Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-09 CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 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 15 3 Chris Van Vliet X 17 1 John Vuksic X 15 3 Karel Lambell X 18 Pam Touschner X 14 4 Allan Levin X 18 Ken Stendell X 17 1 Paul Clark X 10 Gene Colombini X 9 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Pedro Rodriquez, Senior Code Officer Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Janine Judy, Recording Secretary Cancelled meetings: 03/13/12 III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the September 25, 2012 meeting were not available for approval. They will be available at the next scheduled meeting on October 23, 2012. Action: Commissioner Levin moved to continue the meeting minutes of September 25, 2012 to the next meeting on October 23, 2012. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by an 8-0-0-1 vote with Commissioner Colombini abstaining. ARCHITECTURAL RE' -W COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 2012 V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: SA 12-271 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHARTWELL PROPERTIES, INC. 73-061 El Paseo, Suite 200, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a sign program for; The Shops on El Paseo. LOCATION: 73-040, 73-061, 73-080, 73-100 and 73-130 ZONE: C-1 SP Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented the project and said the applicant is trying to create a mall like atmosphere and brand the Shops on El Paseo. The branding would be from St. John's to the Daily Grill, Melissa Morgan's to California Pizza Kitchen, and Escada all the way down to Wolfgang Puck's. They will be putting up wall signage, pole signage and branding their image into pavers. On the buildings, they will add wall signage to the corners of each building; two on St. John's, one on Daily Grill, one on Escada, and one on California Pizza Kitchen. Staff is recommending approval of the wall signage. The branding will be located on their property and will not be within the City right-of-way. He then moved on to the post signage and pointed out the location of each 8' high post on El Paseo. Staff is recommending that the location of the posts be 10' back from the curb and not within the City right-of-way. Staff is willing to work with the applicant to find the best possible location for these poles. He presented a slideshow of other shops with identification signs that are out of the public right-of-way. Staff is looking for guidance from the Commission on the design of the post signs. MR. DAVID FLETCHER, Churchill Management Group, said they have felt for a while that they needed to brand themselves better and as a pooled resource on their advertising, they want to make sure they are getting the most bang for their buck. They are trying to segregate their buildings from the other buildings on El Paseo by architecture, by color, by landscaping, and also by signage. They also want to give pedestrians some sense that they are in a place that is different than the other buildings on El Paseo. The signage program they have developed adds signage on each of the buildings. The wall signage is back lit with halo lit signs on the corners. They looked for a logo design that would read well and not interfere with the architecture of G Planning\Janine Judy Word Filesll ARC CommisiwrAlMimtes120121121009min.door Page 2 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE' -W COMMISSION MINUTES NNOW N..+ October 9, 2012 the building and created the idea of putting the logo into the Egyptian pavers in front of each store to identify them as a part of the Shops on El Paseo. Signage on the back directs people to the offices and it is consistent with the other signage they are doing; in color and style. The post signs are for drive by and pedestrian traffic. This idea came from the iconic signs in Beverly Hills; the shield sign that says Beverly Hills. They don't have the luxury of courtyards like the Gardens or the Galleria so their feeling was to have a couple of them along the street so as people were driving or walking by they would know they were at the Shops on El Paseo. They don't want to distract from the stores so they are only proposing a couple in the front of each building; one at the beginning and one at the end. He met with Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works who didn't have a problem with the post signs and said there are street signs, stops signs and other types of things all over El Paseo that people see while getting into or out of their cars. After staff brought up the issue of being in the right-of-way, he discussed this with Mr. Greenwood who did not have any concerns with it. Mr. Fletcher does not see any other place to put them and placing them in the middle of the sidewalk would be more of a hindrance and up against the building would be too close. He also stated they are considering placing a fountain on the northeast corner of El Paseo and Monterey to match the existing fountain on the southeast corner. The Commission discussed the location of the wall signage and post signage, as well as the long line of palm trees and asked if the post signage would be in line with the palm trees. MR. FLETCHER said the post signage would be in alignment with the palm trees and felt people wouldn't have any problem seeing the signs. He pointed out that the palm trees range between 25' and 50' apart. Commissioner Lambell said the location of these signs would be important and hoped that the Commission would be able to review the plans on their final location. Mr. Swartz said staff will work with Public Works to see if the City wants them in the public right-of-way or not. Commissioners Lambell and Clark suggested they think about other types of signage that could be on the buildings identifying the Shops on El Paseo as opposed to the tall lantern posts; for instance a sign that hangs out from the building. G.