HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-8- ARC MinutesCITY OF PALM SPRINGS
ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Council Chamber, City Hall
3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2012
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Kleindienst called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m
ATTENDANCE -YTD
Present:
#
Absent: #
Total
William Kleindienst, Chair
X
14
5
19
James Harlan, Vice Chair
X
18
1
19
William Fauber
X
18
1
19
Gary Fredricks
X
14
6
19
Susan Secoy-Jensen
X
16
3
19
Randy Purnel
X
18
1
19
Paul Ortega
X
13
6
19
Dan Thompson
11
N/A
(Attendance record begins on January 2012 through the meeting of October 8, 2012.)
Planning Commission Members Present: Roberts
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of Minutes for meeting of September 24, 2012.
ACTION: Continued until next meeting.
REVISIONS TO AGENDA:
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Three (3) minute time limit per person on matters within the
jurisdiction of the Architectural Advisory Committee.
There were no public comments.
AGENDA ITEM #2: Case 3.1294 MAA — Casa de Frida Restaurant
Matt Naylor, owner requesting repaint of a restaurant building located at 450 South Palm
Canyon Drive, Zone CBD, Section 15. (GM)
Assistant Planner Mlaker presented the case stating.that the proposal includes a building
repaint to one main color "Big Country Blue", and two shades of orange for awnings and trim
with a green color for doors. The application also proposes the removal of a low wall to be
replaced with wrought iron fencing. The rear building will be painted white.
Matt Naylor, applicant, was present to answer questions and provide background information
regarding the inspiration for the bright colors.
Architectural Advisory Committee Meeting
Minutes of October 8, 2012
Member Fauber was seeking clarification on the exact location of the colors and asked if the
new railing will extend to the edge of the sidewalk. He asked if the trim around the doors
would be green.
Member Fredricks questioned the design of the proposed railing and if landscaping will be
planted at the base of the new railing. He stated that the proposed colors are bold and may
contrast with other adjacent buildings. The colors should be toned down to include a white
base and color trim.
Member Secoy-Jensen asked for clarification on the painting of the tiles and diamonds on
the side of the building including the type of exterior lighting. A detail of the railing should be
reviewed.
Vice Chair Harlan asked for the reasons for the front wall replacement and the proposal for
the rear buildings shutters and gates. He stated that the color choices are too bold; supports
the removal of the front wall.
Mr. Naylor responded that the removal of the front wall will open up the outdoor patio and the
rear shutters will be painted green.
Member Ortega is concerned with the proposed bright orange awning in combination with the
blue.
Member Purnel is concerned with the proposed colors.
Chair Kleindienst is concerned with the proposed bright colors; the base of the columns
should match and light fixtures should be reviewed.
AAC members offered the following comments and recommendations:
2.a Color choice to be toned down — mainly the use of blue and orange.
2.b Explore using a white base with color trim.
2c. Provide details of exterior lighting.
2d. Provide details of railing.
2e. Site plan showing location of railing and planter beds.
2f. New Column bases to match existing.
2g. Provide proposed treatment of colored concrete.
2h. Provide planting list for landscaped areas.
2i. Show proposed color for all sides of building.
ACTION: M/S/C (Secoy-Jensen, Harlan, 7-0) For re -study.
AGENDA ITEM #3: Case 3.3430 MAJ — Freedom Assembly
Freedom Assembly for the construction of a 3,840-square foot, single -story commercial
building at the southeast corner of El Dorado Boulevard and Tramview Road (4088 El
Dorado Boulevard), Zone C-1, Section 34. (DN)
N
Architectural Advisory Committee Meeting
Minutes of October S, 2012
Associate Planner Newell provided a presentation on the project and made note that the
proposed parking lot was not in conformance with the Zoning Code design standards. This
project is within the College Park Specific Plan Area.
Member Secoy-Jensen asked about the history of the projects submitted for this site.
Ms. Joset Roberts of Freedom Assembly explained the changes that have been made.
Member Fredricks questioned the need for an observation deck. The deck has not been
integrally designed with the proposed building and roofline. No shade trees are part of the
proposed plan, but need to be incorporated. Many of the plants listed on landscape plan are
not part of the species outlined in the College Park Specific Plan. He questioned the use of
white rock in the landscape plan.
Member Secoy-Jensen did not feel that the proposal was an acceptable architecture and that
the project was in conflict with the Specific Plan.
Member Fauber noted an issue with the proposed handicap parking design. On -site trash
disposal may also be an issue for waste disposal.
Member Ortega expressed his concerns with the flow of site movement. The building
entrances appear awkward due to their locations. It appears as though the building is office
spaces, not retail spaces.
Chair Kleindienst stated that this project is the first to be presented since the approval of the
Specific Plan and should be of high quality design to set the bar for future development in the
area. The proposal does not feel like a retail center. He is not in favor of parking adjacent to
the frontage road along Indian Canyon Drive. Design of trash enclosure is not in compliance
with the Specific Plan standards. The A/C units exposed on the side of building are
unacceptable. The applicant needs to provide a cohesive plan for the property and its
inclusion with the Specific Plan requirements.
Member Secoy-Jensen recommended the next proposal identify an architectural style.
Locate signs higher on building.
Chair Kleindienst mentioned bay parking pockets with integrated landscaping as an
alternative parking option.
AAC members offered the following comments and recommendations:
3.a Architectural plans need to be brought up to date;
3.b Parking (including handicap) needs to be designed to conform to Zoning Code
standards;
3.c Provide shading in parking areas;
3.d Include plant selections from Specific Plan guidelines;
Architectural Advisory Committee Meeting
Minutes of October 8, 2012
3.e Either remove observation deck from proposal or redesign so it does not appear as
an afterthought add -on;
3.f Define architectural design and include additional information on proposed materials.
ACTION: M/S/C (Fauber / Ortega, 6-0; 1 abstain Harlan) For re -study.
CHAIRMAN / COMMITTEE / STAFF COMMENTS: None.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further comments, the AAC meeting adjourned at 4:20 PM
r-award O. Robertson
Principal Planner
10