The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About285C FRANK GOODMANJuly 28, 1986 Ga�fy� oil 1F'3DL=M =X90=(�210127, 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of landscape plan. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission approved as revised. Date of Action: July 22, 1986 Vote: Carried 4-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstaining) (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.) STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22, 1986 LOCATION: Country Club Drive east of Monterey Avenue. ZONE: Mr. Drell explained that the applicant was requesting final approval of a senior project. He indicated that the project is approved through the state and that this commission is to review architecture and landscaping. Chairman Gregory noted that the landscaping needed to be revised because of the usage of undesirable plants in certain areas. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant final approval subject to a final landscape plan being approved by the commission. Carried 5-0 3. CASE NO: 304 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HARRY SCHMITZ, P.O. Box 3992, Palm Desert, CA 92261. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of six unit senior project and carports. LOCATION: 44-620 San Rafael ZONE: R-3 S.O. Mr. Cook presented a plan which showed flat roofed carports that planning commission required and requested final approval. It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant final approval subject to final landscape plan approval prior to building permit issuance. Carried 470-1 (Commissioner Cook abstaining). 4. CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS). FRANK GOODMAN, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of landscape plan. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 7 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22. 1986 Final landscape plans were submitted and final approval requested. Commissioner Martin asked what the large hole at the corner of the building was used for. Mr. Oliphant indicated that it was a night deposit for General Escrow. Commissioner Martin noted that the night deposit area was blocked by landscaping. Mr. Gregory stated that they had planted as much as possible by deleting five parking spaces and adding landscaping. Commissioner Martin felt that the plan had been improved considerably. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to approve the plan as revised (landscaping removed from front of night deposit area). Carried 4-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstaining). S. WILLIAM KASPER AWNING Mr. Weller explained that the awning had not been installed according to the approved plans. He noted that commission should review the awning and determine what should be done. Commissioner Martin felt that the awning should be installed the way it was approved by the commission. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Cook to require that the awning be removed entirely and patch holes in sidewalk or install as approved by this commission. Carried 5-0 V. ADJOURNMENT• The meeting was adjourned at 3:05 p.m. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /dig 9 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 July 1, 1986 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN & DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT• Final approval of landscape plans. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 ------------ Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission returned this case back to the applicant for restudy. Date of Action: June 24, 1986 Vote: Carried 5-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.) STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JUNE 24, 1986 111. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN 8 DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of landscape plans. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 Chairman Gregory felt that the plan was inadequate as submitted. Commissioner Cook noted that the parking area needed some planting and trees. Mr. Goodman indicated that the project me t code require- ments and that he has put as much landscaping as possible. Chairman Gregory was concerned with the freestanding curb at the end parking stall and the landscape plan. He felt it was dangerous and should be removed and possibly replaced with additional landscaping. Mr. Smith explained that the applicant has already received a parking adjustment. Commission recommended moving the handicap parking space to the rear parking area and putting two spaces at the east parking area with additional landscaping in the rear area to replace the freestanding curb. It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Holden to return this case to the applicant for restudy of the following. 1. Revised landscape plan to be submitted. 2. Remove freestanding curb and replace with additional planting with the handicap parking space to be located at the rear area. Carried 5-0 3 April 1, 1986 oil 2:E � 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN & DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission approved this case subject to conditions. Date of Action: March 25, 1986 Vote: Carried 5-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.) STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION MARCH 25. 1986 III. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 284 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DEEP CANYON BUILDING PARTNERS, P.O. Box 258, Palm Desert, CA 92260; RICHARD DODD 8 ASSOCIATES, 201 Shipyard Way, Berth A, Cabin F, Newport Beach, CA 92663. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of plans for 12,700 square foot office condominium. LOCATION: South side Palm Desert Drive (Highway 111) approximately 210 feet east of Panorama Drive. ZONE: C-1 S.P. Mr. Smith indicated that there was concern over the roof mounted equipment being adequately screened. Commissioner Holden thought that they hadn't raised the parapet so that it would screen the roof mounted equipment. Moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Martin to grant approval subject to the roof mounted equipment being adequately screened and a final landscape plan being approved. Carried 5-0 2. CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN 8 DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 Mr. Smith indicated that the concerns of the commission in study session were that the wood should be changed to either redwood or cedar, color board of building colors should be supplied, street trees should be added on Alessandro and a final landscape plan needs to be submitted. 3 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION -MARCH 25. 1986 Mr. Goodman indicated that a color board had been submitted which showed the building to be a sand color. He questioned the amount of trees wanted on Alessandro. Mr. Smith indicated that they were generally 25' on center which would require four trees on Alessandro. Commissioner Martin suggested that the street trees be pulled out to the curb instead of placed in the center of the sidewalk. Commission discussed the location of the trees and thought that staff should work with the public works department on the placement of the trees. Moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Cook to approve this case subject to the following conditions. 1. The wood on the building be either redwood or cedar. 2. Addition of street trees on Alessandro (approx. four). 3. That the trees be pulled out to the curb with the location being approved by staff and the public works department. 3. CASE NO: 283 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ROBERTSON HOMES, 1003 Cooley Drive, Suite 102, Colton, CA 92324. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of plans for a 220 unit apartment project and perimeter landscaping. LOCATION: Northeast corner of Cook Street and Fred Waring Drive. ZONE: PR-7 Mr. Rick Churchill explained the project and pointed out some changes that had been made. Commissioner Martin questioned the solar protection that would be provided for the first floor windows of the two story units. He felt that there should be additional protection added. Mr. Moll, architect, indicated that there would be dual pain windows with mini blinds which meet title 24 regulations. He suggested that he use solar screens or have three -pain windows. 