\PlanningWanine JudylWord Filesll ARC Commislsonll Minutes12012Y12100gmin.doo Page 3 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE; W COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 2012 MR. FLETCHER said that was one of their alternatives, but unfortunately a lot of their stores already have blade signs and they felt it would get confused with a store sign. Commissioner Touschner said she liked the idea of the pavers at the entrance of the stores because it really sets them apart and it is different. She thought there would be some opportunities to add it to the back of the buildings where there are multiple entrances. She also liked the signage on the buildings and said it looked nice and clean and hoped that as they are cutting the cornice pieces on the building they are thinking how the end is wrapping around and not chopped off. In reference to the fountain, she hoped they would reflect the new signage on the existing fountain to match everything. MR. FLETCHER agreed and said they were waiting for the drawings on the fountain from the architect. Commissioner Touschner said there is a lot of opportunity in the back of the Fashion Plaza to have some signage up there so you can see it at a distance. In reference to the post signage, she understands that they want to create a sense of place, but feels they will create clutter. She thought the Commission would need to see where all the signs will be placed or that it would even be allowed out at the street level since there is a lot going on outside. Commissioner Van Vliet agreed and didn't think the post signs were necessary. When he first saw them on the plans, he thought they would add clutter and the applicant will already have a lot of other branding going on. The Commission suggested that the applicant work with staff on the pole design relating to location, height, and size and return to the Commission. Commissioner Lambell made a motion for approval and Commissioner Levin seconded. The Commission reviewed and discussed the lighting and the applicant said the signs would be reverse lit. Vice Chair Van Vliet asked if they were removing all the existing paving and putting in new paving. MR. FLETCHER said the Egyptian limestone already exists in front of the Daily Grill and California Pizza Kitchen. Because of the lead time of the stone, they probably won't be able to redo the sidewalk in front G.\PlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\1 ARC Commisisonll Minutes\2012\121009min.doc Page 4 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE` -W COMMISSION MINUTES � October 9, 2012 of Escada and the Fashion Plaza until next summer due to being in the middle of season, but as it's replaced the branding will go into it. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to approve the wall signage, branding on the sidewalk, and office signage in the rear; subject to 1) working with staff on the pole design relating to location, height, and size and return to ARC on a date uncertain; 2) submit a photo sim and elevation of pole signs; and 3) place an actual sign pole in a location for viewing by staff. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 7-0-2-0 vote with Commissioners Gregory and Vuksic abstaining. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: MISC 12-260 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): YOLANDA ALKAWASS, 20276 Majestic Drive, Apple Valley, CA 92308 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of an exception to build a carport at a reduced setback in the front yard, an addition above 15' in height, and 45% lot coverage LOCATION: 77-058 California Drive ZONE: R-1 9,000 Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development, presented this project and said this was presented at the previous meeting but the applicant was not able to attend. MR. ANDREW LEMKE, Project Manager, presented the plans and said the carport addition was previously approved, but staff was concerned with the right tower element and the Commission felt that it wasn't in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood. He mentioned that the applicant would like to keep the tower and said he would explain the design and the overall project. The homeowner, Ms. Yolanda Alkawass, will be remodeling the entire house, the backyard, and also adding a carport. She currently has a single car garage that she wants to convert into more livable space. The house is an older home and they want to bring it up to today's standards and design. He understands that the Commission was concerned with seeing the rest of the residence from the street and pointed out that they had another addition designed for the rear, but current building setbacks are limiting the square footage. When the setback requirements get changed in December 2012 they will resubmit a new set of plans for G.