Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-02-26 r . �� � ��T�� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � ARCHITECTURA� REVIEW COMMISSION • ' ' MINUTES February 26, 2013 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 4 Chris Van Vliet X 3 1 John Vuksic X 3 1 Karel Lambell X 4 Allan Levin X 3 1 Paul Clark X 3 1 Gene Colombini X 4 Michael McAuliffe X 1 Jim Mclntosh X 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Pedro Rodriquez, Senior Code Officer Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Christina Canales, Assistant Engineer Janine Judy, Recording Secretary Cancelled meetings: Ill. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS City Clerk, Rachelle Klassen swore in the new Commissioners, Michael McAuliffe and Jim Mclntosh, prior to the start of the meeting. � � ARCHITECTURAL RE�IV COMMISSION � MINUTES February 26, 2013 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 12, 2013 Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved to approve the February 12, 2013 meeting minutes. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Vuksic and carried by a 5-0-0-4, with Commissioners Levin and Clark absent and Commissioners McAuliffe and Mclntosh abstaining. V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 13-42 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DOUGLASS KOPP, 44-870 Cabrillo Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a 6' high block wall 12' back from face of curb. LOCATION: 44-870 Cabrillo Avenue ZONE: R-1 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, said the applicant is requesting approval of an exception to the wall ordinance to allow a 6' high block wall and metal gate 12' back from curb located on a vacant lot. Chapter 25.56 General Provisions Section 25.56.195 states, fences 61" to 72" in height, must be 20' from face of curb. The applicant owns the adjacent property to the south, and is requesting to continue the wall and gate in line with the existing wall. The wall will be stucco and painted to match the existing adjacent wall. The applicant is also proposing landscaping in front of the wall and fence. The landscape plans have not been preliminary approved by the Landscape Specialist because there is a concern regarding the proposed planting pallet, irrigation, and plant spacing. If approved, the applicant would need to submit a revised landscape plan for approval before building permits are issued. Staff feels this does not warrant the exception and is recommending denial of the request. G:\Planning\JanineJudy\WordFiles\1ARC\1Minutes12013N30226min.docx Page 2 of 13 ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION ,� MINUTES February 26, 2013 MR. DOUGLASS KOPP, applicant, understands that the City wants to achieve consistency throughout the city. His house, built in 1947, has some architectural significance and he would like to increase the landscape area by removing the existing wall on the north side, which will set the house off a little bit better. He asked the Commission for their consideration. MS. KIM HOUSKEN, representative, understands the reason for the wall ordinance and recalls that it was updated within the past five years because people were starting to put up compounds. In the spirit of consistency, she felt it would not be aesthetically appealing to have a 6' wall that suddenly jogs in another 8' and runs across and comes back out. She presented pictures of the neighborhood showing inconsistent fences along the street; picket, wooden, and block walls close to the street. According to the exception, it says a fence should not damage adjacent properties and she believes this wall will improve the looks of the neighborhood. The lot has also been an attractant nuisance with kids breaking glass bottles and setting little fires and feels this is a safety issue as well. Staff suggested a desert color, but the applicant would like the same color to match the mortar that is unique to the house. Commissioner Lambell asked if this was a precision block wall. Mr. Swartz said anything facing the public street has to be stucco or decorative block. The new wall can be precision if the Commission approves it. MS. HOUSKEN said the historic building code allows some exemptions with regard to materials. In terms of consistency, perhaps the Commission would consider a reasonably equivalent alternative to the code. It doesn't seem reasonable or sustainable to tear down a perfectly good block wall that is already there. Mr. Swartz said the code states that every 30' the wall has to have some sort of undulation with a pilaster, column, or a pop out. The applicant proposed this to match the two adjacent walls. Commissioner Vuksic said the wall to the south is different than the wall to the north and the applicant intends to match the wall on the south. He stated that the existing wall was a thin brick about 6". He asked the applicant if he intended to remove the wall facing north and to open up the house to this property. G:\Planning\JanineJudy\Word Files\1 ARC\1Minutes\2013\130226min.docx Page 3 of 13 ARCHITECTURAL RE`�W COMMISSION +�jr MINUTES February 26, 2013 MS. HOUSKEN said this lot was part of the original property when the applicant bought the house. The applicant wants to take the existing wall down and open up this space to prevent kids from getting onto the lot. Commissioner Vuksic said he drove by this property and thought it would look odd to put a wall that is 20' back. Currently there is a wall 12' from the street, then there's an empty tot, then another wall that is 12' from the street. It seems that it would look better to let it be continuous. Commissioner Lambell asked if there was an opportunity for the applicant to put some undulation in the wall. Mr. Swartz said if this is approved, the Commission could make a recommendation to place a pilaster or column along with landscape in that area. He pointed out that the applicant submitted a landscape plan that was rejected by the Landscape Specialist. He would have to submit a revised landscape plan. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if there were photos of the existing wall or the house to show the details. He thought they could take the same design and if it was decorative enough they can continue it down. Commissioner Vuksic said the house was unique and architecturally it was interesting. He stated that the block wall was unique because you don't see block walls like that very often. Commissioner Colombini said the plans show a new driveway and entrance into that new wall; therefore they can use the pilasters on each side of the driveway to match the driveway in front of the house. Mr. Bagato said it may not make sense to have the pilasters since there are no other pilasters on the wall. He suggested just breaking it up by moving the gate back 18". Commissioner McAuliffe asked what the intent was of the new gate design. He asked if it would be in character of the existing gate. MS. HOUSKEN said the existing gate is a custom made gate. Commissioner Gregory feels this is a unique situation. It's essentially an infill and the walls on both sides were built before the city G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\1 ARC\1 Minutes\2013\130226min.docx Page 4 of 13 ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION � MINUTES February 26, 2013 incorporated and they front on a different street. The applicant has a home contiguous to this which has unusual architectural significance. With a little bit of articulation the applicant can conform to the City's rules making walls more interesting. Commissioner Lambell said the existing gate is very well articulated and it gives a great deal of relief going back to it. She suggested keeping the symmetry happening as opposed to it just being a straight wall and recommended 18"—20". Commissioner Vuksic recommended that this wall comes back for review. What is being considered for approval is the idea of the wall being 12' back from the curb. He asked the applicant to come back with a different design. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to continue Case No. MISC 13-42 to allow applicant to return with a 6' wall and gate design 12' from back of curb. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Vuksic and carried by a 7-0-0-2 vote, with Commissioners Levin and Clark absent. 2. CASE NO: MISC 10-238 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SHERRY SIDNEY, 915 West Crescent Drive, Palm Springs, CA 92262. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of an exterior color change; Sidney Properties. LOCATION: 73-760 to 73-790 EI Paseo ZONE: C-1,S-P Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, said this was a request for a new exterior color for a building on the comer of EI Paseo and San Luis Rey. He presented photos of the current orange color. The applicant has proposed two color choices. He pointed out on the photos where each paint color will be applied. Staff is recommending the second color choice. The applicant was not able to attend the meeting. However, she indicated that either color choice will be okay. She is having a hard time leasing the building and would like the building to be noticed. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\t ARC\1Minutes�2013\130226min.docx Page 5 of 13 ARCHITECTURAL RE ' -W COMMISSION ,y�+ MINUTES February 26, 2013 Commissioner Gregory asked staff what their opinion was of the color choices. Mr. Swartz stated staff is recommending the second color choice. Commissioner Gregory said he has an issue where the Commission starts controlling what people want to use. Unfortunately, the applicant precipitated this by initially painting it a pretty vivid color. Mr. Swartz stated this came back two times in 2010 because of the previous color. The applicant chose the existing color, but she is not happy with it. Commissioner Van Vliet moved for approval of the second choice of colors. Commissioner Lambell made the second. Commissioner Gregory asked if there were any further comments. Commissioner Mclntosh said he didn't find anything objectionable to choice number one and asked Commissioner Van Vliet for his comments. Commissioner Van Vliet said he was concerned with the first color choice because there was a lot orange potential and it's hard to tell where it will be located on the building. The Commission reviewed and discussed the color choices and where the colors would be located. Commissioner Vuksic said he didn't have a problem with these colors as they stand on a piece of paper, but it's hard to imagine them on the building. He pointed out that the Commission usually reviews colors on buildings. Mr. Swartz stated if the Commission was okay with the color choices, he will ask the applicant to photo shop the colors onto the building to see how they have been applied. Commissioner Vuksic suggested painting a section of the building for the Commission's review. Commissioner Van Vliet amended his motion to continue to allow the applicant to apply paint swatches on the building for review by the Commission. Commissioner Lambell seconded the motion. G:\PlanningWanine Judy\Word Files\1 ARC\1Minutes12013\130226min.docx Page 6 of 13 ARCHITECTURAL RE�1N COMMISSION � MINUTES February 26, 2013 ACTION: Commissioner Van Vliet moved to continue Case No. MISC 10-238 to allow applicant to apply paint swatches on the building for review by the Commission. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by a 7-0-0-2 vote, with Commissioners Levin and Clark absent. 