4 AGENDA ITEM NO. III-A-2 DATE: MARCH 25, 1986 ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION CASE NO• 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN & DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 DISCUSSION• January 28, 1986 commission granted preliminary approval subject to the fascia being revised as indicated in the attached minutes. Commission should review the plans to assure adequate implementation of the condition of preliminary approval. At the time of writing this report a final landscape plan was not available. It should be available by meeting time and review then. RECOMMENDATION: That the commission review the request for final approval of Case No. 285 C and determine acceptability. SRS/dlg A. -",MINUTES--_...__.— -- ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 28, 1986 Mr. Smith indicated plans considerably site plan problems. that the applicant had revised the previous and that staff was working with them on the Commissioner Cook stated that he liked the bottom of the building but thouaht that there might be some maintenance problem with the redwood. Mr. Frank Goodman indicated that the tenant of the building will also be the owner and that he would keep the redwood looking good. Commissioner Martin stated that he would like to see something with an edge with redwood in the middle with the redwood running horizontally not diagonally. The redwood should be cut down. Commissioner Cook was concerned with the possibility of a sign being placed on the parapet. Mr. Goodman indicated that the sign would be placed on the wall and not on the parapet. Commissioner Cook felt that the wood should be continued completely around the building and thought that if the redwood were horizontal it would make the building sleeker. Moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant preliminary approval subject to the fascia being revised to be approximately two feet of stucco with three feet of redwood and stucco above the redwood with the stucco being recessed a minimum of four inches and to continue around the building. Carried 4-0 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. D 8 A SHADE COMPANY for Savene Commissioner Cook indicated that the commission needs a scale elevation drawing and a location drawing to show how the awning will look on the building. He felt that the two awnings were inconsistent with each other and not appropriate for the building. Chairman Gregory stated that he would have to see a more deta i 1 ed drawing before granting approval. Moved .by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Cook to continue this case to allow the applicant time to resubmit additional drawings. Carried 4-0 E7 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 February 5. 1986 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO• 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN & DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT• Preliminary architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission granted preliminary approval subject to conditions. Date of Action: January 28, 1986 Vote: Carried 4-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.) ------------------------------------------------------ STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 28, 1986 Commission had concerns with the roof mounted equipment being adequately screened. Mr. Rylee indicated that it would be placed behind the raised roofs. Mr. Smith indicated that the applicant was aware of the commission's concerns and that he should address those at the time of final working drawing submittal. Moved by Commission Martin, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant preliminary approval. Carried 2-0-2 (Commissioner Cook and Chairman Gregory abstaining). 2. CASE NO• 286 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): IW-NINE/BOB ORR, 198 Madrid Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary plans for a 6,000 square foot industrial building. LOCATION: South side of Mediterranean. ZONE: S.I. Commissioner Martin indicated that he had no problem with the building. Chairman Gregory stated that the landscape plan should be similar to the adjacent building. Commission expressed concern with the roof mounted equipment being adequately screened. Moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Cook to grant preliminary approval. Carried 4-0 3. CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN 8 DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. MATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 11 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 28, 1986 Mr. Smith indicated that the applicant had revised the previous Plans considerably and that staff was working with them on the site plan problems. Commissioner Cook stated that he liked the bottom of the building but thought that there might be some maintenance problem with the redwood. Mr. Frank Goodman indicated that the tenant of the building will also be the owner and that he would keep the redwood looking good. Commissioner Martin stated that he would like to see something with an edge with redwood in the middle with the redwood running horizontally not diagonally. The redwood should be cut down. Commissioner Cook was concerned with the possibility of a sign being placed on the parapet. Mr. Goodman indicated that the sign would be placed on the wall and not on the parapet. Commissioner Cook felt that the wood should be continued completely around the building and thought that if the redwood were horizontal it would make the building sleeker. Moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant preliminary approval subject to the fascia being revised to be approximately two feet of stucco with three feet of redwood and stucco above the redwood with the stucco being recessed a minimum of four inches and to continue around the building. Carried 4-0 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: I. D 3 A SHADE COMPANY for Savene Commissioner Cook indicated that the commission needs a scale elevation drawing and a location drawing to show how the awning will look on the building. He felt that the two awnings were inconsistent with each other and not appropriate for the building. Chairman Gregory stated that he wou 1 d have to see a more detailed drawing before granting approval. Moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Cook to continue this case to allow the applicant time to resubmit additional drawings. Carried 4-0 E AGENDA ITEM NO. 111-B-3 DATE: January 28, 1986 ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN & DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the Stars, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 BACKGROUND: The applicant was before commission at its last meeting, January 14, 1986, at which time his plans were not approved. The applicant revised his plans and was before planning commission January 21, 1986. Given lack of time to review the revised plans planning commission refused to act on the precise plan request. DISCUSSION: Staff still has some concerns with the site plan. The applicant has reduced the building area from 6300 square feet to 5875 square feet. ELEVATIONS: The proposed building elevations have been changed substantially. The building is still single story and 18 feet in height, but it now includes a 6 foot high parapet which is to be finished in diagonally installed redwood. The lower portion of the building rather than providing straight wall surfaces will undulate with each wall face stepping in and out several times. This allows installation of additional landscaping. It should also be noted that all four sides have been treated in a similar fashion and thereby avoid the appearance of the back of a building. LANDSCAPING: The site plan delineates areas to be landscaped. One of the earlier concerns of commission was the lack of landscaping in parking areas. This is still a concern of staff in that only 111E of the parking area is in landscaping whereas the code requires a minimum of 15%. This matter will be considered by planning commission at its February 4, 1986 meeting. CONCLUSION: The site plan has not been firmly established and it may be subject to further revision. The purpose of having the matter before commission at this time is to obtain comments on(the revised elevation. If the revised elevations are acceptable then a preliminary approval should be given to the elevations only. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 14, 1986 B. Preliminary Plans: I. CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN 8 DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 Chairman Gregory indicated that there would have to be a substantial upgrade in every aspect before he would approve this project. He thought with the way Alessandro is being developed they should make this area an attractive asset to the city. Commissioner Cook agreed with Chairman Gregory and noted that there was an opportunity to upgrade this area and the city standards. The building needs to be more interesting. Commissioners' McCrea and Drury agreed. Mr. Goodman asked if the commission was trying to make this a more expensive building. Commissioner Martin explained that he had seen this building design before and that he did not like to see the same design more than once. He noted the commission did not want him to spend more money, but that they preferred something different on this site, something more attractive to a renter. He also suggested that additional planting be used and even that the building be two story. Commissioner Martin thought that all four elevations did not have to be the same, that there could be some variation. Mr. Goodman indicated that this will be a one tenant building and that the tenant can not go two stories for his use. He thought that the only thing that might need to be changed was the fascia. He noted that the building is attractive and clean looking. Commissioner Drury stated that the fascia and the colors of the building were her concerns. Commissioner Martin suggested that they orient the entrance to the parking lot where people would be entering from. Mr. Goodman replied that people would be entering from all sides of the building and that is why all four elevations are the same, so there is an 6 r MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 14, 1986 entrance on each side. Commissioner Martin indicated that the building being to its maximum on the lot was not a concern with him. Commissioner Cook questioned the intent on the corner of the building. He thought the building was cumbersome, boring and brutal. He noted there was no relief for landscaping on two elevations and that he thought this building was too much for the site. Moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Drury to continue this case for restudy of the architecture of the building. Motion Carried 4-0. IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. APPEAL BY_RALPH MOOD REGARDING FENCE AT 72-890 AMBER COURT Mr. Smith indicated that this item had been to this commission in November as an add on item. At that time commission stated that with some minor changes the fence would be acceptable. Mr. Wood thought that he should come back to this commission and state his case. Mr. Smith indicated that Mr. Wood was asking for a continuance because he could not attend this meeting. Mr. Milo Pizula, property owner at 72-890 Amber Court, presented pictures and explained that his intent was to provide privacy for his yard. He indicated that he had a permit to install the fence and that he did everything he was supposed to do. Mr. Weller noted that the permit was issued in error without planning department approval. Chairman Gregory indicated that he would have required that the fence be terraced. Mr. Pizula stated that it is 5 feet from the wall. Mr. Pizula indicated that the appellant suggested that he install planting in the drainage easement area, which the city does not allow. He also noted that the appellant's attorney sent them a letter asking them to cover the metal posts that were originally in the fence area, which they immediately covered upon the request. Commissioner Martin noted that the commission had looked at this and given suggestions as to how to solve this problem. One was to add planting on the Deep Canyon parkway because of the additional space on that side of the wall. Mr. Drell indicated that the city could 7 r 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 January 17, 1986 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN 8 DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 Upon reviewing the submitted plans and presentations by staff and by the applicant, the architectural commission continued this case. Date of Action: January 14, 1986 Vote: Carried 4-0 (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.) STAFF COMMENTS: Please read the attached minutes. i MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 14, 1986 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN 8 DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States. Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 Chairman Gregory indicated that there would have to be a substantial upgrade in every aspect before he wou 1 d approve this project. He thought with the way Alessandro is being developed they should make this area an attractive asset to the city. Commissioner Cook agreed with Chairman Gregory and noted that there was an opportunity to upgrade this area and the city standards. The building needs to be more interesting. Commissioners' McCrea and Drury agreed. Mr. Goodman asked if the commission was trying to make this a more expensive building. Commissioner Martin explained that he had seen this building design before and that he did not like to see the same design more than once. He noted the commission did not want him to spend more money, but that they preferred something different on this site, something more attractive to a renter. He also suggested that additional planting be used and even that the building be two story. Commissioner Martin thought that all four elevations did not have to be the same, that there could be some variation. Mr. Goodman indicated that this will be a one tenant building and that the tenant can not go two stories for his use. He thought that the only thing that might need to be changed was the fascia. He noted that the building is attractive and clean looking. Commissioner Drury stated that the fascia and the colors of the building were her concerns. Commissioner Martin suggested that they orient the entrance to the parking lot where people would be entering from. Mr. Goodman replied that people would be entering from all sides of the building and that is why all four elevations are the same, so there is an 6 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 14, 1986 entrance on each side. Commissioner Martin indicated that the building being to its maximum on the lot was not a concern with him. Commissioner Cook questioned the intent on the corner of the building. He thought the building was cumbersome, boring and brutal. He noted there was no relief for landscaping on two elevations and that he thought this building was too much for the site. Moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Drury to continue this case for restudy of the architecture of the building. Motion Carried 4-0. IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. APPEAL BY.RALPH MOOD REGARDING FENCE AT 72-890 AMBER COURT Mr. Smith indicated that this item had been to this commission in November as an add on item. At that time commission stated that with some minor changes the fence would be acceptable. Mr. Wood thought that he should come back to this commission and state his case. Mr. Smith indicated that Mr. Wood was asking for a continuance because he could not attend this meeting. Mr. Milo Pizula, property owner at 72-890 Amber Court, presented pictures and explained that his intent was to provide privacy for his yard. He indicated that he had a permit to install the fence and that he did everything he was supposed to do. Mr. Weller noted that the permit was issued in error without planning department approval. Chairman Gregory indicated that he would have required that the fence be terraced. Mr. Pizula stated that it is 5 feet from the wall. Mr. Pizula indicated that the appellant suggested that he install planting in the drainage easement area, which the city does not allow. He also noted that the appellant's attorney sent them a letter asking them to cover the metal posts that were originally in the fence area, which they immediately covered upon the request. Commissioner Martin noted that the commission had looked at this and given suggestions as to how to solve this problem. One was to add planting on the Deep Canyon parkway because of the additional space on that side of the wall. Mr. Drell indicated that the city could 7 AJ AGENDA ITEM NO. III=13-2 DATE: January 14, 1986 ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FRANK GOODMAN 8 DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the Stars, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary architectural review of commercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 DISCUSSION: The property is a 100 by 150 foot lot at the southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. The proposed building is designed with a single tenant to occupy its total 6298 square feet. The building Is oriented to the San Pablo Alessandro intersection with parking provided to the rear of the alley and to the east. ELEVATIONS: The proposed building is similar in style to some recently constructed, on Highway III east of Portola. These buildings have been found to be not unacceptable. The single story building will be a maximum of )8 feet. Extensive glazing is provided In the street elevations Ile: north and west). This could create some solar protection problems although the roof section does overhang this glazed area by 4 feet. This overhang takes the form of a 4 foot by 4 foot high deep stucco fascia. SIGN: The ,elevations indicated that two 2 foot by 5 foot (10 square foot) wall mounted signs' are proposed for both street elevations. These signs will be reviewed in further detail when received. LANDSCAPING: Landscaped areas have been shown on the site plan. Landscaping is to be in the 5 foot setback adjacent to the two streets and within the parking lot area. A preliminary planting plan should be provided delineating materials to be Installed as well as sizes, ground cover and shrubs. The landscape plan delineates the necessary parking lot screen wall along the north property line. STAFF REPORT 285 C RECOMMENDATION: That the request for preliminary approval of plans for a 6,298 square foot commercial building, Case No. 285 C, be approved subject to the following conditions: /dlg I. Construction plans shall be submitted for approval to the city fire marshal prior to issuance of building permits. All conditions shall be made a part of construction and no certificate of occupancy shall be issued until completed. 2. Final construction drawings, including a final landscaping, grading, lighting, amenities, trash storage, walkway layout, irrigation plans and sign program shall be submitted to the architectural commission. No final inspection or occupancy permit shall be given by the department of community development to this project until the aforementioned approved plans and construction shall have been completed. 2 co" (OF PALM BET'Hu 73 __J Fred Waring Drive (Pa1m Z's,,aP`ue FCRH R AOiFU=CH F-CA wH : d3car:-m3=1 L-1 K 600JDA44N l64iJfF1 iNS 77- goo Appc &AAF STATES Mmlmq Andreas f REQUEST: (0e=1D0 scsclflc nature at aovm ct mqu"led). PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: T u Si ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. rGZ7- /SZ - O/7 EXISTING ZONING C Le ;)R. 34s-- 262c, lelspnans 9t! too PropMy Omer AUMOn2aflan TM uncerugnea star" rnci rney am re, timer W at Me praoemY a"cncsa nemin anti nera0 for tee Qnq at mis amicoilon. Y 97va au ......"' """'^^-v ^.e . 'y a m vesm? at all I100111n" Mimi" ra arty Cleo restnCtlans. I 00 eY MY SIGNA7uRfpN �THIS AGREEMENT, Ati a TM ClDesert It of Palm Dof all I)o0llltl" mgarcing any deed ra=cr _O / _ i� that MY De cca=cle sa the property desonDed Herein. Applicants Slgrtmun (FOR S7AFF USE ONLY) Emn ❑ Ministertal Am Q Categoncat E:empnon ❑ Negative Oeccrmton ❑ Other Status E.A. No. care Oat Acapted Dyt cQar;= 1Voa br�<'i Reference Case No. 0 = V W a N . _.. 4. 03NO3HO -mod NMdaa ,0 ;04 =„4 3lt/OS 3.Lva SN01SIA3H�/ OL98 M3awnN 80f U T a Z W 0 W J 0 Z 2 J PIT w z NVId ':DNI1HJIi V S11d13a V NV Id DNI1NV Id J d F Z W_ cr cn wp z FO-I ¢ Xw U W z ¢ X H 3 U N 6 -s 3m ce ¢ I O ¢ O ta. -ZT3 w q ¢ c c� w O C1 G c� z - H 0 E I u 0 H H a w z ¢ o_ �] Cn U I q I O H 07 ¢ ] H HH .a.a a as wW O U CO E PQ m W H H p w q xX xx a, a 0 p insU) a E a o I x a z W U H C U] 3 C H O GH W U p H U i £ - O w W O W W a w z r OI �cw7] Z O ON w H .¢ 3 3 H E v p O a xa w z zc~i� O p H Z w M .>-1 z F F-I P+ En7 � �UW71 .G- x 0 p 3 0 a H 3 a U H U L U u � Nw z ao. ¢z �s a>.o 0 �_y CD Z L.L V] F C En d w I-I C�. .H-1 w p ¢ w0 E O U0.01 Fz P. _ _ E a a m _ H H 6 o � PIZ Vqa w W W cn W O of w z a a O >e W w U Z S E¢ E. • n Q wE. =cc) UUU E F-A a H Ix -I C7 P` o 0 H F cn IEzE-,,I ¢¢ W �U,) �(n U) �a a: z CEng HH0.' .]0 011 -I -ecn .7Zw 6U< O F• O W GE-F J Q 0 N _ r co rn F O p z I w w p rn � a Iz-I z w W F¢a-a. V7 0 CD C-7 z >+ ¢F+ z z cnH W Fl F7 z O q w H ZC P: G > z prw w H wFx ¢ O r; Cl U ¢ P. ¢ rH-1 .F-1 FF CU-1 x U aww w aps w E wqq UWG a. ZWH O x ¢ O c FF W Fz W CD OU ¢ H w w¢ z O W W WO H E C z w U 0 F�� E Ea p w>Fi a w O w•...owE- ¢ wx0 w 0¢ x p U 3 w a o nwH oa PO z zcUqi� w OU z a 6 r 7 U Q o w Oa O H x O W W IF -I ¢< x cnF cn 11 pP'�..w EE-�cn6 [H 0 0.w1 N �U77Q >-. 