\PlanningWanineJudy\Word Files\1 ARC Commisison\1Minutes12 0 1 211 21 009min.doa Page 5 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE ;;W COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 2012 the addition in the back, which will then tie the back to the front more closely. They want to work with staff in order to keep the tower instead of redesigning it for the fourth time. Ms. Aylaian indicated to Mr. Lemke that what is being considered is a piece of the zoning ordinance and a change in setbacks would not guarantee that he would be able to expand or have another addition. So the applicant would have to again get approval for an increase in lot coverage. Chairman Gregory asked if a change in code or setbacks had not been required, would the requested architectural changes have gone through at staff level and not come to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). Ms. Aylaian said the applicant is required to get three exceptions for this project. One would be for the height because it is in excess of the 15' that is permitted; another for the lot coverage because the remodel would exceed the allowed lot coverage, and lastly one for the carport setback. None of this is approvable at staff level. Commissioner Van Vliet said the Commission had a number of concerns at the previous meeting and one of them was the difference in the roof materials. He asked how they would resolve that. MR. LEMKE said they wouldn't be able to put even lightweight tile on the roof of the existing residence because the roof wouldn't hold it unless they do some structural redesign on the existing cut and stack roof. They will re-shingle the existing roof to match the color tile they are using on the front of the house. From the street level, the finish floor of the house is about 3' above the sidewalk. Looking at the rendering there is a bit of the roof in the back that wouldn't be seen from the street level. Commissioner Van Vliet said the neighbors will see it. It's more than just purely street level. MR. LEMKE said from the neighbors' point of view, windows will be replaced to match the entire house, the color of paint will change, and all the fascia boards will match the new front. The whole house will be tied together. Commissioner Van Vliet questioned the changes to the windows because it was not shown on the drawings. G.\Planning\Janine JudyMord Files\7 ARC Commisison\1Minutes\2012\121009min.doo Page 6 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE`"--W COMMISSION MINUTES 1%00� October 9, 2012 MR. LEMKE said the drawings were strictly for the carport and the addition and not so much for the rest of the residence. Commissioner Van Vliet said that the Commission needs to see that and pointed out that certain windows were changed on the residence, but others were left the same. MR. LEMKE said that if they need to change all of them, they would work that in to keep it conducive all the way around. The Commission and Mr. Lemke discussed the split system on the roof. They pointed out that it is visible on the plans and wondered what would happen to it with the new roof. MR. LEMKE said it would still remain there and be behind the bigger tower. The neighbors might be able to see it, but everyone's units are visible. He asked if the Commission wanted it removed from the roof. Commissioner Levin suggested screening. MR. LEMKE wondered why they had to screen it, when other units in the neighborhood were not screened. Commissioner Levin stated that it was because they are redoing the house. Ms. Aylaian informed Mr. Lemke that it is a code requirement that an applicant must screen the A/C units if they were going to remodel or change the house. Commissioner Stendell said one of their concerns was that the right elevation looks like a movie set prop. He pointed out that it is only 3' in mass and it looks like a front. He asked if there was any way they could return this mass and take it back a little to give it some purpose that would better tie in architecturally with the house. MR. LEMKE said that may be possible. They were trying to stay off the existing roof as much as possible for structural reasons. If making it wider and giving it a little more roof and mass will allow the applicant to keep the tower, then that is something they will look into. Commissioner Touschner said the elevation is just there and not adding any dimension to the house and without a higher space inside. She thought architecturally it doesn't match what has been done to the carport and the entry to the house. She feels that architecturally it G:\Planning\JanineJudyMord Files\1 ARC Commisisonll Minutes\2012\121009min.doo Page 7 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL REW COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 2012 looks like three pieces and if the right elevation would look more like the left elevation it would look more cohesive. Commissioner Clark said he applauds the property owner for making a strong effort to beautify the house; overall the effort is good. However, his focus is on the tower. He feels the tower is out of character with the rest of the neighborhood. If the rest of the building follows the same architecture, they would certainly be enhancing the house and add to the neighborhood character. Commissioner Vuksic said what makes this element so odd is how thin it is. It looks like it belongs on a different house. He couldn't figure out why the applicant would want to put that much emphasis on one side of the house. MR. LEMKE said the reason for the tower is that it is a fagade because of the existing roof. As stated earlier, they decided to do the higher tower element because they can't put tile on the other portion of the house due to structural reasons. So doing the tower element was