Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-10-12 CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 12, 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 18 1 Chris Van Vliet X 18 1 John Vuksic X 17 2 Karel Lambell X 17 2 Pam Touschner X 14 5 Allan Levin X 18 1 Ken Stendell X 18 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Missy Grisa, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Pedro Rodriquez, Senior Code Officer Christine Canales, Assistant Engineer Neal Stephenson, Fire Safety Specialist Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 28, 2010 Action: Commissioner Levin moved and Commissioner Van Vliet seconded, to approve the September 28, 2010 meeting minutes. Motion carried 5-0- 1-1, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioner Lambell absent. V. CASES: ARCHITECTURAL F /IEW COMMISSION 11"W MINUTES October 12, 2010 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 10-143 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BETWEEN THE SHEETS, 17302 Daimler Street, Suite B, Irvine, CA 92614 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised awning material; Between the Sheets. LOCATION: 73-425 El Paseo Suite 113 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Swartz presented the project and stated that this came before the Commission previously for a revised store front. They are now proposing to change the awning material from the approved brown to a cheetah pattern; the store name will remain brown. Staff is recommending denial. Mr. Jim Sadler, American Awnings stated that the owner's design team submitted the design for the cheetah pattern to him and he wasn't aware that this wasn't what was approved. He stated that the awning has already been installed for the grand opening of the El Paseo Village this past weekend. The owner is hoping that the Commission will like it, but understands what the alternative is. Mr. Sadler stated that corporate and the local owner is ready to do whatever they need to do, whether it's through the City Council or changing the awning back to brown. Commissioner Gregory stated that although they were already approved for the dark brown they put up the cheetah pattern in spite of the approval for brown. Mr. Sadler stated that the owner would like the cheetah fabric to remain and would like to get it approved. Mr. Swartz stated that staff was unaware that the cheetah pattern was already installed and said that it must have been installed pretty recently and Mr. Sadler repeated that it was installed this past weekend for the grand opening. Commissioner Touschner asked if staff or anyone on the Commission has gone by the store to review the awnings. Commissioner Stendell stated that it is quite different from the brown and he didn't ARCHITECTURAL RaWfEW COMMISSION �%r MINUTES October 12, 2010 particularly like it. He reminded the Commission that the brown was approved on the Td of August. Mr. Bagato stated that the cheetah pattern was submitted a week and a half ago; however the awning was installed this past Saturday. Commissioner Gregory suggested that this be continued to give the Commission and staff an opportunity to review the awning. ACTION: Commissioner Stendell moved and Commissioner Touschner seconded, to continue Case No. MISC 10-143 subject to giving staff and Commission an opportunity to review the awning. Motion carried 5-0-1-1 with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioner Lambell absent. 2. CASE NO: SA 10-329 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): COUGAR'S BAR & NIGHTCLUB, 74-360 Highway 111 , Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a secondary sign; Cougar's Bar & Nightclub. LOCATION: 74-360 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1, S.P. Mr. Swartz presented the project and stated that Cougar's currently has a sign on the building and would like to add "Bar & Nightclub". He presented photos and described the location of the additional sign and said that the sign would be illuminated with acrylic, channel face letters and meets all standards. Staff is recommending approval. The Commission reviewed the sign and Commissioner Vuksic recommended that the sign be centered over the awning. Commissioner Gregory drew attention to the awning and asked that the approval be predicated on the repair of the awning. Mr. Bagato suggested they could encourage the owner to update the awning. Mr. John Cross, Best Signs addressed their concern about the sign being centered over the awning and said it will be centered on the straight portion of the building. ARCHITECTURAL KVVIEW COMMISSION *40 MINUTES October 12, 2010 ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved and Commissioner Touschner seconded, to grant approval and encouraged applicant to update awning. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 , with Commissioner Lambell absent. 3. CASE NO: MISC 10-273 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ABDUL SALEHI, 10 Andalucia, Irvine, CA 92614 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a facade renovation and loading dock expansion; Best Buy LOCATION: 72-369 Highway 111 ZONE: P.C.