Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-11-13 •"��'�� � CITY OF P � ALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES November 13, 2012 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 17 3 Chris Van Wet X 19 1 John Vuksic X 17 3 Karel Lambell X 20 Pam Touschner X 15 5 Allan Levin X 20 Ken Stendell X 19 1 Paul Clark X 11 1 Gene Colombini X 11 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Pedro Rodriquez, Senior Code Officer Neal Stephenson, Fire Safety Specialist Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Janine Judy, Recording Secretary Cancelled meetings: 03/13/12 III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 23, 2012 Action: Commissioner Levin moved to approve the October 23, 2012 meeting minutes. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by a 7- 0-0-2 vote with Commissioners Clark and Touschner abstaining. ARCHITECTURAL RE W COMMISSION ' MINUTES ` November 13, 2012 V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: SA 12-353 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EL PASEO PREMIER CENTRE, 73- 061 El Paseo #200, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of new awnings; El Paseo Premier Centre. LOCATION: 73-655 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, stated this was approval of a new awning program to bring some uniformity to this center. It was recently approved to be painted white. He passed around the materials board for review. MR. DAVID FLETCHER, Churchill Properties, stated there are three awning colors being proposed; solid green, solid black and a green and black stripe. He pointed out that the awning on the corner has gone up a little and presented the revised plans. Commission reviewed and discussed the awning colors presented, as well as the style and shapes of the awnings. MR. FLETCHER said the awnings will have flaps with the ability for the stores to have signage if desired. Mr. Bagato stated staff will look at that to make sure it fits within the overall signage allowed. If it's not within the square footage, the signage will not be allowed. If allowed, staff will review the letters on the awnings. ACTION: Commissioner Levin moved to approve. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by a 7-0-0-2, with Commissioners Gregory and Vuksic abstaining. G:`Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\t ARC\1Minutes\2012\121113min.do Page 2 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REV_-W COMMISSION MINUTES November 13, 2012 2. CASE NO: PP 12-223 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): AUBREY COOK MCGILL ARCHITECTS, Attn: Nick Fotias, 1045 10' Street, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92101 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of landscape plans and sign program; 111 Town Center. LOCATION: 44-419-44-491 Town Center Way ZONE: PC-3 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented the re-model project for Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack. He referred to the tower elevations for Buildings 489 and 491 and stated there should only be one sign allowed on the tower elements per elevation and only one sign allowed for each tenant per frontage. He wanted to make sure that this language was included in the sign program. Three monument signs are proposed; one located on Highway 111 at the main entrance, one on the corner of Fred Waring and Town Center Way, and one on Town Center Way by the bus stop. Staff was concerned with the massing and the size of the proposed monument sign. They are proposing monument signs 10' in height and staff is recommending the monument signs be reduced. Inside the center they are proposing directional signs 9' in height and staff is recommending they be reduced to 6' in height. The Commission discussed the number of tenants on the monument signs. Staff indicated that they typically approve three to four panels. The Commission asked if there was a code or ordinance regarding the number of panels. Staff said the code doesn't specify the number because the signs are approved by the Architectural Review Commission. Staff pointed out there are a couple of monument signs within the City that have five names, but they are integrated as part of the sign. Commissioner Vuksic pointed out that on those signs the names are more irregular and not like a stack of signs. MR. SCOTT BLAIR, Blair Sign Programs, indicated this was a master sign program with two fundamental working parts to divide and organize the project. The first working section is the common area signs; entry monument signs, project identity, vehicle and pedestrian way-finding. The second section is for sustaining the project over time; the tenant sign criteria. He described the four directional signs proposed, which will be four-sided kiosks tucked into the project. All GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\1 ARC\1 MinutesQ012\121113mimdod Page 3 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REV'—W COMMISSION MINUTES %W *0 November 13, 2012 the tenant signs are specified as individual internally illuminated channel letters and all are required to use LED only. In reference to colors, he wants to have some control and uniformity. He wants to have some retail vitality and energy and will allow the tenants to use their own font and color, but within the construction methodology that is specified and the sign area that is assigned by the landlord. Commissioner Gregory asked if that was okay from the City's prospective. Mr. Swartz said yes if it is within the sign program. However, the ordinance states no more than three colors per sign. If the Commission wants to limit it to no more than three colors, they can add that into the sign program. Mr. BLAIR stated he could assign a color pallet to the tenants who do not have a national established sign program, so long as they are allowed to use their registered trademark branding. The Commission discussed the colors and staff said they can have more than three colors it just requires the sign to be reduced a certain percentage. Commissioner Lambell said the Commission will look to the applicant to be sure this doesn't get "junked" up and didn't want it to look any less than their previous presentation. The Commission and the applicant discussed only having one sign per facade. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if there would only be two major signs on the backside of the buildings. MR. DAVE MOORE, Senior VP for Harsh Investment Properties said Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack will have signage on the rear of the buildings to expose them to Highway 111. In another couple of weeks, they will be announcing a third anchor tenant that may also want signage on the back. He pointed out that their sign program doesn't restrict that but they are showing their intent of a minimum of three signs. Commissioner Van Vliet recommended a maximum of three signs. MR. MOORE reluctantly said okay. G.PlanningWanine JudyMord Filesll ARC11Minutes\2012\121113min.doc Page 4 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REY—W COMMISSION MINUTES 1`00 `4"* November 13, 2012 Commissioner Gregory stated this Commission didn't have a problem with the design of the monument sign just the height and the number of tenants. MR. BRIAN WILLIAMS, VP of Construction for Harsh Investment Properties, said their desire is for six tenants because they have such limited frontage on Highway 111 compared to the rest of the center. They want the tenants who are all the way at the other end of the center to be able to have a sign on Highway 111 to get exposure. Commissioner Vuksic was also concerned with the monument signs. The first time he saw the rendering he saw a big metal box. He was concerned that it is basically a bunch of sign panels with very little space between each panel. MR. BLAIR said the panels sit off the back surface so they are very dimensional with natural shading and separation. He agreed that it is a sign box but they worked to break it down and have it still be practical. They tried to make it have enough character in consideration of fabrication methods that is more craftsman style and design to help break that down. Commissioner Vuksic said he appreciates the craftsman detail outside that sign box and thought it may look better if they didn't incorporate "Town Center" as part of the sign box and suggested that be something different. MR. BLAIR said there is a design theory to actually take it off and apply a medallion only to the column and have landscape up lighting to reduce the overall height of the display while retaining the character. Commissioner Vuksic didn't want to limit their ability to sign their tenants and understands the importance of that. However, the applicant needs to do a better job of making this sign more artful and looking less like a sign box. Mr. Swartz stated there seems to be a lot of concerns with the monument signs and suggested to the Commission they continue this to allow the applicant an opportunity to come back with other designs. Commissioner Van Vliet said the applicant could certainly put more architecture into the sign. Mr. Bagato said there were other monument signs in the city they could use as a reference and referred to photos in the zoning ordinance with sign cabinets that are very dimensional and architectural. G:1Planning\Janine JudyMord FilesN ARC11Minutest2 01 211 211 1 3min.doa Page 5 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REV" COMMISSION MINUTES 4 November 13, 2012 MR. BLAIR said he looked at that and stated those signs were modern styles. He wants to do something that is in harmony with the construction methods and styles of this project's architecture. At this point, several people were talking at the same time making it difficult to transcribe the minutes. MR. MOORE asked the Commission if there was a consensus that they come back with a different sign program. Commissioner Gregory was concerned that every architectural plane on this building has a sign. He recognizes that it is a commercial center and tenants have needs and demands for signage, but there is no architecture left showing through. Commissioner Vuksic appreciates the need to sign the tenants and said there may be tenants in every one of those spaces who will need a sign. So the applicant must prepare for this in their sign program. Commissioner Clark suggested that the size of the sign may need to be reduced which would then allow the architecture to come forward. The Commission and the applicants discussed the size of the signs and the individual letters for the hanging arcade signs and the tower elements. The Commission recommended variety with the hanging signs to strike a balance so it doesn't get too repetitive. The applicant suggested having at least three different types for the tenants to choose from. Commissioner Levin verified that the awnings will not have any signage and asked that the trellis on the monument sign be added to the sign program. Mr. Swartz described the landscaping plan for the center and stated that the plans have already received preliminary approval from the landscape department and staff is recommending approval. MR. RANDY PURNELL, Landscape Architect, stated that no landscape is shown on the exhibits for the monument signs and suggested integrating landscape into the monument signs; possibly plants on the trellis or showing lower material to help break the down the mass. Commissioner Gregory and staff discussed the size of the proposed monument signs and how it conforms to City dictates. Staff's G.