the only way to hide the shingles. Commissioner Clark asked if the tower element needed to be as high as it is to accomplish hiding the existing roof. MR. LEMKE said they might be able to bring it down a little more. They are currently at 15'-3". Again all the houses on the road sit above the street level. Commissioner Lambell said they were missing the point. It is the fagade they are concerned with because it is too thin. If it had some purpose, it would be bigger, bolder, and more important looking. However it is very thin compared to the rest of the house. The location of the tower doesn't make any sense, other than to screen what is behind it. She said not put up a fagade just to hide something. Make it have a purpose and then the Commission will feel more comfortable. Commissioner Touschner said if they can't put tile on the existing roof, they need to find a different material for the new roof and the carport. MR. LEMKE said they discussed doing shingle all over but the architect wanted to see if we could go with the tile. Chairman Gregory suggested that the tower element be centered more on the house rather than on the sides because the apparent difference between the height of this building and the height of the adjacent house becomes far more noticeable when the high point is right at the edge of the house. So by being more sensitive and having G9PlanningQanine JudylWord Filesll ARC CommisisonllMinutes120121121009min.do" Page 8 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE` 'W COMMISSION MINUTES 11" October 9, 2012 the roof hipped away from it in some way it doesn't become so jarring. He said if they decide to keep the tower element, then it should be centered more. Chairman Gregory said the goal of this Commission is not to be obstructionists. The Commissioners recognize that the applicant is doing a nice thing and would like to encourage her to continue. He hopes she does not see this as a roadblock, but there are certain reasons this is being reviewed by the ARC and the Commission has to address each of those reasons. ACTION: Commissioner Stendell moved to continue Case MISC 12-260. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by an 8-0-1-0 vote, with Commissioner Colombini abstaining. 2. CASE NO: CUP 12-257 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CROWN CASTLE NG WEST, INC. 1100 Dexter Avenue North, Suite 250, Seattle, WA 98109 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration of a new monopalm distributed antenna system wireless node and associated equipment consisting of six antennas, one disconnect, one power pull box, and one fiber splice vault. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Cook Street and Frank Sinatra Drive ZONE: PR-5 Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development, stated this request for a 40'-0" tall monopalm distributed antenna system wireless node was continued from a previous meeting. The location of this monopalm would be on the east side of Cook Street and the Commission had asked that a couple different locations be investigated and even perhaps moving it to the other side of the wall on Desert Willow. If not, they asked if it could be moved back at least closer to the street. She said a couple of things have happened since they last met and they would now like to recommend a different location. She passed out plans to the Commission and said the applicant submitted an explanation of the reason why they have selected this new location. At the last meeting, there was a possibility that it could go on the other side of the wall onto the golf course. However, staff has discussed the issue with the golf course management and with the property owner representative and they are GAPlanningUanine Judy\Word Files\t ARC Commisison\1Minutes12012\121009min.do Page 9 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE W COMMISSION MINUTES *so October 9, 2012 not willing to put it on the other side of the wall for a number of reasons. When you combine that with the applicant's reluctance to move it, staff would like to rule that out from further consideration. With that being said, staff would like to propose a different location from what was shown in the packet. It is located on Cook Street, close to where it was originally proposed. She passed around a photograph showing the street view and described the area where the monopalm would be located. The trees in the proposed location were destroyed in a fire and new trees have been ordered. The applicant has a little bit of latitude in that the trees have not yet been purchased and they will have the ability to try and marry up the antenna with the installation of the trees. Staffs recommendation is to put the monopalm in this location and the applicant be directed to work with the agency in the replacement of trees to get a stepping effect in the height of the trees between the one that the applicant needs for coverage and then the three shorter trees be staggered in height. Commissioner Vuksic said as you are coming to the site heading north, you are farther away from it and your line of sight will tend to put that monopalm in the center of all these trees and you are getting a nice nestling effect. Commissioner Touschner made a motion to approve the proposed location and Commissioner Stendell made the second. Chairman Gregory was concerned that the new plans did not reflect the original proposal of a faux Washingtonia filifera. Ms. Susan Magansen, representative for Crown Castle, assured the Commission that the faux tree will match the Washingtonia filiferas currently onsite. She stated that the top of structure will be 40', but that includes top of frond. They generally keep at least a 4' setback from the wall for structural reasons and will work with Public Works on that. She stated there will not be equipment housing above ground besides a fiber vault and an electrical meter pedestal, which will be screened. ACTION: Commissioner Touschner moved to approve subject to: 1) monopalm shall match other Washingtonia filiferas onsite; and 2) moving node to site shown on the attached exhibit as "proposed site." Motion was seconded by Commissioner Stendell and carried by an 8-0-1-0 vote with Commissioner Colombini abstaining. G.