Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-12-09 �`•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 9, 2014 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 Chris Van Vliet, Chair X 21 Karel Lambell, Vice Chair X 19 2 Paul Clark X 19 2 Gene Colombini X 20 1 Allan Levin X 19 2 Michael McAuliffe X 20 1 Jim McIntosh X 20 1 John Vuksic X 19 2 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director, Community Development Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Eric Ceja, Associate Planner Pedro Rodriguez, Code Compliance Supervisor Janine Judy, Recording Secretary Cancelled meeting:09/23/14, 11/14/14 III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 25, 2014 meeting minutes will be approved at the next meeting. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 9, 2014 V, CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 14-411 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: JOSH & VIVIAN STOMEL, 4490 Poe Avenue, Woodland Hills, CA 91364 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to approve a new wood fence. LOCATION: 42-925 Texas Avenue ZONE: R-1, 8,000 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented a proposal of a 6' high wood fence. This has come before the Commission because the applicant removed an existing wood fence and installed a new wood fence without obtaining City approval. Wood is not identified as an approved material in the code, however code allows an exception if the Commission believes that a wood fence is an architectural feature of the house. This home is located in the Palm Desert Country Club and the homeowner's association approved the new fence. He explained that the applicant also tore down and replaced the existing carport and added wood for screening. The same wood material was also added to the side yard that goes down about 6' and ties into an existing block wall. He stated that this was advertised and staff did not receive any comments. Staff feels this is an architectural enhancement to the house and is recommending approval. Commissioner Vuksic said most people don't understand what materials to use to meet the level of architectural merit as stated in the ordinance, but in this case the applicant has. It is nicely done and enhances the house. He asked if it would be Code Enforcement's charge to make sure the fence is maintained. Mr. Swartz suggested the approval say the applicant shall maintain the fence. ACTION: Commissioner McIntosh moved to approve subject to applicant maintaining the wood finish and integrity of the wood fence. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES and Lambell absent. G:'Planniny\Janine Judy\ARC\1Minutes\2014\141209min.docx Page 2 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 9, 2014 2. CASE NO: SA 14-398 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: SECURITY BANK PLAZA, 78-000 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to approve a sign program; Security Bank Plaza. LOCATION: 78-000 Fred Waring Drive ZONE: O.P. Mr. Eric Ceja, Associate Planner, presented a sign proposal for the Security Bank Plaza building located on the northwest corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive. In 2004 a sign program was approved that established a sign criteria and limited second story letter height to no more than 14". The applicant is asking for letter height up to 28". The photo simulation shows the sign with reverse channel letters similar to other signs on the building. The sign looks good in that space although it appears to be a little crammed in that area. This proposal would just be an exception to the letter size. Staff is recommending approval. Commissioner Clark asked how this sign relates to the existing signage on the building. Mr. Ceja said a lot of the signs on the second story are 14" letters with double lines. MR. STEVE LYLE, applicant, said it was important to them that the building is named after the bank and with the stacked 14" letters they felt that anything smaller wasn't going to look like a named building. The intersection is huge with a lot of traffic and they want people to see that it is Security Bank Plaza. He worked very hard to get Security Bank and had to promise naming the building after them. The Commission and the applicant discussed the size of the sign in proportion to the building and the illumination. MR. LYLE said the letters are reverse channel and will be illuminated from dusk to dawn. Commissioner Vuksic liked the fact that the only letters that are 28" are the first letter of each word and the others are quite a bit smaller. Commissioner McIntosh asked what the ordinance was for second story signs. Mr. Tony Bagato said the ordinance states that second story signs are to be half the size of the first story, but sign programs can supersede the ordinance with ARC approval. G\Planning\JanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2014\141209min.docx Page 3 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 9, 2014 ACTION: Commissioner Clark moved to approve. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Colombini and carried by a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES and Lambell absent. 3. CASE NO: CUP 14-139 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: VERIZON WIRELESS, 72-850 El Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration of a stealth communication facility: Palm to Pines West Shopping Center. LOCATION: 72-850 El Paseo ZONE: P.C.-(3), S.P. Mr. Eric Ceja, Associate Planner, said this was a proposal by Verizon Wireless for a new telecommunication tower 48' in height and designed to resemble a fan palm. He presented a PowerPoint exhibit and pointed out that the tower location will be in the parking lot along El Paseo directly behind Staples. The equipment enclosure would be located within an existing landscape island which will require all existing landscape within the island to be removed. The equipment enclosure consists of an 8' high block wall. The code requires new communication facilities to have a 300' separation from residential properties and a 500' separation from other communication facilities. Sandpiper, an existing residential development built in the late 1950's, is located directly across El Paseo and is within the 300' separation requirements. In addition, an existing 50' tall tower is within 130' of the proposed tower. Although the communication tower is within the required separation distances the Architectural Review Commission and Planning Commission may allow for exceptions to this requirement if the tower is appropriately designed as an artificial palm tree. Staff supports an exception to the separation requirements if; the tower is located against an existing building, the applicant has demonstrated that a need for the tower exists, and existing mature landscape exists to further screen the tower. Overall, the monopalm tower is adequately designed and conforms to the City's stealth requirements. The Commission reviewed and discussed the number of existing palm trees in the shopping center and the surrounding areas. Commissioner Vuksic said this is the utility side of a shopping center which is a good location for a monopalm and was pleasantly surprised that it is 48' tall and is down quite a bit from El Paseo. G I lanning,JanineJudyWRC\lMinutesk2014\141209min.docx Page 4 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 9, 2014 ACTION: Commissioner Levin moved to approve subject to: 1) 12" setback from curb for the equipment enclosure; and 2) applicant to protect the existing Palo Verde trees in place. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Vuksic and carried by a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES and Lambell absent. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP 14-289 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: MARY CONNOR LIMONT, 72-720 Bel Air, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to preliminary approve new construction of a 674 sq. ft. detached casita and renovation of main house, using the existing footprint. LOCATION: 72-375 Upper Way West ZONE: H.P.R. Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, said this was a proposal for a 674 sq. ft. casita in the Hillside Planned Residential zone. This project will move on to the Planning Commission and the City Council. The reason it came before this Commission is because there were no documents from the county or the city that showed this property having an approved grading permit or pad permit. Staff looks at the architecture of new structures when on a hillside and how it blends with the natural terrain of the hillside in color, materials and architecture and that it is not too visible from a public street. He described the site plan and presented photos of the surrounding area and said that part of this approval is a renovation of the existing home. The home is maintaining the same footprint, but the architecture will be updated to match the casita. The grading on the site will be minimal at 88 cubic yards. The code allows disturbance of 10,000 sq. ft. or less. The total new footprint is 2,869 sq. ft. plus the 674 sq. ft. casita and meets the intent of the hillside ordinance. Staff will advertise this for the Planning Commission and City Council meetings. Commissioner Vuksic asked how they are supporting the roof on the renovation. MR. DOUG HOWARD, architect, said they are using the original footprint, but it is all new walls. G\Planning\Janine Judy\ARC\1 Minutes\2014\141209min.docx Page 5 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 9, 2014 Commissioner Vuksic said the house has a nice movement to it with the way the elevation is designed and with different forms. MR. HOWARD said they are trying to create a homestead house with adobe style brick and traditional terracotta tile to blend in to the hillside. Commissioner Vuksic said he liked the way they have the renovation of the main house being the dominant mass and the casita as the support building; making the look a classic homestead layout and design. ACTION: Commissioner Clark moved to preliminary approve. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Vuksic and carried by a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES and Lambell absent. ("orrimissioner Vuksic recused himself from this item and remained in conference room. 2. CASE NO: MISC 14-46 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: ALLIED DISTRICT PROPERTIES, Attn: Audrey Watson, 180 N. Stetson Avenue, Suite 3240, Chicago, IL 60601 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to preliminary approve architectural modifications to Buildings C & D; El Paseo Square. LOCATION: 73-411 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1, S.P. Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, said this project was continued at the previous meeting and the applicant has returned with modifications to Buildings C & D for review. MR. JOHN GREENWOOD, Prest-Vuksic Architects, presented the changes to the previous plans and said what they have attempted to do is make some value engineering changes while still maintaining the architectural aesthetic of the project. He described the changes to the tower, the metal trellises, canopy's, the screening wall for the loading dock, and material changes. The Commission reviewed and discussed the changes to the elevations. Commissioner McIntosh said he liked the building design of the previous approval because it had a lot of nice articulation and had a very interesting and unique character. That is what this Commission took into consideration when it was first approved. This G F IannincWanine JudyWR01Minutes\2014\141209min.docx Page 6 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 9, 2014 seems to have turned into more of a generic design and it makes for a tough decision. Commissioner Clark agreed and was concerned with the cables and the pulling back on the overhangs. He reminded the Commission that at the last meeting the tower was a point of discussion because of the height. Commissioner McIntosh said the first design had a strong horizontal element that now feels more like a vertical element and he would have a harder time approving it the way he did a couple of weeks ago. He suggested either keeping the louvers or the awning needs to go back to the way it was to give it articulation, depth and shadow. MR. GREENWOOD said the comments made regarding breaking up the mass and taking another look at the louvers is valid. He explained that they are trying to meet the national tenant's requirements to make these changes while also maintaining the aesthetics of the project. Commissioner McIntosh pointed out that extending the canopy over will help to mitigate the height proportion of the tower. MR. JOHN VUKSIC, Prest-Vuksic Architects, understands the Commission's concerns. However, he felt that they were able to do some things to help the engineering and not compromise the overall aesthetics of the building. Commissioner McIntosh and the architects continued to discuss the height of the tower and the previous elements that were helpful to the massing. Commissioner McIntosh was concerned that they will lose character to that element with the current changes. He believes that it should be a significant piece of architecture. Commissioner McAuliffe said it is unfortunate to see some of the details and finishes kind of merge into the background and become similar to the rest of the materials that are around it. He liked the original signage proportions and placement versus the "skinnying" up of the mass above the three units of Building D; he didn't necessarily see that as an improvement. He didn't like to see the equipment screen texture go away because of the large sea of stucco. He wasn't thrilled to see the cable braces at the "Fresh Market" sign and suggested concealing them rather than advertising them because the project will lose the contemporary feel. MR. GREENWOOD said he appreciates the Commission's comments. He explained that they are working on a very stringent schedule to get this approved and under construction. He asked the Commission for further discussion on the tower and its development so they can come to a resolution. Mr. Bagato cautioned the Commission about designing any changes for the applicant. He stated that if it is acceptable today, the Commission can approve it with minor conditions. If they want to GAPlanning\JanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2014\141209min.docx Page 7 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 9, 2014 continue it, then the Commission can summarize the major comments and concerns for the applicant. Chair Van Wet recommended that this be continued to allow the applicant to reexamine the comments made by this Commission and incorporate them into their plans. ACTION: Chair Van Vliet moved to continue Case MISC 14-46 to allow applicant to review design elements. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Clark and carried by a 6-0-2, with Commissioners Lambell and Vuksic absent. C. Miscellaneous Items: None 4'I,. COMMENTS The Commission discussed wood fences, the Palm Desert Country Club, and Coachella Valley Water District. V'II. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Levin, second by Commissioner Clark, and a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES and Lambell absent, the Architectural Review Commission meeting was adjourned at 1:55 p.m. C� — TONY BAG TO, PR CIPAL PLANNER SECRETARY \4 U'd'4� J , JUD F;f N DING SECRETARY G Fanning JanineJudyWRC\1Minules\2014\141209min.docx Page 8 of 8