\PlanningWanine JudyMord Files\\ARC\1Minutes\2M12\121113min.do= Page 6 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REV'—W COMMISSION MINUTES *ftV1 November 13, 2012 recommendation is to reduce the overall height of the sign or come up with a different design. The Commission and the applicant discussed bifurcating the approval. It was decided to continue the entire sign program and approve the landscaping plan. ACTION: Commissioner Clark moved to continue the sign program subject to: 1) one sign allowed on tower element per elevation on Buildings 489 & 491; 2) one sign allowed for each tenant per frontage; 3) all signs shall be limited to three colors; 4) there shall only be a maximum of three signs on the rear of the east facing buildings; 5) re-assess the size of the letters on the buildings; 6) address a variety of blade sign options for tenants; 7) reduce height of monument signs; 8) reduce number of tenants on monument signs; 9) additional architecture shall be added to monument signs; 10) the trellis on the monument signs shall be added to this sign package; and, 11) reduce directional signage to 6'. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Vuksic and carried by an 8-0-0-1 with Commissioner Touschner abstaining. Commissioner Levin moved to preliminarily approve landscape plans. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Colombini and carried by an 8-0-0-1 with Commissioner Touschner abstaining. 3. 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 landscaping and color changes to the bungalows and cottages on the former Forest Lawn Mortuary. LOCATION: 44-660 San Pablo Avenue ZONE: O.P. Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented this project and stated this is returning to the Commission for approval of landscaping and color changes to the bungalows and cottages for the former Forest Lawn Mortuary. This project was to convert the three cottages and four bungalows; painting, adding carports, and re-doing the landscape along the exterior of the project. He presented a materials board for review. Staff is recommending approval. The landscape plan is still awaiting approval from the Coachella Valley Water District. G\PIanning\Janine JudyMord Files\1 ARC\1Minutes\2012\121113min.dod Page 7 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REV`W COMMISSION MINUTES November 13, 2012 Commissioner Touschner mentioned the facades that face the pool and asked if it was the same material and height as the other walls and asked if the gates were new or existing. MR. JOHN VUKSIC, Architect, said there are actually two different types of walls. There are 8" high block walls and 4" high block walls that will be repainted using the colors within the color pallet. The gates will be solid metal gates with no detail. Commissioner Van Vliet asked about the roof material. MR. VUKSIC said the roof material is rock and will not be replaced unless needed and the new carport roof will match the existing roof. ACTION: Commissioner Van Vliet moved to approve. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by an 8-0-0-1, with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining. 4. CASE NO: SA 10-221 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIGN-A-RAMA, Attn Chad Addington 41-945 Boardwalk, Suite L, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a new monument sign; The Vineyards commercial center. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Cook Street and University Park Drive ZONE: P.C. 2 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, stated the Commission recently approved a sign program for this commercial center including the location of the monument sign. However, the design of the monument sign was continued. He indicated that the location will be at the main entrance of the center. The proposed double-sided internally illuminated monument sign is 14'-6" wide and 6' in height. The monument sign will have four tenant panels and the name of the center. The panels are opaque black aluminum with routed-out white letters. It will be attached to two stone columns; 6' high by 25" wide. Staff was concerned with the height of the columns which matched the height of"The Vineyards" sign. He suggested lowering the columns to 5-6" to provide some depth. Otherwise, this meets the sign program and criteria. The Commission discussed the visibility and location of this sign. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Filss\7 ARO Minutes\2012\121113min.d— Page 8 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REV' W COMMISSION MINUTES %We November 13, 2012 MR. CHAD ADDINGTON, Sign-A-Rama, said in the initial sign program there were two monuments approved; one for the tenants and one for the center. The one for the center will be called "The Vineyards" and will be on the corner by the hotel. The Commission and the applicant discussed the materials used on the monument. The Commission had concerns with the ledge stone and the satin aluminum on the columns and thought the sign should not be symmetrical. They also discussed the corners on the sign and the applicant stated they will all be pre-welded. The Commission informed the applicant that this sign has to look like they made a solid effort and the corners of the stone themselves will be important. Commissioner Touschner said she didn't like the sign and thought it looked exceptionally fussy and takes away from the top of the sign; "The Vineyards". She felt there was almost too much going on. If they want to use the metal, they should use it for "The Vineyards" and make that pop. If they want it Italian looking to match the building, then they have to take their cues from the building; it needs to support the architecture of the building, not over power it. Commissioner Vuksic thought