Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-03-22 r � � ��•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • ' MINUTES March 22, 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 5 1 Chris Van Vliet X 6 John Vuksic X 5 1 Karel Lambell X 6 Pam Touschner X 5 1 Allan Levin X 6 Ken Stendell X 6 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 Neal Stephenson, Fire Safety Specialist Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 8, 2011 Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to approve the March 8, 2011 meeting minutes. Motion carried 7-0. V. CASES: ARCHITECTURAL R�"dIEW COMMISSION `'�"'� e MINUTES March 22, 2011 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 11-111 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SJB PROPERTIES, LLC, 1742 Michael Lane, Pacific Palisades, CA 90272 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a fa�ade entrance addition; Harbor Freight Tools. LOCATION: 72-630 Dinah Shore Dr #101 ZONE: PC-(3) FCOZ Ms. Grisa presented the project and summarized the staff report. She informed the Commission this is a new entrance in a multi- tenant complex and the adjacent tenant, Dollar Tree, has the space to the south. This building was originally one suite and has now been split into two to allow two tenants. Dollar Tree's sign will be centered on the adjacent entry feature with the addition of the new entrance, rather than off-set as was previously approved by staff. The proposed fa�ade addition for Harbor Freight Tools allows the two tenant spaces to maintain separate entrance features and the architectural intent of the shopping center. She described the wall color and roofing materials, which are proposed to match the adjacent existing finishes to blend in with the original shopping center. The site plan indicates that the entrance columns are located immediately adjacent compact parking stalls. Staff anticipates bumper damage to these columns from people parking vehicles and recommends that the applicant leave a minimum of two feet of overhang beyond the curb; same as the code requires for stall dimensions. Staff believes this requirement would maintain the appearance of the exterior finishes over time. This requirement may not leave room for a walkway between the columns and the building and the applicant may need to re-locate the columns more to accommodate for proper pedestrian clearances. Staff recommends that the Architectural Review Commission approve the project with the conditions that all exterior finishes match the center and move the columns a minimum of two feet away from the adjacent parking stalts. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2011\AR110322min.doc Page 2 of 9 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION `'"'�''� MINUTES March 22, 2011 The Commission discussed the columns and the possible bumper damage. They suggested wheel stops, removal of parking spaces at the entrance, or spacing the entry columns appropriately to accommodate parking overhang. Mr. Bagato explained that there were a lot of spaces in the center and they probably could stand to lose a couple of spaces. The Commission reviewed and discussed the store entry. Commissioner Touschner said the architectural elements need to work with each other. Commissioner Gregory suggested raising the entry form so the average height matches the form on the left fa�ade elevation. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved and Commissioner Lambell seconded, to grant approval subject to: 1) raising the entry form so the average height matches form on left fa�ade elevation; 2) applicant to explore removal of parking spaces at entrance, or space entry columns appropriately to accommodate parking overhang; and 3) review and approval of staff. Motion carried 7-0. 2. CASE NO: MISC 10-343 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): THE THIRD CORNER PALM DESERT INC. 73-101 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of expansion of bar patio and awning; The Third Corner. LOCATION: 73-101 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Swartz presented the project and summarized the staff report. The applicant is requesting to remove the existing 322 square foot patio and construct a new 619 square foot patio, with an awning over the patio. The proposed patio is angled at the southeast corner to avoid being within the public right-of-way. The proposed forest green awning is attached to the building, and is 36' x 16', and 8' in height. In order to construct the patio, existing landscaping would have to be removed. The applicant has submitted a landscape plan to the City's Landscape Specialist, which must be approved prior to building permits. The proposed patio and awning meet all development standards and will provide the applicant a G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2011\AR110322min.doc Page 3 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL R�IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES March 22, 2011 larger outdoor dining area. The existing patio is old and outdated and the proposed patio will enhance the building and restaurant appeal. Staff recommends approval of the proposed patio reconstruction and installation of awning cover. Commissioner Levin asked if the increase would have an impact on the parking and Mr. Swartz stated that it would not. Commissioner Vuksic stated he liked the concept and said it would add a little more life to the outside of the building. Commissioner Lambell moved for approval and Commissioner Levin seconded. Commissioner Gregory asked if there were any further comments. Commissioner Van Vliet wondered how the awning terminates against the building on each side and asked if it was flush with the building face or was it inset. Mr. Bob Sipovac, Architect said it was flush on both sides. Commissioner Vuksic suggested they set it in about 3" to 4" on both sides so it has something to die into. Commissioner Touschner suggested the slope of the awning peak in the middle to become a consistent face. Commissioner Lambell amended her motion. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to grant approval subject to: 1) awning recessed 3" to 4" on the return; and 2) slope of the awning to peak in the middle to become a consistent face. Motion carried 7-0. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: MISC 11-58 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Attn: Tyler Hoist, 765 The City Drive, Suite 400, Orange, CA 92868 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of a new restaurant and signage; Red Lobster. LOCATION: 72-291 Highway 111 ZONE: P.C.-3 Mr. Bagato presented the project and said this came before the Commission at a previous meeting and was approved subject to some modifications. He presented new plans for the Commission's G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2011\AR110322min.doc Page 4 of 9 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION `"�' MINUTES March 22, 2011 review and described the changes. The applicant thickened up all the columns, placed a screen wall over the mechanical door on the Fred Waring elevation that matches the building and material, they added a light and awning above the egress door on the Fred Waring elevation, and screened the mechanical equipment on the roof. He stated they also changed the signage on Highway 111, removed the large white tetters and went with the non-illuminated panel with illuminated channel letters. Staff is recommending preliminary approval. Commissioner Vuksic noticed that the applicant did not make all gable roofs the same depth as the entry roof on the Fred Waring elevation as recommended by the Commission at the last meeting. He was concerned that what would be constructed would not be as deep. Mr. John Keen, applicant said to make that a condition. Commissioner Vuksic pointed out that the parapet on the Fred Waring elevation that was higher than the parapet next to it was not returned back onto the roof 6' feet as recommended by the Commission. Commissioner Vuksic and Mr. Keen discussed the issues. Commissioner Touschner was concerned that not all the units on the roof would be screened. Mr. Bagato stated it was a code requirement that all equipment be screened and would be inspected prior to approval. Mr. Keen said the equipment would be screened by a metal screening material and painted to match the building. Commissioner Stendell stated they need to be appropriately screened and reviewed by staff. Commissioner Touschner was concerned about the backs of the gables from the Fred Waring elevation and suggested that the backs of the gable roof elements be painted to match the wood shake siding. She said she saw inconsistencies in the drawings in terms of the white molding going around the building. She asked that the detail be consistent. Mr. Keen stated they are trying to minimize the west elevation and that is why they didn't add any depth to the gable on that side because it won't be seen. The Commission reviewed and discussed the roof drains and asked where they would terminate. Mr. Tyler Holst, representative said there are two main drains coming down internally which will terminate at grade. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files�A Minutes\2011\AR110322min.doc Page 5 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL R�G'IEW COMMISSION � MINUTES March 22, 2011 Commissioner Vuksic moved for approval and Commissioner Stendell seconded with conditions. Commissioner Gregory asked for comments. Mr. Keen was concerned with the condition requiring a 6' return on the Fred Waring elevation and said he was comfortable doing a couple of feet. He thought visually the Commission's concerns should be covered. Commissioner Gregory asked if there would be extensive costs involved with bringing it back 6' and Mr. Keen said there would be some. He reminded the Commission that they have made a lot of changes. Commissioner Vuksic said that if the applicant had a compelling architectural reason for not doing it, he would be the first one to back away, but he didn't see a cost issue or an architectural reason not to do it. Mr. Keen said okay. Commissioner Stendell said that it was a perspective issue and he agreed that a 6' return will mask the element of change that is there with no basic foundation as far as the structure. It can be reduced accordingly if the perspective warrants it. Commissioner Vuksic amended his motion that the parapets on the Fred Waring elevation shall return 6' onto the roof and will be subject to review during construction, and may be reduced if deemed acceptable by staff. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved and Commissioner Stendell seconded, to grant preliminary approval subject to: 1) final mechanical screen layout to be reviewed by staff; 2) all gable roofs to be the same depth as the entry roof; 3) backs of gable roof elements painted to match the wood shake siding; and 4) parapets on the Fred Waring elevation shall return 6' onto the roof and will be subject to review during construction, and may be reduced if deemed acceptable by staff. Motion carried 7-0. 