efforts, she said that a lot of these things are stock details. She stated that it should have a signature to it that makes it different. This Commission looks at the visual impact that these homes will make with the City of Palm Desert and was afraid that this is not up to the City standards. Mr. Knepper indicated that this open planned series is their best seller in all of Southern California, but not in the desert as of yet. Commissioner Lambell stated that the desert is very unique and she asked him to take a look at detailing. Mr. Knepper asked staff if they might have some sample elevations he could review. Mr. Bagato said that they could look at the previous plans approved on this tract; Toll Brothers and Trans West. Mr. Knepper asked if out of the three elevations which style was better besides the French. He asked if it was the Italianate. Commissioner Lambell thought there was a ways to go on the Italianate, and didn't think that should be their baseline. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that they need to take the architecture around all four sides and they need to improve the windows and door trims. He was also concerned with the Italian columns and shutters and didn't think they would hold up here in the desert. He mentioned that they need to consider solar shade and have some options on the windows because they will get really brutalized. Commissioner Stendell stated that they are putting smaller homes on larger lots that were originally designed for larger homes and there is a wonderful opportunity to create a street with a lot of setback, relief and perspective as you drive down the street. He suggested bringing the garage out to give it a little more room and that will automatically develop a little relief and suggested that the wainscot and veneer go back at least to the cut off fence that separates the front and back yard. Commissioner Levin stated that the sides are flat and some don't even have windows and would like to see a little more relief in the window treatments. He asked what the eave overhang was and Mr. Knepper stated that they tend to be 12" to 15". Commissioner Levin said he would like to see them a little bit deeper. Mr. Knepper suggested that one elevation could be the larger overhang and one could be the decorative foam; two different architectural elevations. Commissioner Lambell stated there are many homes in the desert that have huge overhangs which then becomes a passive solar controt in the summer time. Mr. Bagato informed the applicant that the building G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010WR100209min.doc Page 8 of 11 � ARCHITECTURAL F�9EW COMMISSION � � MINUTES February 9, 2010 code requires one model to have solar panels and aii other models to have solar pre-wiring capabilities. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Lambell and seconded by Commissioner Levin, continued Case MISC 10-28 subject to: 1) provide footings for wainscot; 2) provide thicker wall elements for all elevations; 3) windows setback to create a shadowbox effect; 4) extend soffit at least three feet; 5) delete French style and substitute with Tuscan style; 6) create more details to make homes unique; 7) keep a low profile for roof ventilation; 8) one model home to show solar panels and other models to be pre-wired for solar features; and 9) look at Trans West homes for architectural design ideas. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with Commissioner Gregory abstaining and Commissioner Touschner absent. C. Miscellaneous Items: 1. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Discussion and review of Way Finding signage in Palm Desert. Mr. Bagato presented photos of some of the way finding signs throughout the city as well as photos of way finding signs from other jurisdictions. The Commission discussed the spindly legs supporting the signs, the height, and the back of the signs. Commissioner Lambell measured the height of a stop sign and another sign in the city and asked why the way finding signs were so much taller. Mr. Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works stated that there are a variety of standards for traffic signs. The first standard is that they must be 7' to the bottom of the sign and with a limited exception they can go as low as 6' to the bottom, particularly in areas where there are pedestrians. Then when you start stacking text on top of it, it gets taller so they try to limit the signs to no more than three lines of text; He pointed out that the whole purpose of the way finding signs are to guide people who don't know where they are going. Guests and visitors need to see these signs so a large font is used. So when a large font is used with multiple lines of text you end up with a sign that is 13' feet to the top. He stated that there are other signs that are that tall; the city limit signs and places where they stack two or three signs toget�er. G:\PlanningUanineJudy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010WR100209min.doc Page 9 of 11 ARCHITECTURAL R�r'W COMMISSION `'�+�r� � MINUTES February 9, 2010 � Commissioner Van Vliet agreed that a lot of them are too tail. The Commission restricts the monument signs in the City to six feet high, however sometimes they may go a little over that. Commissioner Lambell stated that aesthetically they are wonderful signs, but her concerns were with the legs, the back and the height. Mr. Greenwood stated that on the back of every sign there is some kind of support posts and as a roadside device they are required to meet the federal standards with breakaway capabilities. They cannot make them substantial or they won't meet the standard. Cornmissioner Gregory suggested that taking the signs down to 6' to the bottom of the sign would help. The legs would look less spindly and the proportions would look better. Commissioner Lambell asked Mr. Greenwood how he could fix the signs knowing the Commission's concerns. Mr. Greenwood stated that the comments received so far have been overwhelmingly positive and asked if the signs needed fixing. Commissioner Lambell said that in a city where they spend an incredible amount of time on signage, the Commission is incredibly picky on what kind of sign goes up in the City. Countless times the Commission has sent signs back because they don't depict the feeling that is needed in Palm Desert and these way finding signs have the City's name all over them. The Commission doesn't have a problem with how the sign looks, but the concerns are with the legs, height and the back. Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development thought that painting the posts to match the back of the sign may make the posts disappear. The Commission discussed the possibility of lowering them down to the 6'. Mr. Greenwood stated that he would check the standard to see if it is possible in this case. There may be locations that are appropriate for lowering, but in other locations it may not be appropriate. Commissioner Gregory suggested doing only one sign to see if it is worth the expense and hassle of doing them all. Mr. Greenwood said that since this project was approved by the City Council the changes have to be approved by the City Council. Commissioner Levin asked what was presented to the City Council. Mr. Greenwood answered that they were presented with a half size sign and displays which showed them at 7'. He said that he would talk with the City Manager to see if he approves of lowering one sign and to see if the budget will bear the expense; because this project was fairly manpower intensive. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010WR100209min.doc Page 10 of 11 � ARCHITECTURAL f�,,,��IEW COMMISSION �� � MINUTES February 9, 2010 ACTION: No action taken; discussion only. Recommend painting support posts on the back side of signs to match signage and review standards for lowering height from 7' to 6' to the bottom of signage. VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Lambell, seconded by Commissioner Stendell to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 1:55 p.m. � TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER G:\PlanningWanineJudy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010\AR100209min.doc Page 11 of 11 ;�,, �"'�pv .