staff was correct that "The Vineyards" sign didn't line up with the columns. He also thought they should remove one of the tenant spots on the sign. The whole composition would look better and less cluttered if there were only three tenants. Having the brushed aluminum on the pillars and on the sign seems to be too much. MR. ADDINGTON asked if it was a possible option to make the columns all stone so it doesn't have that broken look. Commissioner Vuksic said they would have to see the drawings, but thought it was a viable option. He suggested spreading the tenant names out in the interest of keeping it kind of sleek and horizontal, so they can get some air between the tenants instead of having it all be solid. Commissioner Gregory was concerned with the tenant at the bottom and thought that even with gravel at the base it might interfere with the viewing of it. MR. ADDINGTON said they originally designed this with five tenants and said there should be about a four inch gap there so it's not sitting right on the ground. GAPlanninglJanineJudyMord Filea\l ARC\1Minutes\2012\121113min.doa Page 9 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REV-7W COMMISSION MINUTES November 13, 2012 A motion was made for continuance. Commissioner Gregory asked if there were any further comments. Commissioner Touschner and the applicant discussed the sign having more detail and being more symmetrical. Commissioner Colombini thought the length of the sign box should be cut down or made shorter. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to continue Case SA 10-221 subject to: 1) make stone design on columns less symmetrical; 2) tie building architecture into monument sign to support the design; 3) reduce the height of the columns; 4) reduce the number of tenant names to three and allow more space between each name; 5) reconsider the satin aluminum and stone material on the columns; and, 6) bottom tenant shall have a 4" gap. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Vuksic and carried by a 9-0. With the concurrence of the Commission, Case No. MISC 12-306 was continued until the end of the meeting. (Commissioner Vuksic left at 2:15 p.m.) 5. CASE NO: MISC 12-306 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CARMEN SALDANA MRAZ, 72445 Parkview Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a wall setback exception on the side yard. LOCATION: 72-445 Parkview Drive ZONE: O.P. Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented this project and stated this approval was for a setback exception for a 6' high block wall 4' from face of curb. The wall setback of 20' from face of curb cannot be achieved due to the location of an existing swimming pool and pool equipment. Mr. Swartz stated the applicant must obtain an encroachment permit and a hold harmless agreement from Public Works and submit a landscape plan showing the plant choice, irrigation plan, and existing landscaping. Staff mailed out a legal notice to inform the adjacent neighbors of the applicant's request and asked if there was anyone in attendance in favor of or in opposition to and none were noted. The Commission and staff discussed the undulation of the wall and pilasters. However, the other walls on the property are painted white G\PlanningUanine JudylWord Fileslt ARCNMinutes12012Y121113min.doo Page 10 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REV' W COMMISSION MINUTES November 13, 2012 and had no pilasters which would totally change the design on the one side. Staff stated that if they are doing an exception, they would not need undulation and this is a very unique circumstance because of the pool. The Commission and Mr. Pedro Rodriguez, Code Compliance Supervisor discussed the notice of violation that was issued to the homeowner for having an exposed pool due to holes in the wooden fence. At this point, several people were talking at the same time making it difficult to transcribe the minutes. Mr. Swartz presented photos of the property with the current wooden fence and discussed the other wall on the property. ACTION: Commissioner Touschner moved to approve subject to: 1) height shall not be any higher than existing wall; 2) wall shall be painted white to match existing wall, using same material; and 3) obtain an encroachment permit and hold harmless agreement from Public Works. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by a 7-0-1-1 with Commissioner Van Vliet voting NO and Commissioner Vuksic absent. 6. CASE NO: CUP 12-266 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): AT&T MOBILITY, 12900 Park Plaza Drive, Cerritos, CA 90703 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval to allow a new wireless telecommunications facility disguised as three faux boulders to house nine panel-antennas and two GPS antennas on up- sloping terrain within the Stone Eagle Development. LOCATION: Stone Eagle Development ZONE: HPR/R-HR Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, said this approval is to allow a new wireless telecommunications facility disguised as three faux boulders located on the ridgeline within the Stone Eagle Development. This was reviewed by the Commission several months ago and then went to the Planning Commission where it was denied because our code prohibits it being on the ridgeline. The applicant has now proposed three faux boulders located within the hillside south of the golf course and only be visible to Stone Eagle residents. Stone Eagle G\Planning\Janine JudyMord Files\1 ARC\1Minutes\2012\121113min doca Page 11 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REY"W COMMISSION MINUTES %W November 13, 2012 HOA has already signed off on this request. All the antenna and equipment will be concealed. Staff is recommending approval. ACTION: Commissioner Touschner moved to approve. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Stendell and carried by a 9-0 vote. 7. CASE NO: MISC 12-299 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): QUIEL BROS ELECTRIC SIGN SERVICES COMPANY, Attn: Nancy K. Parker, 272 South "I" Street, San Bernardino, CA 92410 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of new wall signage and awnings: Applebee's. LOCATION: 74-999 Frank Sinatra Drive ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented this project and stated the applicant is proposing to update the Applebee's restaurant with the current franchise signs; one "Neighborhood Grill & Bar" wall sign, and six awnings. Staff is concerned with the awnings being only 6" from the bottom of the cornice detail to the top of the awning so staff is recommending lowering the awning so it looks more in uniform with the stone and the cornice detail. The awnings are also illuminated and although the LED lights are external, staff believes that it is attached to the awnings and would then be considered externally illuminated. MR. JACK CANNON, National Sales Manager for BSI, presented a photo showing the details of the awnings. The Commission discussed the existing signage, the proposed awnings, and lighting. The applicant is stating that the illumination is on the exterior and not internally illuminated. Section 25.68.150 Definitions states, "Back-lit awning" means an internally illuminated, fixed, space-frame structure with translucent, flexible, fabric reinforced covering designed in awning form and with graphics or copy applied to the visible surface of the awning." Since the proposed illumination is on the exterior, and the entire awning lights up, staff believes it falls under the definition for "Back-lit awning". Also, staff is concerned with the design of the awnings with LED lighting on the exterior. Commissioner Touschner liked the awnings and thought they were fun. She didn't have a problem with the cornice being too high. She thought that some of the signs were not centered correctly on the GAPlanning\Janine JudyWord Files\7 ARC\1Minutes\2012\121113min.doc Page 12 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REN"W COMMISSION MINUTES '" W November 13, 2012 building. She also thought the "Neighborhood Grill and Bar," sign was too thin and asked if it was solid and provided a shelter. The applicant stated that "Neighborhood Grill and Bar" was inside a canopy with push-through letters. Commissioner Clark felt that the apple attached to the awning is considered advertising and said it is a bit overwhelming. MR. ABE SAKAK, owner, said this is a part of a national program and every seven years they have to revitalize their signage. He believes these new awnings are a big improvement over what is out there today. He stated that 1,800 restaurants will be changing to these new awnings. The Commission discussed the awnings 6" from the cornice and MR. SAKAK presented a photo of one of their stores with the new awnings that show the correct distance from the cornice to the awning. The Commission also discussed the silhouette of the apples on the awnings and suggested that the red apple be a gray silhouette. MR. SAKAK said this is a part of a national program and they would have to present that idea to them. The Commission asked staff if this would meet the sign criteria if this one red apple was a part of the sign criteria. Staff stated they would have to check that out. MR. SAKAK said they don't have a monument sign or any other signs out there now, other than the existing "Neighborhood Grill and Bar" sign which is much larger that the new one being proposed. This sign will be completely eliminated from the north side all the way across. Mr. Swartz stated that if the apple was a part of the sign criteria it would be close. With the "Applebee's" and "Neighborhood Grill and Bar" it's about 61 square feet. Commissioner Vuksic thought it would be softer and easier on the eyes if the lighting was a little more old-fashioned like scalloped rather than this sheet of light that lights up the whole thing; very much like a billboard. MR. CANNON said to meet the City's code he can separate the light bar so it wouldn't be a part of the awning. He would attach the panels and the light bar separately using the old goose-neck electrical outlet. Commissioner Vuksic left at 2:15 p.m. G:\Plannirg\Janine JudyNord Files\1 ARC\1 Minutes\2012\121113min.dom Page 13 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REI"=W COMMISSION MINUTES ' ` November 13, 2012 Commissioner Touschner was concerned with all the lighting on the building. The Commission discussed the lighting and recommended to keep the sconces, but remove all the goose-neck lighting throughout the building. The Commission also discussed the space between the top of the awning and the cornice. It was recommended that the top of the awnings shall be no more or no less than 6" from the bottom of the cornice detail. ACTION: Commissioner Colombini moved to approve subject to: 1) removing all goose- neck light fixtures on the entire building; and, 2) top of awning shall be exactly 6" from the bottom of the cornice detail. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 7-0-1-1, with Commissioners Clark voting NO and Commissioner Vuksic absent. B. Preliminary Plans: None C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. COMMENTS None VII. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Lambell, second by Commissioner Touschner, and an 8-0-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Vuksic absent, the Architectural Review Commission meeting was adjourned at 2:35 p.m. 'f—�Y' jakZAL TONY YAGATO, ASSISTANT PLANNER SECRETARY *d* A E JU ORDING SECRETARY G-.\PlanningUanine Judy\Word Files\t ARC\1Minutes\2012\121113min.d= Page 14 of 14