The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-10-13 CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 13, 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 16 Karel Lambell, Vice Chair X 16 Paul Clark X 15 1 Gene Colombini X 15 1 Allan Levin X 14 2 Michael McAuliffe X 14 2 Jim McIntosh X 15 1 John Vuksic X 15 1 Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director, Community Development Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner Eric Ceja, Associate Planner Pedro Rodriguez, Code Compliance Supervisor Janine Judy, Recording Secretary Cancelled meeting:03/10/15;08/11/15,08/25/15 III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 8, 2015 and September 22, 015 Action: Commissioner Levin moved to approve the September 8, 2015 and September 22, 2015 meeting minutes. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Clark and carried by a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES and Colombini absent. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 13, 2015 V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 15-96 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: GHA Companies., Attn: Mario Gonzalez, 30875 Date Palm Drive, Cathedral City, CA 92234 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration for final approval of architectural plans for the Genesis at Millennium single- family home development. LOCATION: Southeast corner of Dinah Shore Drive & Portola Avenue (part of the Millennium Palm Desert Specific Plan) ZONE: PR-6 Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, presented final construction drawings for the Millennium single-family home development. He said when this was preliminarily approved by the Commission, the only comments were related to the landscaping around the perimeter of the project on Dinah Shore Drive. He mentioned that those plans were still being reviewed by CVWD and the landscape specialist. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve construction drawings as presented. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Levin and carried by a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES and Colombini absent. 2. CASE NO: MISC 15-250 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: LOREN DEGRAT, 50855 Washington Street, Suite 227, La Quinta, CA 92253 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration of final approval for paint color change; Cranked Vapors. LOCATION: 74-214 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1, S.P. Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, informed the Commission that this item was pulled from the agenda because the color change was not approved by the landlord. GAPIanningUanineJudyNARC\1Minutes\2015\151013min.docx Page 2 of 5 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 13, 2015 ACTION: With Commission concurrence, the withdrawal of the application was accepted. 3. CASE NO: MISC 15-240 APPLICANT AND ADDRESS: LEA WARD, P.O. Box 231847, Encinitas, CA 92023 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration of final approval to allow a 6' high rear yard block wall approximately 12' behind the curb. LOCATION: 73-385 Grapevine Street ZONE: R-1 40,000 Mr. Tony Bagato, Principal Planner, presented a wall exception for a 6' high wall approximately 12' back from curb to be in line with the neighboring fencing. The property has two street frontages; the back yard is on Willow Street and the front yard is on Grapevine Street. The existing chain link fence in front of the citrus orchard will be removed. 01 The applicant is requesting 12' back from curb so she will not lose part of the orchard. Mr. Bagato noted that the applicant was not present. The Commission reviewed the plans and the setbacks. Chair Van Vliet stated he was on site prior to the meeting and said that the curb is between 11 to 12" high and felt that a 6' high wall would be too tall. He suggested a 5' high wall 15' back from curb to meet the code. The Commission reviewed the street view of other walls and fences on the street and discussed the grade difference from the street side. Commissioner Vuksic felt there wasn't a compelling enough reason to approve a 6' high wall. Mr. Bagato said if the Commission recommends a denial of the wall as presented, the applicant can appeal and go to City Council for the 6' high wall or come back to staff to approve a 5' high wall over the counter. Commissioner Lambell suggested denying the request and Commissioner Clark asked if this should just be continued. Mr. Bagato said they could continue this so the applicant can be present at the next meeting. The Commission discussed the options. Commissioner Lambell moved to deny the wall exception as presented. Motion seconded by Commission McIntosh. GAPlanningUanineJudyARC\1Minutes\2015\151013min.docx Page 3 of 5 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 13, 2015 At 12:50 p.m., the contractor entered the conference room. The Commission informed the contractor there was a motion on the floor. The Commission continued to discuss the grade and setbacks. Mr. Bagato asked the contractor if they would have a retaining wall. MR. SCOTT FRAZER, OB General Contractors, answered yes. Commissioner Clark asked why the applicant was requesting 6' when a 5' high wall could be approved over the counter. MR. FRAZER said the adjacent walls were 6' and the homeowner wants the line matched up all the way across. He stated that from the street side the wall will be 4'-9". Chair Van Vliet suggested withdrawing the motion for denial. Commissioner Lambell withdrew her motion and Commissioner McIntosh agreed. Mr. Bagato explained that with it being 12' back from curb there is still an exception even at 5' because it should be 15' back from curb. Chair Van Wet asked the contractor if they could move it back 3' to meet the code. MR. FRAZER asked what the code was regarding the setbacks and Mr. Bagato said for a 5' high wall the set back is 15' on the street side. MR. FRAZER said based on the approach they are requesting 12'. The Commission and the contractor reviewed the setbacks of the neighboring walls. Chair Van Wet suggested approving the variance for a 5' high wall at 12' back from curb. Commissioner Vuksic made a motion for approval with conditions and Commissioner Clark made the second. Chair Van Vliet asked for comments. The Commission and the contractor discussed the material for the gate and the stucco finish on the wall. They also discussed the need for a landscape plan and recommended submitting a landscape plan for staffs review and approval. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve wall and gate subject to: 1) wall shall be no higher than 5' above the curb at any point; 2) wall shall be 12' back from curb or in line with adjacent wall to the east; whichever is the greatest distance from the curb; and 3) provide a landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by staff. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Clark and carried by a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES and Colombini absent. GAPIanningUanineJudy%ARC\1Minutes\2015\151013min.docx Page 4 of 5 0 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 13, 2015 C. Miscellaneous Items: None VI. COMMENTS None VII. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion by Commissioner Levin, second by Commissioner McAuliffe, and a 7-0-1 vote, with Clark, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES and Colombini absent, the Architectural Review Commission meeting was adjourned at 1:05 p.m. TONY AGATO, PRINCIPAL PLANNER SECRETARY JANINE JUDY RECORDING SECRETARY r GAPIanning\JanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2015\151013min.docx Page 5 of 5 *me