The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-09-27 i %W ��•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • MINUTES September 27, 2016 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 14 Karel Lambell, Vice Chair X 13 1 Paul Clark X 11 3 Gene Colombini X 13 1 Allan Levin X 12 2 Michael McAuliffe X 14 Jim McIntosh X 12 2 John Vuksic X 12 2 Also Present Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Development Eric Ceja, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner Heather Buck, Assistant Planner Pedro Rodriguez, Code Compliance Supervisor Janine Judy, Recording Secretary Cancelled meeting:2/9/16,3/8/16,5/24/16,6128/16 III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 23, 2016 and September 13, 2016 Action: Commissioner Levin moved to approve the August 23, 2016 meeting minutes. 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. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 27, 2016 Commissioner Clark moved to approve the September 13, 2016 meeting minutes with minor corrections. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Colombini and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES. V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 16-242 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CLAUDIO BRAVO, 72791 Willow Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to approve a garden wall 12' from curb. LOCATION: 72791 Willow Street ZONE: R-1, 12,000 Mr. Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner, presented a block wall exception for a 6' high wall 12' from back of curb verses 20' from back of curb. The property owner is asking for a 6' high wall because of the noise from Highway 74. He presented photos of the house and the site plan and pointed out where the block wall will be located along the frontage road. He presented photos of the neighbor's 6' high wall at 18' from back of curb. The wall will be stucco and painted to match the house. Chair Van Vliet asked if this was a modification to an existing wall permit. Mr. Swartz said when this originally came in, the plans showed a 5' high wall at 15' from back of curb which meets the code. However, the homeowner asked if there was a way they could get a little bit more room from the back yard. Chair Van Vliet asked if a 5Y2' wall would work. Mr. Swartz said they talked to the applicant and told them that at 12' from back of curb a 5' high wall would work but not a 6' high wall. At the time, the owner was okay with that but obviously they now want a 6' high wall. The Commission reviewed the request and felt this wasn't a compelling reason to grant the wall exception. They reviewed the space between the proposed wall location and the corner of the house and suggested pushing the wall back at that location. Commissioner Levin said a compromise would be to line it up to the neighbor's wall. Mr. Swartz said when they originally spoke with the applicant about lining it up with the neighbor's wall at 18' made sense and provided enough room. Commissioner McIntosh pointed out that the neighbor's GAPlanningUanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2016\160927min.docx Page 2 of 6 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 27, 2016 wall has pilasters incorporated into the design and suggested that the applicant add pilasters to give it some undulation every 30'. He said this wall will have a lot of exposure along Highway 74 and incorporating pilasters will give it some sort of interruption and not just a long flat stucco wall. Commissioner Levin said as part of the undulation, when you get close to the building corner you could have some movement in the wall. Commissioner Clark asked if this should be continued to allow the applicant to respond to the Commission's concerns. Mr. Swartz suggested making a recommendation. Commissioner Vuksic moved to approve subject to: 1) a 6' high wall 18' from back of curb and providing a pilaster pattern every 30'; and 2) enclosing the property from the street on the southwest corner. Motion was seconded by Commissioner McAuliffe. At 12:50 p.m., the applicant, Mr. Daniel Martinez, contractor,joined the meeting. Commissioner Lambell reminded the Commission that a motion was on the floor. Chair Van Wet asked if there was any further discussion. Chair Van Vliet asked staff to explain the Commission's comments to the applicant and allow him to speak. Mr. Swartz explained what was discussed regarding the proposed wall exception and said the Commission didn't see a compelling reason why it had to be so close to the curb. The Commission recommended lining up this wall with the adjoining property to the south; 18' from back of curb. MR. DANIEL MARTINEZ, contractor, asked if they could do a 5' high wall at 12' from back of curb. Mr. Swartz said at 5' it would have to be 15' from back of curb. MR. BRAVO said the way this is situated the frontage is at an angle towards the house so in the back it's not an issue, but once it gets to the front even at 15' it is only a few feet away from the corner of the house. He thought 12' from back of curb is ideal but going to 18' to match the neighbor didn't make sense for this house. Commissioner Lambell said the Commission and staff spent almost 25 minutes talking about this project before the applicant arrived. She stated there was a motion on the floor and suggested that the Commission vote. If it's not acceptable to the applicant, then he can come back to the next meeting with changes. She stated that since the applicant was late, they couldn't start the discussion all over. MR. MARTINEZ apologized for being late and explained that the wall, as presented today, has been sitting in Building for over a year and his client has been waiting. He explained that he was prepared to build the wall