-3 Ms. Grisa stated that this project has been before the Commission previously and that the Commission had concerns with the main storefront entry. She informed the Commission that the applicant has addressed their concerns with this submittal. The applicant has submitted a 3-D rendering that shows the wedge located 2' off the main storefront and a surround that is an additional foot for a total of 3' away from the main storefront. They removed the molding frames that were to the right of the entry and extended the wedge where it slopes further down into the building. Staff had concerns about the awkward meeting of elements with the parapet and the wedge, and recommends dying the parapet into the wedge rather than stopping it short. Staff also recommends that the detail lighting that illuminates the wedge be covered up. Staff recommends approval with these changes. Commissioner Vuksic thought that the facade was such a departure from the architecture and thought it was too thin. He suggested that they bring the element out farther. Mr. Abdul Salehi, architect explained that they were previously at 12" and have now pulled it out 24" and every foot increases the cost of the building. The Commission and the applicant discussed in detail the thickness of the facade, the blue wedge and the material depth. Commissioner Touschner stated that part of the issue is the detail and thought the overall massing is much better. However, she did have some concerns with the side detail because the lamp is exposed. Mr. Salehi stated that this will be concealed by extending ARCHITECTURAL RISVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 12, 2010 the panel about 4" to hide the lamp. They will increase the depth of the blue wedge from 12" to 24" out from the wall leaving 6" to 8" of open space for the lamp. Commissioner Touschner was concerned that they would not maintain the light. Mr. Salehi stated that they will take another look at it and if they feel that it is not needed, they will lose the light. Commissioner Vuksic thought it was still too thin. The Commission reviewed and discussed the roof and the kickers. Mr. Salehi stated that the kickers will be at the high point of the wedge and they will frame everything on the top of the parapet. The roof is high and because the wedge is at an angle there will be braces on the back side and the kickers will not be exposed. Commissioner Vuksic thought the element was too shallow. If it was shorter and stayed away from the parapet and returned on the roof, that would make it better than it is now. Proportionately it would look better because that element is almost as long as the part going over the storefront. Commissioner Gregory made a motion to approve, subject to changing the wedge/light detail to pull the blue cladding material in on the sides and bottom of the wedge creating 16" of material depth" leaving 8" for the light well. Commissioner Touschner added that the details be changed so the lamp/light is not visible. Commissioner Gregory so amended and Commissioner Stendell made the second. Commissioner Gregory asked for comments. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the new fagade is not angling from one side to the other; it's parallel. He thinks they made it as simple as it can be and said that the least they could do was to beef it up an additional 1'. Mr. Salehi stated that this wedge is humongous and doesn't want to bring it out any further. The Commission and the applicant discussed bringing it out further and Mr. Salehi reminded the Commission that he complied with their request to bring it out to 24". Commissioner Gregory called for the vote. ACTION: Commissioner Gregory moved and Commissioner Stendell seconded, to grant approval subject to: 1) changing the wedge/light detail to pull the blue cladding material in on sides and bottom of wedge creating 16" of material depth leaving 8" for the light well; and 2) change detail so the lamp/light is not visible from the bottom or side views. Motion carried 5-1-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic voting NO and Commissioner Lambell absent. ARCHITECTURAL MEW COMMISSION MINUTES - October 12, 2010 4. CASE NO: MISC 10-329 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ENGIN ONURAL, 53-771 W. Sierra Circle, Coachella, CA 92236 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a new awning with signage; The Venue. LOCATION: 73-111 El Paseo, Suite 103 ZONE: C-1, S.P. Ms. Grisa presented the project and stated that this is an approval of an existing awning and staff recommends approval. The Commission reviewed and discussed the plans. ACTION: Commissioner Stendell moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to grant approval subject to 1) signage being centered within the window; and 2) reducing the logo size, so text and crown are equal distance from top and bottom of the awning. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioner Lambell absent. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: CUP 10-292 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): REALCOM ASSOCIATES, LLC; Verizon Wireless, Attn Alexis Osborn, 27201 Puerta Real, Ste 240, Mission Viejo, CA 92691 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of 55' monopalm to hold 3 sectors of 4 antennas for a total of 12, and one 2' microwave dish. LOCATION: 47-900 Portola Avenue ZONE: P Ms. Grisa presented the project and informed the Commission that the applicant was not present. She stated that staff recommends that this be co-located with another carrier in the same area. However, Verizon indicated that they could not locate all the equipment together in one monopalm because they have larger ARCHITECTURAL RbwlEW COMMISSION S"101 MINUTES October 12, 2010 communication equipment. The applicant did not submit a landscape plan with the original submittal because they wanted to wait until the ARC meeting to see if the Commission would request additional palms around this area. Staff recommends locating the equipment inside the monopalm or using other equipment that can be located inside the antennas and the submittal of a landscaping plan to include three to five palms surrounding the monopalm to hide it. The Commission discussed the issues with placing the palms in the same location as other carriers. Mr. Bagato stated maybe not on a palm tree, but the pine trees have different carriers on one pole, they just need a 3' separation between the other carrier's antennas. Commissioner Vuksic asked if this could be relocated to the palm grove near this location where a different applicant is putting in a pole and Mr. Bagato said it is possible if there is enough room and there are no technology issues. The Commission discussed the notice to residents within 300' of this monopalm and thought they should extend that further out. Mr. Bagato stated that he could talk with the applicant and ask them to consider extending it out so more people would be notified. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved and Commissioner Stendell seconded, to continue Case CUP 10-292 subject to: 1) consider co-locating with other carrier proposal on-site; and 2) relocate monopalm in adjacent palm grove and screen equipment. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioner Touschner and Lambell absent. 2. CASE NO: CUP 10-298 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS LLC, 350 Commerce, Suite 200, Irvine, CA 92602 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval to increase the height of a church steeple belfry area to accommodate three panel antennas to be used for wireless communication and to locate ancillary equipment in the parking lot. LOCATION: 47-321 Highway 74 ZONE: R.1, S.P. ARCHITECTURAL VIEW COMMISSION ``0 , MINUTES October 12, 2010 Ms. Grisa presented the project and summarized the staff report. She stated that staff has a concern with the 13' x 18' equipment structure that is located in the corner of the parking lot. Staff doesn't have any issues with the raising of the structures between the two church towers and looks like it would fit well there. The only concern is the patchwork in the existing concrete tower that faces Highway 74. Ms. Grisa stated that this is a large site and feels that the applicant can better locate the accessory structure. Ms. Veronica Arvizu, representative described the materials that will be used for the belfry and the accessory structure. She said that she received comments from the landlord regarding the drawings and the photo simulations and they are requesting that the speakers not be removed and a planter put in around the equipment area. Ms. Grisa and the applicant discussed the parking around that area. Ms. Arvizu stated that they could do a little planter on one side only. Commissioner Gregory stated that the proportions will really be affected and it will become heavy looking. He pointed out that with all the palms in this area it would be so easy to put a monopalm there. He pointed out that there are certain architectural gems in town and this is one those. It was extremely well designed and it will be compromised. Ms. Arivizu stated they gave the landlord different options and this is what they preferred. The Commission discussed the proportions, the setbacks and the steeple. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the steeple is a major part of the building and they should stay away from it. Commissioners Stendell and Touschner both stated that this architecture was done well and blends with other architecture. Commissioner Gregory asked them to consider placing a monopalm in this location with other live palms. Ms. Grisa explained that the applicant could ask for an exception and it would go to the City Council for approval. Commissioner Touschner excused herself from the meeting. ACTION: Commissioner Stendell moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to continued Case No. CUP 10-298 subject to considering a monopalm in this location with other live palms. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioner Touschner and Lambell absent. ARCHITECTURAL RL 1EW COMMISSION MINUTES October 12, 2010 C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. COMMENTS Commissioner Levin asked for the status of the neon sign ordinance. Mr. Bagato said it will go to the Planning Commission on October 19th. He stated that modifications were made based on the Commission's comments at the last meeting. VII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Stendell moved and Commissioner Vuksic seconded to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5-0-0-2, with Commissioners Lambell and Touschner absent. Meeting adjourned at 1:45 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER