The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-08-14 r CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES August 14, 2012 1. 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 12 2 Chris Van Vliet X 13 1 John Vuksic X 11 3 Karel Lambell X 14 Pam Touschner X 11 3 Allan Levin X 14 Ken Stendell X 13 1 Paul Clark X 6 Gene Colombini X 6 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Missy Wightman, Assistant Planner Pedro Rodriquez, Senior Code Officer Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager Christina Canales, Assistant Engineer Janine Judy, Recording Secretary Cancelled meetings: 03/13/12 III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 24, 2012 Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved to approve the July 24, 2012 meeting minutes. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 6-0-2-1 vote with Commissioners Gregory and Touschner abstaining and Commissioner Vuksic absent. ARCHITECTURAL RE N COMMISSION MINUTES August 14, 2012 V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 12-230 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GHA COMPANIES, 30-875 Date Palm Drive, Cathedral City, CA 92234 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval for a tract of 16 homes on University Pointe Ct. LOCATION: North of Frank Sinatra Drive, east of Portola Avenue, and west of Shepherd Lane ZONE: PR-5 Ms. Missy Wightman, Assistant Planner, presented the project and summarized the staff report for approval of 16 homes on University Pointe Court. She presented photos of the lot where the homes will be located. She said that Tentative Tract Map 32498 was already approved for the 16 lots. All the lots in the subdivision are 10,000 sq. ft. or less. The 16 homes have three separate floor plans; Plan 1A and 113, Plan 2A and 213, 2XA and 2XB. She recommends varying models that are next door to one another and directly across the street to create varied house facades along the street. Staff recommends approval of the proposed architectural plans with staff recommendations and commissioner comments incorporated for final staff review. Commissioner Clark mentioned that the slump wall on Shepherd Lane was pretty plain and recommended enhancing the entry feature to give the neighborhood a sense of place and identification. MR. MARIO GONZALES, GHA Companies, said they could definitely dress that up by putting some columns on it. He referred to one of their projects called Sundance and said they returned the walls, created a monument sign, and added a couple of pillars in the corner. If the Commission allows it they will emulate what is out there. MR. GONZALES referred to Ms. Wightman's comment about the interior slump stone walls and explained that everything out there is GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Commisison\1Minutes\2012\120814min.doc Page 2 of 7 ARCHITECTURAL RE`V COMMISSION MINUTES August 14, 2012 basically a tan CMU. In today's environment it would be nice if they could use tan CMU blocks instead of the slump stone. He thought once you put in the landscape and put houses on the lots, no one is really going to see that or really appreciate that. Ms. Wightman said staff is okay with the tan precision in between, but what was proposed for Shepherd Lane and Portola Avenue was tan slump on the interior walls. She asked if the applicant would like to change that. MR. GONZALES said he would. The Commission had a lengthy discussion about the party walls between the houses and said they would like to see the return walls that face the street, in slump since that is what is visual to the neighborhood. The Commission and the applicant discussed the landscape and the splash of grass on one of the plans. The applicant asked the Commission for some consideration to add the grass. The Commission and the landscape architect discussed the water calculations. MR. RAY MARTIN, Landscape Design, said as a rule of thumb, 30% of the ground could be lawn with a low to moderate plan use. He feels the interpretation for the calculations tends to vary between the water district and the City, but thinks the City is referring to the district for approval on the water calculations. MR. GONZALES pointed out that it would be for the front yards only and said the different landscape compliments the different elevations giving you a much more interesting street scene. Commissioner Touschner asked why the center wall between the properties extends past the front wall into the block wall. MR. GONZALES said they did that to give more definition of the lot. They'd like to take it out a couple of feet and put a couple of steps in it to make it look custom. If they are allowed to put some grass in there, they would mound it up a bit so there is some interest. Otherwise, it is a hard corner. GAPlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesWRC Commisison\1 Minutes\2012\120814min.doc Page 3 of 7 ARCHITECTURAL REYV COMMISSION MINUTES August 14, 2012 Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, said the code requires that if you come out beyond the front of the house it needs to be more decorative than precision. MR. GONZALES asked if he could get some type of flexibility if he stays within 10' from the corner and doesn't go beyond that. He said he doesn't have to do the dividing wall but it will give more definition of the property. Commissioner Levin said he hates to look at the end of a wall. So putting a pilaster in or stepping it down will give it some definition. Commissioner Gregory said he would imagine that the home buyer would like the wall for clear definition of territory and also a sense of privacy. He thought with the stepping detail you're not looking at the butt end of a 6' high wall, you're hopefully looking at some interesting architectural detail. Commissioner Van Vliet thought it was an odd detail but understands that the applicants feel it is important in order to sell the units. He suggested that the wall be slump stone. Commissioner Gregory asked Commissioner Van Wet if he was suggesting that any wall visible from the street be slump. The Commissioner agreed. The Commission and the applicant discussed slump verses precision block. Mr. Bagato explained again that if a wall goes beyond the front of the house it has to be one of three options; slump, split face, or stucco. Commissioner Lambell referred to the veneer stone on the plans and suggested that it return to the adjacent wall. She also asked the applicant to re-evaluate the lightest color on color scheme #1 & 2 and on color scheme #6. They need to look at the delineation of difference between the accent stucco trim and the stucco body. Commissioner Stendell suggested some type of screening for the gas and electric meters to give them a little bit of concealment. Commissioner Lambell moved to approve. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Clark. Commissioner Gregory asked for further discussion. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FilesWRC Commisison\1 Minutes\2012\1 20814min.doc Page 4 of 7 ARCHITECTURAL RE'�.r'W COMMISSION MINUTES August 14, 2012 The Commission discussed the aesthetics of having a lawn in front and not having the entire neighborhood in desertscape. They stated that the applicant should not encourage lawns in the front unless there is a use for it. Commissioner Lambell amended her motion to read; remove lawn from model homes, unless a reasonable use is found by staff; lawns shall be an option. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to approve subject to: 1) the party walls protruding in the front of the homes and walls facing University Pointe Court shall be either stucco, slump or split face; 2) the walls on Portola Avenue and Shepherd Lane shall be slump with an enhanced entry feature at Shepherd Lane for unique character; 3) the veneer stone shall return to the adjacent wall; 4) re-evaluate the lightest color on color scheme #1 & 2 and approved by staff; 5) on color scheme #6, look at the delineation of difference between the accent stucco trim and the stucco body and approved by staff; 7) flexibility in placement of models as approved by staff; and 8) remove lawn from model homes, unless a reasonable use is found by staff; lawns shall be an option. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Clark and carried by an 8-0-0-1 vote with Commissioner Vuksic absent. 2. CASE NO: MISC 12-215 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JEFF MASSNICK, 47-530 Via Montigo, La Quinta, CA 92253 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of minor exterior fagade renovations to the building formerly known as Forest Lawn Mortuary; three cottage units including two carports; exterior color change to four bungalow units; and exterior landscaping. LOCATION: 44-660 San Pablo ZONE: O.P. GAPlanning\JanineJudyMordFiles\ARCCommisison\1Minutes\2012\120814min.doc Page 5 of 7 ARCHITECTURAL RE COMMISSION MINUTES August 14, 2012 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented the project and summarized the staff report. He said this is an approval of minor exterior fagade renovations; three cottage units including two carports; exterior color change to four bungalow units; and exterior landscaping. The project is located north of San Gorgonio Way between San Pablo Avenue and San Rafael Avenue. The applicant is proposing to convert the existing Forest Lawn Mortuary into a medical building, which is zoned Office Professional (OP) and use the three cottages as retreats/recovery units for a high-end plastic surgeon. The bungalow units would remain as bungalows. However, the City Council must approve a zoning ordinance amendment to allow residential uses on the ground floor within the O.P. zone. The Commission and the applicant discussed the paint colors on the bungalows. The Commission suggested bringing back to staff a range of desert colors that will compliment the architecture of the building. They also suggested that the applicant provide more detail to show where the colors will be placed on the buildings. The Commission and the applicant reviewed the north and east elevations and suggested that the applicant re-study all elevations and consider adding something to make it more interesting. The Commission recommended that the applicant consider hiring a licensed architect to provide more architecture to the building. The landscape plans were reviewed and the Commission informed the applicant that the landscape plans must be signed off by a landscape architect. They recommended that the applicant hire a landscape architect. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to continue Case MISC 12-215 subject to: 1) using a range of desert colors to compliment architecture of building; 2) re- study all elevations and add something to make it more interesting; 3) consider hiring an architect to understand the building; and 4) landscape plans must be signed off by a landscape architect. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by an 8-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Vuksic absent. GAPlanning\JanineJudy\Word FilesWRCCommisison\lMinutesk20l2\120814min.doc Page 6 of 7 ARCHITECTURAL RE' 'W COMMISSION MINUTES ' August 14, 2012 B. Preliminary Plans: None C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. COMMENTS The Commission and staff discussed posting agenda and plans online and/or including a CD of the plans in the packets; staff to review. VII. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Lambell, second by Commissioner Stendell, and 8-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Vuksic absent, the Architectural Review Commission meeting was adjourned at 2:10 p.m. J ZINE COR IECRETARY GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word FileSWRC Commisison\1 Minutes\2012\1 20814min.doc Page 7 of 7