\PlanningWanine JudyWoid Filesll ARC CommisisonllMinutes120121121009min.doca Page 10 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RED" -W COMMISSION MINUTES *400, October 9, 2012 3. CASE NO: PP 12-223 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): AUBREY COOK, MCGILL ARCITECTS, Attn: Nick Fotias, 1045 14th Street, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92101 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of expansion to existing center, amend precise plan, add tower elements, new signage program, modify portion of parking field, paint center, modify existing median at Highway 111 for a left in movement and stacking to existing driveway; 111 Town Center. (Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack) LOCATION: 44419-44491 Town Center Way ZONE: PC-3 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented the project and said this is the 111 Town Center, commonly known as the former Best Buy Center. Coming into this center will be Nordstrom Rack and Whole Foods. After demolishing two existing stores, Nordstrom Rack will take over 33,392 square feet and the Whole Foods will take over about 30,000 square feet for a net increase of 17,000 square feet of new building. They will be updating the existing landscaping by removing all turf on-site and adding plants, but the landscape is not a part of this approval and will come back to the Commission to a date uncertain. What is being proposed today is the architecture for Nordstrom Rack and Whole Foods and a sign package for the center. Mr. Swartz started with the architecture and said the current building is 35' in height and the applicant will be adding tower elements for Whole Foods which will be 45'. They are asking for an exception to the zoning ordinance which must be approved by City Council. The tower elements would incorporate signage. This site is about 8' to 10' lower than the street and explained that when you're driving along Highway 111 you wouldn't be looking at a 45' tower, it would be more like a 38' tower. For the other part of the center, the applicant will repaint the existing building. The applicant is looking for approval of the architecture of the center and the paint colors for the remainder of the center will come back to a date uncertain. They are making modifications to the existing parking lot directly in front of Whole Foods with an increase in parking, removal of a median and the addition of new landscaping. The applicant will be adding a sidewalk along the Town Center Cafe, as well as adding a path of travel through the parking lot to get to the buildings. Currently the center does not meet GAPlanningllanine JudylWord Filesll ARC Commisison\lMinutes120121121009min.doc Page 11 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL REI ;;W COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 2012 ADA requirements, so the applicant will bring that up to code. They are also adding a left turn-in pocket to the center from Highway 111, as well as re-doing the median and landscaping along that area. The applicant will also be re-doing the loading dock area in the rear; which is an entrance only. MR. DAVE MOORE, Senior VP for Harsh Investment Properties, said they are hoping today to get through the first hurdle and show the Commission how the rest of the project will blend. They have been waiting months to be able to officially announce these stores. There is a third anchor that will be announced shortly that will line up the entire center. The interest in the remaining space has increased dramatically. It is their goal to try to deliver to the Commission what the City's expectations are. MR. BRIAN WILLIAMS, VP of Construction for Harsh Investment Properties, stated that two stores will be demolished and the entire area will be re-graded. A portion of the existing Best Buy building will be cut off in order to make the Best Buy building actually smaller to house the Nordstrom Rack and the remaining space will be the new Whole Foods building along with two outdoor patio seating areas. There will be a couple of towers that will be added to each corner of the building to add a little prominence to the Highway 111 elevation. One thing with this center is the historic lack of visibility from Highway 111. When you are traveling west, the pad buildings really block a lot of the visibility of the mainline and really hurt the tenant's visibility with it being focused more on the Town Center side. They want to give as much prominent visibility as they can to their tenants to ensure their success with this center. In addition to the towers, they are proposing to increase tower height on two pad buildings to add a little more prominence at the main entrances, as well as adding a new tower on Fred Waring and Town Center Way to add more prominence there as