The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-06-09 `fir►' err; ��•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • MINUTES June 9, 2015 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 10 Karel Lambell, Vice Chair X 10 Paul Clark X 10 Gene Colombini X 10 Allan Levin X 10 Michael McAuliffe X 10 Jim McIntosh X 10 W John Vuksic X 9 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 meeting:03/10/15; III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 26, 2015 meeting minutes to be reviewed at the next meeting W c ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 9, 2015 V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: SA 15-148 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: COAST SIGN, INC. Attn: Brian, 1500 W. Embassy Street, Anaheim, CA 92802 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to approve design modifications to two existing monument signs and one wall sign for; Courtyard Marriott and Residence Inn. LOCATION: 39-305 Cook Street ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Eric Ceja, Associate Planner, presented a proposal to replace two existing monument signs for Courtyard Marriott and Residence Inn; one on Frank Sinatra Drive and one on Cook Street. He said city code requires monument signs to come before the ARC for review and approval. He pointed out that the proposed changes have minor detailing and straight lettering and staff has concerns since the signs do not have any sort of details and are just two big box signs. Commissioner Vuksic agreed and said it appears they have taken a step backwards with the new design. MR. DENNIS STOUT, Coast Sign, said Marriott corporate has changed their brand nationwide and this is what they are going to. He mentioned that the owner cannot make any changes to the signs without Marriott's permission. MR. STOUT would like some input from the Commission and a denial if they don't like the sign. That way the owner can take the Commission's comments to corporate to ask for a deviation from Marriott's standards. The Commission reviewed the proposed changes and discussed the design and felt the signs were lacking design and personality. Commissioner Lambell informed the applicant that Palm Desert has a very high standard for signs and pointed out that these two signs don't appear to be in keeping with the buildings. The Commission and the applicant discussed the sign design and materials. GAP1anning\JanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2015\150609min.docx Page 2 of 5 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 9, 2015 Commissioner Vuksic said the signs need more articulation to make them more pleasing and in keeping with the surroundings. Commissioner McIntosh said the signs look like a temporary solution, almost like real estate signs which are temporary in nature. Commissioner McAuliffe felt there was a disconnect between the signs and the architecture. He pointed out that this is a very contemporary looking sign and a traditional building. It looks like the signs have been applied to the wrong property. ACTION: Commissioner Levin moved to deny Case SA 15-148 as submitted. Motion was seconded by Commissioner McAuliffe 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: PP/CUP 15-128 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: LARREA PARTNERS, LLC, Attn: Josh Levy, 7 Via Meranda, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 W NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to preliminarily approve the development of a 62-bed memory care facility; Palm Desert Memory Care. LOCATION: 78-825 Larrea Street ZONE: R-3 13,000(3) Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, presented a proposal for a one-story, 62-bed memory care facility with 19 on-site parking spaces located on Larrea Street. He pointed out that they will have drought tolerant landscape. MR. RUDY CARBAJAL, designer, said they are trying to maintain a very contemporary look and color pallet that is more suitable for the desert community that will include all natural stucco and stone. They will also have some darker elements by the windows that are a composite siding material that will hold up to the weather and sun. W GAPlanning\JanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2015\150609min.docx Page 3 of 5 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 9, 2015 v Chair Van Vliet asked if there was an architect on this project and MR. CARBAJAL answered no and said he was the designer. Chair Van Vliet said he spent a lot of time looking at the drawings because they were confusing and was trying to understand what was going on. He pointed out that certain things are shown on the elevations but not on the roof plan. Commissioner Clark asked if there was an isometric or an illustrative drawing and MR. CARBAJAL said not at this time. The Commission reviewed and discussed the metal eyebrows above the windows, the roof plan and roof access, the trees in the atrium, the pre-manufactured aluminum awning and the HVAC units. Commissioner Vuksic said the forms were interesting and appreciates that the windows are recessed and will have some depth to them, but he was concerned with some of the inconsistency in the plans and details. He asked if the Commission will see the details in the construction documents and MR. CARAJAL said yes and the details will be clean and crisp. Commissioner McIntosh suggested they submit a rendering of the front elevation from a street view so they can see what this will look like, as well as illustrating the front wall. He said their concern is how the building is perceived from the street and the community because this will be 300' of the same thing. Commissioner Clark suggested wrought iron elements into the wall to open it up and asked if that would be a security issue. MR. JOSH LEVY, Larrea Partners, said they wanted to keep this contemporary and were thinking of plantings in front of the wall which would cover the wrought iron. The Commission recommended they provide more information for the proposed wall regarding the setback dimensions, articulation, design and materials, pilasters with or without caps, and shown in context with the building design. Commissioner Vuksic said the wall needs to compliment the building as well as the neighborhood. The Commission also reviewed and discussed the parapets going back further in some places, studying the tree selection in the atrium, and submitting a 3-D rendering of the building design. 14 GAPIanningWnineJudyWRC\1Minutes\2015\150609min.docx Page 4 of 5 �rrr' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 9, 2015 w ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to continue Case PP/CUP 15-128 subject to: 1) providing a full street elevation with the front wall illustrated; 2) submit a 3-D rendering of the building design; 3) increase the returns of the parapets to provide better massing and the appearance of a complete form; 4) request the landscape architect to study the trees in atrium due to the enclosure above courtyard space; and 5) provide more information for the proposed walls: i.e. setback dimensions, articulation, design and materials, pilasters with and without caps, and shown in context with the building design. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Clark and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES. C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. COMMENTS The Commission and staff discussed whether or not the City requires licensed architects to do plans on commercial buildings. rr VII. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner McAuliffe, 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 1:20 p.m. TONY BAGATO, P INCIPAL PLANNER SECRETARY JA UDY RECORDING SECRETARY GAPIanningUanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2015\150609min.docx Page 5 of 5 �' + ., 'r