at the 12' setback since that was how it was presented to him a year ago. Commissioner Lambell said the Commission doesn't see a GAPIanningUanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2016\160927min.docx Page 3 of 6 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 27, 2016 compelling reason to grant the wall exception for such a tall wall that close to Highway 74. Commissioner Clark said if you want a month's continuance to work something out and bring it back that would work. However, at this time the motion is 18' from back of curb and according to code it should be 20' from back of curb. Mr. Swartz said the property owner could do a 5' high wall at 15' from back of curb per the code. MR. MARTINEZ asked the Commission to approve a 5' high wall at 15' from back of curb and then if the homeowner still wants a higher wall, then they will come back to the next Commission meeting. Commissioner Vuksic revised his motion to continue and Commissioner McIntosh made the second. ACTION: Commissioner Vuksic moved to continue Case MISC 16-242 subject to: 1) a 6' high wall 18' from back of curb; 2) aligning the wall with the adjacent property; 3) undulation every 30'; OR comply with the standards of a 5' high wall 15' from back of curb and approved by planning staff. Motion was seconded by Commissioner McIntosh and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Vliet and Vuksic voting YES. 2. CASE NO: MISC 16-256 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): H5 CAR WASH ENTERPRISES, LLC. 72880 Dinah Shore Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration to approve a revision to the building paint color scheme and install a new vacuum system and associated shade canopies; Grand Prix Car Wash. LOCATION: 72880 Dinah Shore Drive ZONE: P.C.-(3), F.C.O.Z. Ms. Heather Buck, Assistant Planner, presented a paint color revision, installation of a new vacuum system and shade canopy for the Grand Prix Car Wash. This car wash has been in existence at this location for approximately 20 years and several years back they installed a single 40' by 40' royal blue shade canopy that exists today. The owner would like to keep up with current trends in the industry by installing the vacuum system, the individual shade canopies, as well as updating the outside of the building. The existing building is tan with a red accent band and the proposed colors would be tan with a royal blue GAPlanningUanineJudyWRC\1Minutes\2016\160927min.docx Page 4 of 6 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 27, 2016 accent band to match the shade canopy. The existing shade canopy will be removed and site work will allow for a new access lane. Staff is recommending approval of these improvements. The Commission reviewed the plans and MS. SUE FOX, owner, explained the access into the facility, the self-serve process and the new detailing area. ACTION: Commissioner Levin moved to approve as presented. Motion was seconded by Commissioner McAuliffe and carried by an 8-0 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe, McIntosh, Van Wet and Vuksic voting YES. Commissioner McIntosh left at 1:10 p.m. Commissioner Vuksic recused himself from this project and left the room. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP/CUP 16-178 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MARLORKAND LLC, 72960 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Consideration of preliminary approval of a 2,300 square foot building for a veterinarian facility; Barkingham Palace. LOCATION: 73650 Dinah Shore Drive ZONE: S.I. Mr. Kevin Swartz, Associate Planner, presented for preliminary approval a 2,300 square foot building for a veterinarian facility for Barkingham Palace. He explained that Barkingham Palace will be relocating off of Spyder Circle and Dinah Shore Drive (Dinah Shore) to a vacant lot on Dinah Shore. The proposed 20,000 square foot building design received preliminary approval from the Architectural Review Commission meeting and the Planning Commission. Part of that site plan included future plans for a 2,300 square foot pad for a veterinarian building which is being presented today. He passed around color elevations and stated all materials will match the approved building. Staff is recommending approval. The Commission reviewed the plans. GAP1anning\JanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2016\160927min.docx Page 5 of 6 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES September 27, 2016 ACTION: Commissioner Lambell moved to approve. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Clark and carried by a 6-0-1-1 vote, with Clark, Colombini, Lambell, Levin, McAuliffe and Van Vliet voting YES with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioner McIntosh absent. C. Miscellaneous Items: None. VI. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES UPDATE — Commissioner Vuksic —September 14, 2016 The Palm Springs Art Museum in Palm Desert will have a new exhibition starting on November 4 of the Kaplan-Ostergaard collection, guided tours of the Sculpture Garden on Wednesday mornings, Day of the Dead event on November 4, lecture series (sponsored. by the Sandpiper El Paseo community), and Galen First Fridays (November through May). Eye on the Desert interviewed artist Susan Smith Evans whose work is currently in the Community Gallery and El Paseo is preparing for new exhibits in the median. Vil. COMMENTS The Commission asked that applicants provide accurate and up to date exhibits and drawings for the packets. Vill. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Vuksic moved to adjourn the Architectural Review Commission meeting at 1:30 p.m. ERIC CEJA PRINCIPAL PLAN R SECRETARY J N JUDY E DING ECRETARY GAPlanningUanineJudy\ARC\1Minutes\2016\160927min.docx Page 6 of 6