The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011-01-25 � � � ��•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • ' MINUTES January 25, 2011 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 1 1 Karel Lambell X 2 , Pam Touschner X 1 1 Allan Levin X 2 Ken Stendell X 2 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 Christina Canales, Assistant Engineer Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 11, 2011 Action: Commissioner Levin moved and Commissioner Van Vliet seconded, to approve the January 11, 2011 meeting minutes. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic absent. V. CASES: ARCHITECTURAL R�EW COMMISSION � � MINUTES January 25, 2011 A. Final Drawings: 1. 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; Presbyterian Church. LOCATION: 47-321 Highway 74 ZONE: R.1, S.P. Ms. Grisa stated this request came before the Architectural Review Commission previously. At the October 12, 2010 meeting, the Commission continued this case with recommendations and suggested a monopalm at this location with other live palms. In the meantime, staff informally brought forward a couple of design plans that the applicant was considering. One was a cross design and the other would replicate an existing rendering they found that the architect may have intended for the final design, but never came to fruition. Staff recommends approval of the cross design, however just a few minutes prior to the start of today's meeting Ms. Grisa found out that the church did not approve this new design. The applicant is here today to address the Commission on how to move this forward. Ms. Veronica Arvizu, representative stated that the church board rejected the most recent rendering mainly because there is already a cross in the glass and the board felt it was redundant to have a cross on top of a cross. She then presented to the Commission a third option that illustrated the addition of an arch on top, which is the original intent of the architect. She said the church board liked it and it stays with the original intent. She introduced Mr. Lloyd Vale, Presbyterian Church representative who found the original sketch. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�201 t�P,Rt 10125min.doc Page 2 of 7 � ARCHITECTURAL R�cW COMMISSION � MINUTES January 25, 2011 Commissioner Gregory asked why the proportions were considerably different than the architect's sketch and Ms. Arvizu stated that the antennas that need to be placed there are 6' long. Commissioner Gregory said that the architect's drawing had a certain lightness and proportion that really flowed well. Ms. Arvizu stated that they were looking at that as well and they figured that the arch completes the missing portion. Ms. Grisa stated the initial cross design had a piece cut out of the side of the belfry and asked if there was a way to get three antennas there. Ms. Arvizu stated there are three antennas and one has to face north, one has to face southbound, and it was not possible. Commissioner Gregory asked if they could make this so that it doesn't come across so heavy. Looking at the original design and the architect's sketch everything was graceful and the proportions worked. However, the applicant's approach looks more engineered; like a bridge support. He asked that they not mimic this idea but try something to incorporate the two vertical elements they need, but have it feel lighter. Commissioner Touschner supported what Commissioner Gregory said and stated that it's not a bad idea and is worth pursuing; it's just heavy right now. Even though this is massive, it is very delicate. It has to look sculptural to go along with the arch and the connection needs to have the same sculptural quality to it. She asked that the architect go out and look at this and study this three dimensionally. Ms. Arvizu said she understands that it needs to be more flowing and suggested that she prepare a photo simulation and submit to staff. Commissioner Touschner stated that this is one of the more architecturally sensitive designs that the applicant has brought forward, but this is a building that has incredible architectural significance; whether it is on a register or not. She asked again why they are not considering a monopalm so they don't have to touch the building. Ms. Arvizu said that she has met with the landlord and the increase to the steeple is the preferred option. Mr. Vale stated that if they were to try to place a monopole amongst the existing trees it would stand out far more than any architectural change. Ms. Arvizu said that if they go behind the building her engineer would not approve the design because the mountains would interfere with reception, so it would have to be up front which would then take away from the building. G:\Planning\JanineJudy\Word FilesW Minutes�2011\AR110125min.doc Page 3 of 7 ARCHITECTURAL R�EW COMMISSION �' `' MINUTES January 25, 2011 Commissioner Lambell suggested that they stay with the architect's original intent and not make it so that it is flush with the tops of the two spires that are coming up. Commissioner Touschner stated that execution is really important and once it is built it can never be changed. The Commission discussed the conduit on the outside of the building for the cabling that goes all the way down the building. Ms. Arvizu stated she will bring in photos for the Commission's review of buildings where this was done. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to continue Case CUP 10-298 subject to: 1) re-designing the proposed antenna screening to appropriately match the sculptural quality of the church belfry architecture; 2) obtaining approval from the church board prior to returning with a new design; 3) provide three dimensional perspectives, sections, and details; 4) submit photos of faux finishes; and 5) provide detail on where conduit is located from the church belfry area to the grade below. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic absent. 2. 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 revision to existing awning; Between the Sheets. LOCATION: 73-425 EI Paseo Suite 113 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Swartz stated this project came before the Commission previously. He said that the owner made a substantial change from what was originally approved and installed a Cheetah print with new signage that was not approved. The applicant was cited by Code Compliance and was asked by staff to go back to the original approval and design. They have now submitted a new proposal going back to the original approved brown color. The only difference now is the designs at the bottom of each awning. He G:\P�anningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2011\AR110125min.doc Page 4 of 7 r ARCHITECTURAL R��W COMMISSION � MINUTES January 25, 2011 also pointed out that the signage is going back to what was originally proposed. Mr. Swartz also indicated that part of the approval would be for the flood lights above the awnings for the signage. ACTION: Commissioner Van Vliet moved and Commissioner Lambell seconded, to grant approval. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic absent. 3. CASE NO: SA 11-20 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIGNARAMA, Attn: Kim, 41-945 Boardwalk, Suite L, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of monument sign; Venture Commerce Center. LOCATION: 73-700 Dinah Shore Drive ZONE: S.I. Mr. Swartz stated this was a request for a new monument sign. The applicant has submitted photos of the buildings which are typical industrial type buildings. The monument sign is 6' in height and stuccoed on the outside. A sample board was presented to the Commission with the colors and lettering. The Commission reviewed the colors and the size of the letters. Commissioner Touschner stated that she liked it and thought the colors matched the building. Mr. Swartz pointed out that the monument sign is located in a landscaped area and said that the applicant has submitted an irrigation plan and a landscape plan. Their plans show that the landscape will not be impacted, but he suggested that their approval say that if anything is removed or damaged the applicant has to replace it. ACTION: Commissioner Touschner moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to grant approval subject to replacing any landscaping that is removed or damaged. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic absent. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2011\AR110125min.doc Page 5 of 7 ARCHITECTURAL R%EW COMMISSION � • MINUTES January 25, 2011 4. CASE NO: MISC 11-25 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JNP CONSTRUCTION, Attn Pamela Ryan, 73255 Shadow Mountain Drive, Paim Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of exterior paint for Las Sombras Center (excluding Olive Garden and Tilted Quilt). LOCATION: 72224-72261 Highway 111 ZONE: P.C. (4) Mr. Swartz presented this project and stated that the applicant is proposing to repaint two buildings in the Las Sombras Center; excluding Olive Garden and Tilted Quilt. He pointed out on the plans a couple of blue trellises that the applicant is requesting to be removed. Mr. Swartz presented samples of paint colors for the Commission's review. The Commission reviewed and discussed the colors and was concerned with Solar Wind. Commissioner Touschner recommended that the applicants apply paint swatches to a test area for staff's review. Ms. Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist said that a landscape plan will need to be submitted for review and approval if the landscape is changed. ACTION: Commissioner Van Vliet moved and Commissioner Stendell seconded, to grant approval of exterior paint color and removal of trellises, subject to: 1) applying paint swatches to a test area for staff's review; and, 2) submittal of landscape changes, if any, and approved by the Landscape Specialist. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic absent. B. Preliminary Plans: None G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�A Minutes�2011WR110125min.doc Page 6 of 7 .' ARCHITECTURAL R��W COMMISSION ;;�,,� MINUTES January 25, 2011 C. Miscellaneous Items: None V1. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Stendell moved and Commissioner Lambell seconded to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic absent. The meeting was adjourned at 1:20 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2011\AR110125min.doc Page 7 of 7 � �rrr� `