well. Existing utilities for Southern California Edison (SCE) and Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) main line will have to be relocated for these areas. The SCE lines have to go out into the street and they will have to do that before May 1 because the City will be re- paving Highway 111. The CVWD line will go along their private property along the street side of the project. They will be upgrading the rest of the center primarily with finishes, new paint, stone finishes, new awnings, and a couple of store front revisions to tie the center together as a whole. They will also upgrade the lighting in the parking lot to make it much more energy efficient as well as revising the landscape throughout the entire center in an effort to make it more water efficient. G9PIanningUanine JudyMord FiWl ARC Commisiwn\1Minutest2012\121009min.doa Page 12 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE` -W COMMISSION MINUTES '`'" October 9, 2012 Commissioner Clark asked what the estimated occupancy time would be. MR. WILLIAMS said Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack are scheduled to open in March or April 2014. They are planning on having a grand opening in the spring of 2014 with a majority filled brand hew center. Chairman Gregory informed the Commission that he and Commissioner Touschner would have to leave no later than 2:15 p.m. and wanted to make sure there would be a quorum. MR. TOM AUBREY, Aubrey, Cook, and Hill Architects, presented and discussed the renderings. He stated this will be a 150' addition of the existing Best Buy building. He pointed out the two outdoor dining areas for Whole Foods; one on the south side and one on the east side. He discussed the differential from the street and the building being about 8' and the transition of landscaping to make that change of grade. He presented renderings of the building elevations showing the views facing east and the view from Highway 111. To get some articulation of the building, they will be creating two towers that will include signage. He pointed out the outdoor dining area which will be a trellis covered area that will go back about 30' at the deepest point and 15' at the shallowest point. Then as you wrap around the corner to make the transition to the east elevation, you drop down from Highway 111 about 7' to 8' to get to the elevation that is Whole Foods. The finish will be Santa Barbara stucco on the exterior, the trellises above the entrances to the store will be constructed of reclaimed lumber, as well as the outdoor dining areas. The tower height from the street will be 37' to 37'/2' as you look from Highway 111. As you transition to the Nordstrom Rack building, the similar architecture style will continue. There will also be trellis' that will be covered with vines to provide shading. He pointed out other tenant spaces and described the finishes for those spaces. They will use stone clad columns, stone clad finished retaining walls and ramps, and will try to use the reclaimed wood as much as they can for the entry doors. He referred the Commission to the colors planned for Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack. Commissioner Touschner said this was definitely an improvement to the center. She assumed they would submit a color board along with construction documents to assure the Commission that everything is carried through. She is pleased they will be addressing ADA access along Town Center Way, but wondered if there was a drop off along Highway 111. She suggested they think about the sequence of entry and how someone would be coming onto the site. G Tlanning\JanineJudyNord Files\t ARC Commisiwn\1Minutes\2012\121009min.doc Page 13 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL REW COMMISSION MINUTES V40 October 9, 2012 MR. WILLIAMS said there will be ramps that go from Highway 111 down to Whole Foods that will be ADA compliant. Chairman Gregory said he and Commissioner Touschner were about to leave and asked if they could vote on the items that have been presented thus far; the architecture and site planning improvements, excluding the signage. Ms. Aylaian suggested that while the Commissioners were still here they may want to move to continue this and felt they would not be able to approve everything at today's meeting. Then the two Commissioners can depart and the rest of the Commission can give feedback to the applicants. Commissioners Gregory and Touschner can then review the minutes prior to the next meeting and will be able to vote. The applicants discussed getting approval as soon as possible so that it can move on to the Planning Commission and City Council. Mr. Swartz stated the approval today would be preliminary and the construction drawings will have to come back to ARC. Commissioner Touschner said architecturally she is fine with the proposed changes. However, she had a few comments regarding signage and deferred to Commissioner Vuksic to make sure her concerns are addressed after her departure. She said she reviewed the sign package and the applicant is asking for a relatively large sign on the back of the building facing Highway 111. She understands why they are asking for it, but she would really need to see a picture of what that looks like. She suggested they be a little more discreet back there. MR. WILLIAMS said the only signage on the rear would be Nordstrom Rack and Whole Foods, which are the main anchors. This is needed for the visibility as you are driving east on Highway 111. Commissioner Touschner understood that but said that it shouldn't look like the back of a house elevation and needs to be an elevation that is worthy of the sign; in size and quality. Mr. Swartz said that is one of the things that staff is working on with the applicant and has requested that the applicant put signage in the location for Nordstrom Rack to see what it would look like. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\?ARC Commisison\1Minutest2012\121009min.do. Page 14 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE` -W COMMISSION MINUTES llftw October 9, 2012 Commissioner Touschner had one final concern prior to leaving. At first glance, she wasn't sure that the monument sign design is of the best quality for the center and didn't think that it matched the architecture. Commissioners Gregory and Touschner left at 2:45 p.m. Commissioner Clark said they might take a look at how the parking lot is striped upon entering from Town Center Way at the stop light and how the internal traffic will be at this access point. MR. AUBREY pointed to an area on the rendering and said the area will have a wider drive than the others because that would be the main drive. They could look at re-striping or re-working it, but they can't lose any stalls in order to meet the parking requirements because they are at the minimum for their needs. Commissioner Clark discussed the two towers and how one tower is open at the top and the other one is solid. Given that they are asking for a variance, that opening could act as mitigation because it is open and allows a sense of flow or openness, which would partially mitigate the height. He also said on Highway 111 he sees a lot of green and thought by doing heavy landscaping or something nice in there would be important. MR. AUBREY said there would be a retaining wall that will have the nicer finish as well as landscaping. Commissioner Lambell said they have done a terrific job with this project and the devil is in the details. The Commission has seen some Santa Barbara here in the desert that looked wonderful on paper, but wasn't executed as well as they were led to believe. She hoped with having the two prominent tenants they will make an exceptional effort and it won't be lost in the budget or lost in the finish product since this will be a prominent area on Highway 111. Commissioner Levin asked what lighting would be in the tower and on the signage. MR. AUBREY said there will be some up-lighting for one of the towers and the tower facing Highway 111 will have a translucent glass with a back light. G:\P1anning\JanineJud0Word Files\1 ARC CommisisonllMinules12012\121009min.dom Page 15 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE :W COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 2012 MR. SCOTT BLAIR, Blair Sign Programs, said the signage will be internally illuminated, face lit channel letters. Commissioner Levin asked if Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack would be the only two tenants on the towers or would there be another tenant. MR. BLAIR said the one tower would be dedicated to Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack. The other tower facing Highway 111 will have two or three other tenants who don't get visibility on the other towers. Commissioner Vuksic was taken by how much better this looks than what is out there now. He asked about the batter on some of the walls and said it was very subtle. He asked if that was really their intent. MR. AUBREY said it is their intent on the towers to have a slight batter, as well as the towers at the southeast corner and the southwest corner. Commissioner Vuksic referred to the two gabled roofs and said one is really large over Whole Foods and was concerned about the depth with both. Although it is quite deep, it is such a long element and thought it would look a little staged fronted. MR. AUBREY said they could look at that a little bit more and submit some prospective sketches showing what that would look like from the front of the building and from Highway 111. Commissioner Vuksic said it is a 100' long and at a glance it needs to be twice that depth for it to look like it's over a space. The other gable roof is a lot thinner and on both of them you are going to see the surface of that so it's going to be important. He asked what "no coping" meant on the plans for the parapets that won't have the exposed rafters. MR. AUBREY said the horizontal parapets will have a foam piece that will be covered in a plaster finish maybe a slightly contrasting color to give the appearance of a full thickness. Commissioner Vuksic asked how they will gain access to the roof. MR. WILLIAMS said it will be an internal access for both stores. GAPlanning\Janine Judy\Word Files\t ARC Commisison\1Mlnutes\2012\121009min.doa Page 16 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE` 'W COMMISSION MINUTES 1*0W October 9, 2012 Commissioner Vuksic said he is familiar with working with existing buildings and the structural challenges that arise. On the plans he saw a lot of masses they are creating that are three dimensional and asked if they have thought about the structural implications of this. MR. AUBREY said after talking with Whole Foods, who wanted more openings, they knew this would require some kind of bracing to make that happen. He said their structural engineers have gone through and seen what they have to do from a bracing standpoint and it will all tie in with the existing architecture. Commissioner Vuksic said he thought about the problems that have existed at this