Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-01-26 f j . � � �� �� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • ' MINUTES January 26, 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 2 Chris Van Vliet X 2 John Vuksic X 2 Karel Lambell X 2 Pam Touschner X 2 Allan Levin X 2 Ken Stendell X 2 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Missy Grisa, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Pedro Rodriquez, Senior Code Officer Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 12, 2010 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Levin, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the January 12, 1010 meeting minutes. Motion carried 7-0. V. CASES: ARCHITECTURAL R`�1EW COMMISSION wr+� , MINUTES January 26, 2010 A. Final Drawings: None B. Preliminary Plans: None C. Miscellaneous Items: 1. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Verbal presentation of kitchen & building expansion for conceptual approval; Desert Willow. APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 Ms. Heather Buck, Redevelopment Agency presented the plans and explained the proposed changes to Desert Willow. She stated that 100 seats are proposed for dining and 250 seats for banquet settings, a new terrace to match the existing terrace, a few amenities such as a fire pit in the central area and a fire place on the east side of the project. This area is terraced down with landscaping to protect the views from the existing terrace with good views for the lower terrace. As part of the terrace project they are proposing additional square footage expansions to the project to provide additional seating on the interior of the building. This will be designed to match existing finishes, with stone and wrought iron railings. When presented to the City Council, they recommended taking a look at the kitchen expansion because with the additional patrons the current kitchen is currently undersized for the types of meals that Desert Willow is offering their patrons. The expansion is primarily to the east to minimize the impact to the utilities. They are adding an additional banquet line leaving the dining line intact and adding storage to accommodate food, liquor, china, glass, and silver. The City Council also recommended that they look at expanding the pinch point at the existing bar location to create more of a transition area. The bar will be relocated to the south into the area where the existing offices are and the offices will be relocated from the entry area over to the east side of the building. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010WR100126min.doc Page 2 of 9 . ARCHITECTURAL R�,rcW COMMISSION �' , MINUTES January 26, 2010 Mr. Martine Alvarez, Redevelopment Agency stated that they tried to incorporate architectural elements, materials, and colors that currently exist. The southeast corner has been reduced down to a flatter roof, the northeast side of the building has an entry feature that will be utilized as a secondary access point, and a secondary foyer to accommodate dual uses with banquet rooms; one at one end and patrons and golfers on the other end. As mentioned earlier, the lower scale of the southern side of this elevation mirrors in scale and in characteristics with what is existing. The concepts have been designed so that it incorporates and ties in with the terrace around the north side of the building, stone veneers, metal overhangs, and a lot of the architectural features and elements. Ms. Grisa stated that both of the packages will be moving forward as one at the next submittal and what they are looking for right now are comments only. They still have to submit the WQMP to Public Works and get a preliminary approval before a vote can be taken. These plans were reviewed at the Development Services meeting and staff indicated that the outdoor bar area needs to have a spot for ADA accessibility. Also discussed was the fire and safety detail regarding the fire pit and how that would be addressed. Mr. Rich Mogensen, General Manager of Desert Willow stated that they will look at different options for the fire pit. One option would be to have some type of inetal grate on top of the feature or to extend the planter/seating area further away from the center so someone won't accidently fall in. Commissioner Levin asked about parking. Mr. Bagato stated that Public Works is designing 250 more spaces and Mr. Alvarez said that parking will be a part of this expansion, Ms. Grisa mentioned that the Landscaping Specialist would like the turf pulled 24" away from the concrete on the east side extension. Mr. Alvarez stated that they will have an event lawn for weddings, golf, and other special events and they preferred the turf right up to the concrete to make it is an easier transition for the workers to get back and forth, but stated that they will create planters or walkways for access. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesV+Minutes�2010�.4f1100126min.doc Page 3 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL R�EW COMMISSION �rr✓ , MINUTES January 26, 2010 Commissioner Levin asked if they will have to shut down the facility while construction is being completed. Mr. Alvarez stated that they want to move forward as quickly as they can and start construction in the summer so they can have two to three months of closure. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the tower element was added later because it doesn't look like the other architecture. Everything else has kind of a horizontal flow and lower slung and this tower is a bulky thing that has a thick eave to it and a different looking window system. He asked the applicant to explain the entry. Mr. Alvarez stated that they wanted it to be a prominent entrance. In fact, a lot of their patrons use that now because of the access to the parking lot. Once they bring in the banquet functions and other special events this will be another secondary access. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the existing entrance is very elegant and it is a great feeling when you come in and see the golf course and the terraces. When looking at the new entry in plan it looks like you enter into a lobby space with a corridor that leads you a long distance into the main hub of the building. It is not a pleasant entry experience. Mr. Alvarez stated that they can take a look at the plans to open that up to capture more of an open feel. Mr. Emad Michael, architect explained that the entry will be open and as people come in they will see the fabulous view. The purpose of this main entry will serve as a pre-function area for the Palm Desert room and the patrons will experience the same view. Commissioner Touschner thought that the fireplace will get in the way of that view. Mr. Michael explained that the terrace is two feet lower than the lobby. Commissioner Touschner felt that if it is located there, the fireplace has to be dynamite. Mr. Michael indicated he will look into lowering the height of the fireplace. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the north wall of the tower has a massive wall in elevation but in reality it is quite a thin element and considering the massive scale of the tower it is going to look even thinner. He also commented on the entry and felt that there should be a much more elegant way to handle the approach than walking down a handicap stripped parking area. Commissioner Touschner stated that this is a missed opportunity and needs to be much more elegant. G:\PlanningWanineJudy\Word Files�AMinutes�2010WR100126min.doc Page 4 of 9 , ARCHITECTURAL R�rEW COMMISSION `�r�+` MINUTES January 26, 2010 The Commission discussed the major entrance and stated that it needs to be signed well. Mr. Alvarez discussed a median island with directional signage in front of the main lobby; possibly a valet drop-off station. The Commission discussed the pilasters and columns. Commissioner Touschner said they should all flow well together and be a part of the building. It will need to look like an extension of the architecture on the building. Mr. Michael stated that the pilasters will have the stone cladding to match the entire fa�ade and the location of the pilasters will be in line with the column. Commissioner Touschner suggested that they are consistent. Commissioner Touschner mentioned there is no natural light in the office space and asked that they rethink that area in order to bring some natural lighting into that area where three to four people work. Mr. Michael stated that when they designed the office area they worked close with the employees in order to meet all the requests they had in mind, however they do need the storage as close as possible to the banquet rooms. He stated they could redesign that area and put in light tubes. Commissioner Lambell pointed out that the north elevation is the most important elevation because patrons will see it as they come up to the 18th green. She expressed that the whole north fa�ade is probably more important than the south fa�ade. She felt that the north elevation should have more attention paid to it because in plan it looks like an add-on. Mr. Alvarez stated that they did preserve some of the views because they want to do some type of entrance feature to break up the elevation and massing. Ms. Grisa asked if they were switching the bar so people would be looking out. Mr. Alvarez explained that there is a new bar outside where people look out towards the course and on the inside they are taking a couple of offices out on the south end and expanding the bar to the south. There may be an opportunity for this to be flipped so you can capture some of these views. Ms. Grisa asked if they would be submitting a landscape plan and Mr. Alvarez said that they will return with preliminary plans with landscaping and they will also address all the comments made by this Commission. 6:\PlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesVl Minutes�20101AR100126min.doc Page 5 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL R�t'EW COMMISSION '� , MINUTES January 26, 2010 ACTION: Conceptual plan review only; no action was taken. 2. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Verbal presentation for Lake View Terrace for conceptual approval; Desert Willow APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, 73-510 Fred Waring, Palm Desert, CA 92260 See minutes above. ACTION: Conceptual plan review only; no action was taken. 3. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Update on the new Recreational Vehicle Ordinance Ms. Grisa presented the Recreational Vehicle ordinance and stated that the City Council on January 28, 2010 will extend the RV moratorium until the new ordinance is in effect. The new ordinance will go to the City Council for first reading on February 11, 2010. She stated that the main changes were moving large RVs from street side yards to a location behind the side fa�ade of the residence; removing front yard parking locations completely; eliminating setback dimensions from the property line; necessitating 100% screening at the time of storage; temporary parking regarding loading/unloading, cleaning, charging, etc., restricted to a period of 24-hours; providing emergency ingress and egress from residences; noticing requirements; staff approvals vs. Architectural Review Commission (ARC) approvals; and creating strict exceptions procedures language. The final changes made to the ordinance are summarized below: Section 8.40.010 Purpose of provisions. Grammatical language changes only; the intent and purpose remain the same. Section 8.40.040 Measurement of recreational vehicles. Language clarifies how the height and width are measured. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010\AR100126min.doc Page 6 of 9 � . ARCHITECTURAL R�W COMMISSION `'�"` MINUTES January 26, 2010 Section 8.40.050 Permitted and non-permitted uses of recreational vehicles. Language was added to: eliminate front yard and street side yard RV parking; prohibit the parking of RVs in carports; eliminate RV setbacks from side and back yard property lines, and to require 100% screening of the RV height at time of storage; reduce noticing requirements to immediately adjacent property owners; establish staff approval when all neighbors are in agreement regarding the screened RV; establish ARC review when neighbors are not in agreement regarding the screened RV; and prohibit blocking of residential emergency ingress or egress with an RV. Section 8.40.060 Permit issuance to park recreational vehicles on private propertv. This section now establishes clearly defined applicant submittal requirements, and side and rear yard grandfathered (legal nonconforming) approvals are terminated upon transfer of the property to another party. Subsequent property owners will need to apply for approval under the new standards. In front and street side yards, a 12-month amortization period will allow the RV owner to find other means of storage. Section 8.40.080 Temporary parking permit procedure. 72-hour permits will be issued for parking on private property, such as driveways. These permits were previously only issued for parking on public streets. Also, a parking permit will remain unnecessary for loading/unloading and/or cleaning an RV for less than 24 hours, rather than the 72-hours in the existing ordinance. Section 8.40.090 Permit fees. Although the existing ordinance provides for charging a fee to process applications through the steps of ARC review, the City Council set a policy of waiving the fee many years ago. Staff and the subcommittee recommend that the fee be reestablished in the amount of $168 (equivalent to the cost of processing similar cases through the ARC), to be updated periodically when other development fees are revised by City Council resolution. Staff typically spends four or more hours on recreational vehicle cases. The process involves discussions with the applicant to get a full submittal, field site review, preparation and noticing nearby property owners, writing an ARC staff report, and the actual presentation in the ARC meeting. Additional time is required when cases are appealed or called up by the City Council. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010�AR100126min.doc Page 7 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL RL''�fEW COMMISSION `"�'`' . MINUTES January 26, 2010~ Section 8.40.100 General conditions. Minor language changes were addressed regarding temporarily connected power and water. Staff agrees with the concerns of the subcommittee and recommends approval to adopt Chapter 8.40 Recreational Vehicles on Private Property in its entirety as attached. The Commission discussed issues with the screening material and setbacks. They expressed that there should still be a minimum setback; which is typically five feet. The Commission asked if there was an exemption clause and Ms. Grisa stated that there is a clause but it is very limited. Ms. Grisa stated that all residents with RVs previously permitted or permitted under a previous ordinance will have to prove they were permitted or show proof that there was no ordinance in effect at the time they started parking their RV on their property. They will also be required to submit photos and a site plan. At that time, the Director has the option to add additional screening if the RV is not sufficiently screened. Ms. Grisa stated that new RV applications will not come through the ARC if the neighbors are okay with the RV. If there are problems or a neighbor doesn't like the RV then it will come through ARC. ACTION: Discussion only; no action was taken. V. COMMENTS Commissioner Touschner requested that the new way finding signage be placed on the agenda for a future meeting. She mentioned that after reviewing a couple of the signs, she feels they are at the appropriate height, however she thought that if they had a back to them they would appear to have more substance. Commissioner Lambell stated that the City and this Commission have always paid a lot of attention to signage and felt that these signs should look right. She asked if this Commission can make a recommendation regarding these signs. Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Community Development Director stated that if the Commission wanted to make specific recommendations, staff can take it forward and ask the City Council what they would like to do. She stated that staff will take photos of the signs for discussion at a future meeting. G:\PlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW MinuTes�2010\AR100126min.doc Page 8 of 9 . , ARCHITECTURAL R�w'EW COMMISSION "�"' MINUTES January 26, 2010 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 1:45 p.m. TONY BA ATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2010WR100126min.doc Page 9 of 9