2. CASE NO: PP 06-05 Amendment #1 /TT 36342 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HIGH POINT COMMUNITIES, 20 Enterprise, Suite 320, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of architectural design of 196 homes; 78 detached cluster homes; 69 attached homes; 49 single family homes; and a private recreation facility for tentative tract 36342 within The University Park. LOCATION: NWC University Park Drive & College Drive ZONE: PR-5 G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2011\AR110322min.doc Page 6 of 9 � ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION `'`"'� MINUTES March 22, 2011 Mr. Bagato presented the project and reminded the Commission that this was preliminarily approved at the last meeting, subject to conditions. He described the changes recommended by the Commission and said that staff had a concern with the minimal detailing around the windows on the single family homes on the side elevation that are not consistent with the front. Staff is recommending that the applicant carry it around to the side. Mr. David Kent, KTGY Architects, described the changes they made as recommended by the Commission at the last meeting. The Commission reviewed and discussed the elevations. Commissioner Vuksic suggested on Plan A2.1 of the cluster homes to fur out the bottom to perceive a different plane on the entry towers; on Plan A3.1 he suggested thickening the gables; on Plan A3.1 Single Family Homes he suggested increasing the width of chimneys by 3' to make it more proportionate with face; on Plan A3.1 Single Family Homes he suggested making the offset deeper on the Spanish elevation A; and on Plan A6.2 Duets he suggested beefing up the columns to be consistent on all models. Commissioner Vuksic and the applicants discussed the rear elevation on Plan A3.2 elevation A. Mr. Steve Vliss, High Point Communities, stated that this elevation is quite a bit higher than any surrounding buildings and set back quite a bit from the property line in the back. It would be difficult to really get any kind of a prospective on the entire rear elevation from anywhere in the community. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the land to the north of this project is a lot lower and asked them if the rear of the homes would be visible and Mr. Vliss said they would be able to see a portion of them, but not from the bottom plate all the way to the top. These homes are set back with quite a lot of grade change. He suggested doing a sight-line study and said they can add enhancements as option items like decks or some other elements to give it some relief. Mr. Swartz asked the applicants about the location of the A/C units and Mr. Kent said the units were either in rear yards or on the drive aisle. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2011\AR110322min.doc Page 7 of 9 ARCHITECTURAL R�'I`IEW COMMISSION `� MINUTES March 22, 2011 ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved and Commissioner Lambell seconded, to grant preliminary approval subject to 1) on Plan A2.1 Cluster Product - fur out the bottom to perceive a different plane on the entry towers; 2) on Plan A3.1 cluster product — thicken gables; 3) on Plan A3.1 Single Family Homes — increase width of chimneys by 3' to make it more proportionate with face; 4) on Plan A3.1 Single Family Homes make offset deeper on the Spanish elevation A; 5) on Plan A6.2 Duets — beef up the columns to be consistent on all models; and 6) landscape plans must be preliminarily approved before going to Planning Commission. Motion carried 5-0-1-1, Commissioners Levin abstaining and Commissioner Gregory absent. C. Miscellaneous Items: None NOTE: Staff requested an additional item be added to the Agenda. Commission concurred. Commissioner Levin moved and Commissioner Lambell seconded, to add Case MISC 10-343 to the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. 1. CASE NO: MISC 11-91 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PERMITS TODAY, 140 S. Lake Avenue, Suite 223, Pasadena, CA 91101 � NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of storefront remodel and signage; True Religion. LOCATION: 73-515 EI Paseo ZONE: C-1 Mr. Swartz presented the project and reminded the Commission that this was approved for brown awnings at a previous meeting. The applicant then submitted a proposal for red awnings with a red and blue sign. Staff inet with applicant and after some discussion the applicant has decided to leave the brown awnings and go with red and blue signage, which is their trademark color. The Commission reviewed and discussed the red awning and signage color. The Commission recommended halo lit lights on the G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes\2011\AR110322min.doc Page 8 of 9 ' ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION '"�" MINUTES March 22, 2011 sign to bring down the brightness at night and a submittal of two renderings one with a blue awning similar to their blue jeans and one with a toned-down red awning. ACTION: Commissioner Stendell moved and Commissioner Levin seconded, to continue Case MISC 11-91 subject to: 1) submitting two renderings one with blue awnings similar to their blue jeans and one with toned-down red awnings; 2) clarify color of red; 3) blade sign to remain as approved; and 4) halo lit signs. Motion carried 7-0. VI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Stendell moved and Commissioner Levin seconded to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m. TONY BAGATO PRINCIPAL PLANNER G:\Planning�,lanineJudy\Word FilesW Minutes�2011WR110322min.doc Page 9 of 9 ���rr �► �