center and one of them was access and visibility. He absolutely understands the reasons for having signs on the back. He said that Commissioner Touschner made a good point about how the back elevation looks. He said they have gone to so much effort on the signs to make this pop, but on the back it almost looks like a different project. He asked what their thoughts were. MR. AUBREY said these comments were well taken. Obviously they can't put windows in the back but they will come back with plans to create more relief from a horizontal standpoint. They will add more pilasters and the parapets will have more relief with a three dimensional coping on the very top. He understands their point and they will take a look at that on how to dress it up. Vice Chair Van Vliet said he didn't have a problem with the height of the towers and believes the architecture will be done well and it will help the center. Commissioner Vuksic made a motion to approve the architecture. The Commission then moved on to the sign program. Mr. Swartz stated there will be three monument signs; one located along Highway 111, one on Town Center Way and one on Fred Waring. The signs are about 9' plus the structure. Commissioner Lambell informed the Commission that she would have to leave at 2:45. She said she was happy with renaming the center 111 Town Center and didn't have any trouble with the aesthetics of the signage and will leave it up to the Commission regarding the size and lighting. GAPlanningUanine JudoWord Filesll ARC Commisison4l Minutes12012V21009min.doc Page 17 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL REWW COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 2012 The Commission discussed the height of the signs and the grade differential on Highway 111. The Commission was concerned that since three Commissioners have left, should they continue the signage. In order to move on to City Council, they asked what the applicant needed. MR. WILLIAMS said the overall sign package is part of this proposal to maximize the square footage for the project in total. The things they have to go to City Council for will not only be for the variance on the height but to sign their towers, which is a part of the sign program. Mr. Swartz informed the Commission they could make a motion for the size of the towers and the locations of the signs on the towers. He pointed out on the plans the locations of the signs. The Commission discussed the location and the number of signs on the towers. Commissioner Vuksic said the signs were tasteful and interesting as far as the letter styles and it overrides his concern with clutter. Commissioner Clark suggested limiting it to not more than three signs per tower. Commissioner Vuksic said in order to have three signs on one tower they would have to be pretty impressive signage. Commissioner Lambell left at 2:55 pm. MR. AUBREY said the proposed three tenant tower is actually behind the building. The reason they will put three tenants on the tower that faces Highway 111 is because their unannounced tenant is taking almost 25,000 square feet and he would like for them to have visibility from Highway 111. Commissioner Levin wanted to confirm that the only signage on the backside would be Nordstrom Rack and Whole Foods. MR. AUBREY said that was correct, but the tower facing Highway 111 would have three tenants. Commissioner Vuksic said the Commission would have to see how those signs would look; how tight they are together and how big they are. G)Planning\Janine JudylWord Fileslt ARC CommisisonllMinutes120121121009min.doo Page 18 of 19 ARCHITECTURAL RE' =W COMMISSION MINUTES '%We October 9, 2012 The Commission and the applicants discussed the aesthetics of the signs and their quality assuring requirements and how the sign program will stipulate only three signs per tower. They stated other applicants in the future will hold this up as a precedent that has been set and this Commission has to have specific reasons why this was different. They felt that if these signs were a high quality design it will be okay. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve the architecture subject to: 1) the depth of the gabled roofs shall undergo further studies; 2) cornice detail on the horizontal parapets shall be reviewed in final construction documents; 3) roof access shall be internal; and 4) west side of the building where Nordstrom Rack and Whole Foods signs are located shall undergo further studies to articulate the elevations. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by a 7-0-0-2 vote with Commissioners Gregory and Touschner absent. Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve a portion of the sign program subject to: 1) sign type #3 (tower) shall have either two or three signs depending on the design of the actual signs; and 2) continued remainder of sign program. Motion seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 6-0-3-0 vote with Commissioners Gregory, Lambell, and Touschner absent. C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. COMMENTS None VII. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Stendell, second by Commissioner Levin, and a 6-0-0-3 vote, with Commissioners Gregory, Lambell, and Touschner absent, the Architecttgal Review Commission meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m. r LAURI AYLAIAN, DIRECTOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SECRETARY f ANINE U Y � �ECOR Ily SECRETARY GAPlanninglJanine JudylWord Filesll ARC CommisisonllMinutes2012F121009min.doc Page 19 of 19