Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-09-09 CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • MINUTES September 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 17 Karel Lambell, Vice Chair X 16 1 Paul Clark X 15 2 Gene Colombini X 16 1 Allan Levin X 15 2 Michael McAuliffe X 16 1 Jim McIntosh X 16 1 John Vuksic X 16 1 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 meetings: 09/23/14 III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 26, 2014 Action: Commissioner Levin moved to approve the August 26, 2014 meeting minutes. Motion was seconded by Chair Van Vliet and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES. ARCHITECTURAL REV ;V COMMISSION MINUTES September 9, 2014 V CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 14-278 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: PETER AND CATHY TERRACCIANO, 49-200 Town Center Way, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a new single-family home at a proposed building height of 18'. LOCATION: 73-789 Agave Lane ZONE: P.R. 7 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, presented a new single-family home at a proposed building height of 18'. He pulled up an aerial map of the area and pointed out the location of the proposed home. He explained that back in 1978 the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map 5553 for 71 single-family lots. The resolution attached to the map had special conditions for setbacks. The height limit in this area is 16' but the resolution states that it can go to 18' subject to design review board. This also has to go through the Ironwood Home Owner's Association and the applicant has submitted the plans to them. He presented photos of the neighborhood and said there are homes at 18' in the surrounding area. The house is 6,000 square-feet with four bedrooms, a great room, a three car garage, casita and pool. The portion of the house that goes to 18' is the main entry way on the south elevation with a portion of it over the great room. He said the applicant is still undecided on the window details with some being recessed and some not. He stated only a portion of this home can been seen from Portola Avenue. Staff is recommending approval. Commissioner Clark asked if the grading on the pad would be elevated. Mr. Swartz said the pads have already been established and the applicant has already submitted the grading plans. Commissioner Clark asked if it would add significantly to the height. Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, said they can't go up more than 6" unless it goes to Planning Commission. GA, inning\.anineJudyVARC\1Minutes\2014\140909min.docx Page 2 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REI 'W COMMISSION MINUTES *MV, '*'� September 9, 2014 Commissioner Clark asked if there was a color and materials board for review. Mr. Swartz said colors have not been chosen yet and the applicant is still going through the HOA approval process. He said the applicants have stated they will keep it to a Mediterranean style. Commissioner Vuksic said the long side on the east elevation is facing Portola Avenue and asked how much of that would you actually see. Chair Van Vliet thought it would be a lot because there is only an existing 5' wall in front of it. Mr. Swartz presented photos of the existing homes around this lot and the Commission reviewed. Commissioner Lambell felt there should be some caveats on this approval because the windows aren't shown and there is no materials board. Mr. Swartz said the Commissioners could preliminary approve the height so the applicant can start on the construction drawings. Then this can come back to the Commission for review of the final plans. The Commission and the applicant discussed the reason why there were no window details on the plans. MR. CHRIS BEATTY, So-Cal Design, said the main concern for submitting these plans to ARC was to get the height approval so they can move to structural drawings and then submit the remainder of what is required. Chair Van Vliet pointed out that the Commission most often will require enhanced architecture on a home when there is a height exception. MR. PETE TERRACCIANO, applicant, said this will be very similar to what you see in Toscana and will have very subtle colors with a Tuscan flavor throughout the house. They haven't decided on whether or not to have a loose tile roof or not. Commissioner Vuksic said the massing of the roof is okay and it makes sense. He pointed out on the east elevation a really long eave that goes from one end of the house to the other without any sort of break. It appears they are a few feet back from the setback so that would give them a great opportunity to introduce some architectural elements that carry onto the roof and break up that line. The way the line of sight works you're going to be looking at the eave of the house and not so much of the wall. The Commission and the applicant discussed the line of sight for the whole roof and the eave from Portola Avenue. Commissioner Vuksic suggested adding detail to the east side of the house. Commissioner McIntosh said the massing is good but the roof plan GAPlanning\JanineJudyWRC\1Minutes\2014\140909min.docx Page 3 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REV f COMMISSION MINUTES September 9, 2014 needs to match the elevation. He said when the applicant works that out to make sure they don't increase the mass. Chair Van Wet asked staff if the Commission can just approve the height and the applicant can bring the details back. Mr. Swartz said if the Commission is comfortable with the height, they can preliminary approve subject to plans coming back with more details for the roof materials, colors, and window detailing. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to grant preliminary approval of the roof massing subject to: 1) continuance of the design to provide more articulation on the roof, in particular the east side elevation; and 2) provide a materials board and colors. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lambell and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: MISC 14-46 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: ALLIED DISTRICT PROPERTIES, Attn: Paul Goodman, 180 North Stetson Avenue #3240, Chicago, IL 60601 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of fagade enhancements to Buildings C & D, construction of two new buildings, and a landscape plan for entire site; El Paseo Square. LOCATION: 73-411 El Paseo ZONE: C-1, S.P. C(:,mmissioner Vuksic abstained from this project and remained in the conference room. Mr. Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner, said this project was first presented in early 2014 and at that time the Commission preliminary approved fagade enhancements to buildings C & D for El Paseo Square. The applicant now has a new architect and is proposing new architectural modifications to buildings C & D and proposing two new buildings E & F along Highway 111. Staff recommends that the Architectural Review Commission approve the fagade enhancements to buildings C and D, and the building design and locations for buildings E and F. The applicant is G\f1I:nning\.anineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2014\140909min.docx Page 4 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REV W COMMISSION MINUTES �"' `vo September 9, 2014 requesting approval for exterior fagade enhancements to buildings C and D to accommodate a grocery store and other retail tenants. Building C maintains a tower element height of 42', which is allowed within the zone. The applicant is also proposing new landscaping throughout the entire center including the perimeters along Lupine Lane (Lupine), Highway 111, and San Pablo Avenue (San Pablo). Other site improvements include new and re-located trash enclosures, new flat work connecting a path through the center from Highway 111 to El Paseo, closing off the secondary access along San Pablo, and parking lot design modifications. Buildings A, B, and C will remain as they currently exist. Preliminary approval from the City's Landscape Specialist has been granted and a final landscaping plan must be reviewed and approved by Coachella Valley Water District before building permits are issued. Signage is not a part of this approval and will come back to this Commission at a later date. He pointed out that buildings E & F will either be retail or restaurant. He passed around a materials board for the Commission's review and presented a prospective of the project and discussed the tower element that has increased from 39' to 42'. Overall, staff supports the proposed architectural design for the project. The enhancements to the site along with the addition of two new buildings will provide a nice visual transition to the El Paseo corridor. MR. JOHN GREENWOOD, architect, said Fresh Market is the proposed tenant going into building C and buildings D, E, and F are proposed shells at this point until they get retailers in place. One of the site improvements is the new enhanced paving connecting the north south drive aisle through the center of the site to help pull in the El Paseo circulation. Fresh Market will have both indoor and outdoor dining along the east elevation and hope these improvements will bring additional pedestrian traffic into the site. He described the materials, paint colors, and landscape that will be used in the center. They have connecting Lupine to Highway 111 to provide better circulation, as well as some definite aesthetics from the El Paseo view going down Lupine. All mechanical systems will be screened and the lighting for the project will give the center a dynamic and soft appearance in the evening. The Commission discussed the outdoor dining area for Building E and had concerns that it would be facing Highway 111. MR. GREENWOOD understood their concerns and said one of the constraints they have are the utility easements that is pushing the building farther away from the northern setback. If a restaurant were to come in, that could be a potential location. GAPlanning\JanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2014\140909min,docx Page 5 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REV ,N COMMISSION MINUTES September 9, 2014 The Commission discussed the "right in" only entrance off El Paseo and thought making it a pedestrian "entry only" would introduce more pedestrian traffic into the center. Mr. Swartz said they mentioned this idea to the owner but they want to leave it as is. MR. GREENWOOD said this was an important item to Fresh Market because they want to maintain the circulation on site and it maintains a north south flow to give pedestrians options. Parking along El Paseo directly south of Building A is all red-curbed providing ample view to make a safe right turn in. The pedestrian flow is improved and inviting and they did not see the benefits of shutting off the entrance. Commissioner Levin felt that getting rid of the vehicular traffic would improve the pedestrian traffic. There is an exit off of San Pablo to get to El Paseo and it's not a significant inconvenience to come out there. Commissioner McIntosh and MR. GREENWOOD discussed the building materials on the west side in the truck delivery area off of Lupine. MR. GREENWOOD said they have done quite a bit to the west elevation. The existing wall, which is the loading dock, is all new and will be screened. Structurally there are two separate elements and they have incorporated the same design elements which are on the east elevation that will break up both the new structure versus the existing and carry into an overlap as one element. The existing CMU slump stone wall will be raised to screen the loading docks from Lupine. The applicant is dealing with an additional electrical easement directly adjacent to the west elevation so it hampers them from adding too much depth within the architecture. They have created ample daylight into the rear of the building, a nice area for signage, and have broken up that area with some vertical elements. Commissioner McAuliffe and MR. GREENWOOD discussed the roof plan, tower elements and the ADA ramp and stairs. Commissioner McAuliffe mentioned the turning radius of the island that reaches out into the main drive aisle. He was concerned that it sticks too far out in the main flow of traffic and feels it could be a potential hazardous situation. He suggested they strongly consider losing those first two spaces just to make that area breathe a little more. He was also concerned with the pedestrian navigation from the southwest corner of building F down across the drive aisle heading west and asked that they take a look at that because there was a lot of stuff going on right there. Commissioner McIntosh was concerned with someone pushing a cart out of the tower entrance into the area where the cars are parked. Mr. Bagato said they could G F"anning'Janine Judy\ARC\1Minutes\2014\140909min.docx Page 6 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL RE ., W COMMISSION MINUTES 4w S"001 September 9, 2014 lose parking under the zoning ordinance. Commissioner Clark suggested opening up the whole area and doing something interesting with the tower at the pedestrian level. MR. GREENWOOD said they will sit down as a team and investigate any additional opportunities. The Commission and MR. GREENWOOD discussed the height of the tower. MR. KEITH WHITE, Fresh Market, said they are excited to come to Palm Desert. Fresh Market was created in 1982 and has grown to approximately 170 stores based in the southeast. Five years ago they decided to expand out to the west with stores in Palo Alto, Santa Barbara, and Laguna Hills. They are a specialty grocer, specializing in gourmet and their own private label. He stated that the tower is a very important element for this store. Their main entrance will be centered on the sales floor, but within the tower area they will have an indoor cafe seating area that is private space and set apart from the main service area. Chair Van Vliet called for a vote. ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to grant preliminary approval with comments addressing the landscape, the parking areas and pedestrian traffic; staff to review. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Colombini and carried by a 7-0-1-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, and Van Vliet voting YES and Vuksic abstaining. C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. COMMENTS Staff discussed the Walls and Fences Committee meeting held on September 18 and the awnings at Kaiser Grille Restaurant. G.Planning\JanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2014\140909min.docx Page 7 of 8 ARCHITECTURAL REV 'V COMMISSION R MINUTES September 9, 2014 V II. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Lambell, second by Commissioner Vuksic, and an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES, the Architectural Review Commission meeting was adjourned at 1:55 p.m. 1 TONY BAGATO, PRINCIPAL PLANNER =CRETARY i RaI E JUDY RbING S RETARY G:Panning Janine JudyWRC\1Minutes\2014\140909min.docx Page 8 of 8