3. CASE NO: MISC 12-140 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MARJORIE SOLE, 43-305 Illinois Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a new carport 20' from curb. LOCATION: 43-305 Illinois Avenue ZONE: R-1, 9,000 Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, stated this first came to the Commission on May 22, 2012. Under the current ordinance, all new carports have to be 20' from a property line. In this case, on Illinois Avenue there is a 12' right of way so a new carport has to be 30' from the curb. However, if someone wants to rehab an older home they can ask for a provision and come to Architectural Review seeking approval to be 20' from property line. A notice was mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the applicant's site. Staff has not received any comments in favor or opposition to. The original drawing showed 2' x 2's trellis and not well designed. The Commission, back in 2012, recommended that the structure match the existing home better than the original proposal. This new proposal shows a full covered roof to match the existing roof on the home. The applicant has now hired an architect who is here today. The architect is now bringing out the new carport with a covered roof to match the roof on the existing home, as well as a 2' x 10' beam coming across the whole front of the home. One side of the carport, adjacent to the neighbor, will be closed off but it will still have an opening on the front and side facing the front yard. All the framing for the columns will be interior to the structure and the hardware will not be visible. MR. WENDELL VEITH, architect, said he will continue the stucco look across the front of the house on the fascia and soffit. Right now there is a 4'-6" roof that comes out flat with the pitch coming G:\Planning\JanineJudy\Word Files\1 ARC\1Minutes\2013\130226min.docx Page 7 of 13 . , ARCHITECTURAL RE�1N COMMISSION � MINUTES February 26, 2013 down. There will be a column where the end of the existing roof is and another column at the other end. He has tried to continue a horizontal line with a stucco fascia going across with stucco columns to tie altogether from one side to another. The color of the stucco will match the color of the house; which is a light yellow. The stone, already on the project, will be retained. Right now there is a dark brown wood fascia on the house and he will change that to stucco so it will be non-maintenance for the owner. He asked the Commission to approve this project. Commissioner Bagato said this was originally a code enforcement case. When the owner first bought the home, she was unaware that the previous owner illegally converted the garage into living space. Now she is trying to satisfy the code by putting in a carport. Otherwise, if it is not approvable she will have to remove the living space. Staff is looking at this from an architectural standpoint and is recommending approval. Commissioner Lambell said this was one of the houses that she and Commissioner Clark surveyed last year in the Palm Desert Country Club. She mentioned that they saw far worse carports and converted garages during their tour. She asked for the column detail. MR. VEITH said it is a 12" square stucco column with a trim at the bottom 12" up to give it a little detail so it's not just a straight column going down to the dirt. Commissioner Van Vliet drove by the house and said it is a nice little house; well maintained and manicured. He said it was unfortunate that the applicant is being forced to put a carport there because he felt it would detract from the house. Mr. Bagato said the room is not permitted so in order for her to keep the room she needs the carport. Ms. Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development, said this is a part of a larger issue in the Palm Desert Country Club where they have identified maybe 40 different garage conversions done illegally and Code Enforcement is trying to enforce uniformity with all the residents. The Commission reviewed and discussed the slope of the roof. They pointed out that the roof was composition gravel and thought G:\Planning\JanineJudy\Word Files\t ARC\1Minutes12013\130226min.docx Page 8 of 13 ARCHITECTURAL RE�,,,W COMMISSION � MINUTES February 26, 2013 there would be a considerable amount of water coming from the existing house. They suggested creating a slope for an internal roof drain. Commissioner Vuksic said he liked the house because it has a nice trim and the color was kind of punchy, but he was a little disappointed that the carport would be all stucco. The Commission and the applicant discussed extending the fascia across the front of the house and carport. They thought it might be more integral to the house if it had a wood fascia on it to help with the detail. Commissioner Vuksic also suggested having the fascia protrude out a little bit past the stucco column. Commissioner Vuksic made a motion to approve the design subject to: 1) new fascia shall be wood rather than plaster; and 2) new fascia shall be painted to match the existing fascia and off-set from plaster column below. Commissioner McAuliffe and MR. VEITH discussed the new structural fascia connected to the carport roof, as well as the support of the one corner of the carport. It was suggested a post be placed there to take the load off the existing overhang. Commissioner McAuliffe said if the wood is exposed, then they need to conceal any hardware and attachments so it will be a dressed fascia without bolted plates. Commissioner Vuksic said he would like to add to his motion that all structural hardware be concealed and Commissioner Lambell made the second. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve design subject to: 1) new fascia shall be wood rather than plaster; 2) new fascia shall be painted to match the existing fascia and off-set from plaster column below; and 3) all structural hardware shall be concealed. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by a 7-0-0-2 vote, with Commissioners Levin and Clark absent. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\1 ARC\1Minutes�2013\13D226min.docx Page 9 of 13 ARCHITECTURAL RE�IV COMMISSION � MINUTES February 26, 2013 4. CASE NO: MISC 12-324 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PARADISE T.D. & 5M5, P.O. Box 1171, Corona Del Mar, CA 92625. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of the landscape plans; Goodyear Tire Store. LOCATION: 34-700 Monterey Avenue ZONE: P.C. (3) FCOZ Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, stated this is final approval of the landscape plans for the Goodyear Tire Store. This project received preliminary approval on January 24, 2013 with the landscape plans returning for additional review. The plans have been reviewed by the Landscape Specialist and have been preliminary approved for the materials and spacing. Commissioner Gregory said the plans are fine and is gratified that they are going to put as large a box size as they are suggesting with the acacia's. He asked if there would be any concern with people stepping out of their cars and getting pronged on the Acacia's. MR. TOM OLSEN, representative, said they had no concerns. Commissioner Vuksic pointed out that there was only one type of plant, a red yucca, other than a tree in the front and asked if that was enough. Commissioner Gregory said it is the design look Goodyear wants. However, if that is going to be their design perhaps those should be larger sizes to start with instead of one gallon. He didn't have a problem with the way the plants were laid out, and recommended � the Muhlenbergia and Hesperaloa's be increased from one gallon to five gallon and made a motion to approve. Commissioner Colombini made the second. Commissioner Gregory asked if there were any further comments. Ms. Hollinger said if the applicant wanted to make the Hesperaloa a little different, they could add the yellow with the red to combine the colors giving it a little more interest. G:\PlanningUanineJudy\Word Files\1 ARC\1Minutes\2013\130226min.docx Page 10 of 13 e • ARCHITECTURAL RE�,,;,alV COMMISSION ;,,,,,,� MINUTES February 26, 2013 Commissioner Gregory added that recommendation to his motion and Commissioner Colombini seconded. ACTION: Commissioner Gregory moved to approve subject to increasing the Muhlenbergia and Hesperaloa from the 1 gallon to 5 gallon size and using both yellow and red Hesperaloa. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Colombini and carried by a 7-0-0-2 vote, with Commissioners Levin and Clark absent. Staff requested that an additional item be added to the Agenda. Commission concurred. It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, adding Case No. MISC 13-32 to the agenda. Motion carried 6-0-1-2, with Commissioner Mclntosh abstaining and Commissioners Levin and Clark absent. 5. CASE NO: MISC 13-32 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESSI: DAVID NARZ, 77372 Evening Star Court, Indian Wells, CA 92210 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a carport located in the front yard 20' back from face of curb. LOCATION: 43-120 Texas Avenue ZONE: R-1, 9,000 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, said this carport proposal received conceptual approval at the last meeting on February 12, 2013, subject to the applicant submitting final working drawings for review and approval. The plans were presented and the Commission reviewed and discussed the posts and a section of the carport that stands up higher than another section. They suggested that the fascia needs to match and tie in. At this point, several people were talking at the same time making it difficult to transcribe the minutes. Commissioner Gregory left at 1:30 p.m. G:\Planning\JanineJudy\Word Files\1 ARC\1Minutes\2013\130226min.docx Page 11 of 13 t a ARCHITECTURAL REVii�„�W COMMISSION � MINUTES . February 26, 2013 Commissioner Van Vliet asked if this can be approved at staff level or should it be continued. Mr. Bagato said staff will inform the applicant of the Commission's comments. If the applicant doesn't agree, he can come back to the Commission. The applicant took a risk by not submitting a design because he wanted the Commission to review the construction drawings first. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve subject to: 1) wrap fascia to tie into existing fascia; 2) no exposed hardware; and 3) integrate beam into the structure. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Colombini and carried by a 5-0-1-3 vote, with Commissioners Gregory, Levin and Clark absent and Commissioner Mclntosh abstaining B. Preliminary Plans: None C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES UPDATE — Commissioner John Vuksic Commissioner Vuksic reported on the last Art in Public Places (AIPP) meeting. He stated that three traffic signal boxes will be painted on Fred Waring Drive at Phyllis Jackson, Portola, and at the Palm Desert Library; a mural will be painted onto the wall at the Palm Desert Community Center; the new exhibit, "My American Icon" is in the Palm Desert Gallery; the docent program is getting up to 60 to 70 people per tour; Desertscapes is continuing; Coachella Valley Water District is still considering their public art display; ongoing lectures take place at the Coachella Valley Art Center in Indio. MS. KIM HOUSKEN provided information on Walter White, a local designer who built several homes in the Coachella Valley. His collections will be on display at the Art, Design & Architecture Museum at UC Santa Barbara now until March 24, 2013. G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\t ARC\1 Minutes12013\130226min.docx Page 12 of 13 . . ARCHITECTURAL RE�W COMMISSION ,,�,, MINUTES February 26, 2013 VII. COMMENTS None VIII. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Lambell, second by Commissioner Vuksic, and a 6-0-0-3 vote, with Commissioners Gregory, Levin and Clark absent, the Architectural Review Commission meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m. � TONY BAGATO, RINCIPAL PLANNER SECRETARY ,�A E JU ORDING SECRETARY G:\Planning\Janine Judy\Word Files\1 ARC\1 Minutes\2013\130226min.docx Page 13 of 13