0 O W x� F .�-7 q�q CJ cn U R] O F Z I¢ -I -3-3 F 2 W IF -I 0 W F O w O a W x U C4 w � W Z V 7 W a w H H C W w- w x -IFH w �ww w ¢o z¢ w5a. z Z WEwF N wW ¢EO-EW wZOW �••, H q CL ✓ EU`° 5¢ q H H D4 F W 04 H U w a J >• w¢ = H q O F H > .] .2 O¢ tiF .7 O ¢ ¢F3 Ecn 2zw ¢F .]Cl `r zw .adL1. E cn F cnEw xcn U¢ -� p0'H ¢cpn Ui <Pa.6 H Fz-iZF -3u a z W a W J _Z F- z a J a VAL: [slid a a ¢ o w F c ¢ w w � U U U CC O O O O 0� C N 01 6� H a @J @J CP Q fA W C1 .-7 Q ¢ F Vl V] F WI c� o cFF c N - c c - - coU �c� U ¢¢¢p¢ V1 00 [n if1 O"ww[n O' i-. -7 �- O, cl cn r itl - r 0 U N F _� H'7 C7mH N I 2 O Ln W 0. W V O 0 rG z ¢ O W cn > ¢ w H a W z C4 C4 C4 W ¢- 0 ww W pZ w z ¢ W O C/I W W c¢i) z xw w rxaawwo > O O CIU= UUU F.aw ZHU ¢O ¢ ODUZcc i CD C4 HC4H HQC4 W> zH,w C.7 V]HHIW C4 W Xw X qF ¢ W W 6q-1 ¢ C4 C4 ¢ a O ¢ > w > W W ¢ C4 C4 C4 Z w O W w W W U U W '-' W4 Y- C: 0Hr. u0 w cn¢¢x> F H q w W w Pi U O z cn F w z HH O a ¢- a p z z H H O - 0 W F H 0. W O C4 H> V H ] 6 U F F W W W w ¢ in cnw a. In z r¢H ¢ W a :D E,¢¢ OHEUz ..] W W F F� W or HH �Ho UHCG HErx¢a,JpH - U z cjq¢H OWz W �Fp HOu ZF zH cn W q> [, OP4 G V] x 6 X H ¢ U- Z ul W �l O H i H¢z •ww QHa W� W 1 ¢ 230 a.¢w0. H a. O- W 0. ¢ H (n O¢ E 00 W W¢ > U [O U ZZ-) V1 X u a¢ V] ¢ H o z z z W 0. .a Y� 0 F H ,] H H g z z E H H C/] H 6 rn V] O H ¢ H W ¢ ¢ z z H W ¢ ¢ F cam¢ < C4 [4 VI NN WCC O w cuw a.R.s W UozC��xE w ¢� z w o 1-0 w O 0 H q z w w I w I a O 3 C4 v100¢Xc 2F00. n F Uw W 0.0.a: n UUq W O7 C4F PW u ¢UU W> z '- EO-H Z tt H z w w C I _ x Z w ¢ w' q H O E ¢ W L w v] U ¢ 0 x O W q ¢ 0. a C4 ¢ H O E. 3 E ¢ W a: w v] 4V1 w G w C C W 6.] Im W U O E. w cn z ¢ cn o w z o z Hce cG fc U o - a wH we zo ¢ ¢ cn U V p U p O c4 ¢ >• > O z H O W q a: -C Z¢rk F zw ¢CG t w i -1 W O p 0 Z >+ C4 U p 0. F z O .] w Cl P.' Cl H w Z d W O zw x cc xc -cc xw a Wp ¢Z w a EW cn Do P;F W U xZ Ep y� JZ -4 9-1F Cl Fw Zz Q. Vn -4 G O¢ O¢ x a E i ¢ w Z W Z au W O z 0 0 W w L x H x Hx > w H U Z .a w C O E w E E- U q • w `CD ¢ p ¢ W ¢ U ¢ O H p 0 F F qF wC - 0.H wU C) W 6 W p V] In FF w 00 O� ¢ -H CHE W > H QE,cn UU pC H H6 C70. O 0. ¢H Q �O 0 O0. cn ¢H QH w Q E Cw'.7] Z 06 W Ww z•-7 Hp Cn HpW w¢ cry ww a.o -4-1 cm HE a E ¢Z � H cnq cnw 0.3Z W v] Ew �aU H •--p_q z W W W C7 -H CG V] H V] a z } cn W q0 F-I U UF7 ¢m Hu FH urn'i{\Ljl E q U a CD zz z z w W wW Z q x .-] U v] 1-1 _2 p zw¢ x3 ¢¢ ¢ WECC cnW .aa..] 6q Z Ul p ¢ F En Z W W Z ¢F O E-p4cn 0 W¢ H w 2: ¢ H O r[�� W H p 1�A cn 0 cn EF i GFF .-] W HE0. V]rx ?a l U C4 W W = U 0 a. ¢ 0. E U U > q ¢� x UE E a.xa. > z¢� 0 z z • c w c4 cn CD = ¢ W w w x tn H W HE W 6 0..E OF Epw woF a•-, `"w Uw �w wFH'� c¢iv, doz ¢¢a r,�'}• C4 F W F 5 W W W W >¢ cn C Q E F U H C4 G = O 0.. 3w 0p FE £ mC0FE, F ' E, OU � I N cn � Ln � r dl �- 6 Elilae#4/ r4141i'l r- m i1 ZZ o N O Z O N� G7�a m WyJ YO Oa Z =W W O 0_== iVUa Fwz w >. CZ ILY& F-�U mLLw N003 oyf 4f OWN �o z3a IND ZWc i ..0-.8 N U W a CO W N J m 2 lL z W x ~ Wo 05 G Z = J = a3a J W y aai F• Y_W F- WO Q 3 m� O x W a i LL LLi N fQ^ V Z Y U) -- - W W w N 4L� J Q ..0 -.3 W P'I W Y cn a ,,vO,ju.dszju n ivd 440E Ava O'd L 9ZZ6 �: P� : I 0 3 1 H 0 H V NO.LX3S '3 INVIIIIM NVWOOOO NNVH I S H . 11=1=11 do onou :S83NMO 'VO '183S3G W-lVd '*3AV O'lElVd NVS 006tpV ONiaiins MOHOS3' IV83N39 S99Z9vE f6t9� j l9Z "VO 1a3S30 WIVd LLOZ Y06 "O'd i N Y W a O O o N N d a J T S H 1 1 0 3 1 1 H 0 H V NOlX3S "3 INVIIIIM L u:jiao onoa :Sa3NMO -v3 `1anm Wldd "3Ad OlaVd NVS 006VV JNlaiins M08OS3 IVU3N3t9 �ezas`; IBM 9AOU91 o x o a ioor* 1 3 1 I H 3 d V NOlX3S '3 WVIIIIM m VINUOdildO `1a3S3(3 Wltld "3Ad SOlEIdO NVS JLV 3AIHG OaNVSS3ld NVYYCOOO )INVU=l V SH11=I=IIH0 onoo ao� JNIamline 331330 / IVIOE13WWOO d .. ..-... ._.•au_ nw..............w-....r...._-.y..-•..:..r�..•.-..�:.u.._..-.-w��.r...-r.-.....-.-..«....-.......:�_-�-.-._. _..._-_r+. 4._. ...-.<m..:.-__.._ _ a.^._r,.. _..^ws....u.•+:-.�-rwomr y... e_........-..n-....-�.....�__...+rv....._.-..... �_�--..-.._._.... __.- ...-_-. .y.-_ _,.rw._. S99Z'94£ 16t91 ]i] L9Z 't101kl3S30Wltld LLOZXOS'O'd 1 NdWa00J �Nd�� SH 1 I��I�0 r.�n®a •V./ `1>:13S3a Wlt/d `'3Ab' OIBt/d Nb'S U06tib � � N - I W ' Y Y,■ V Y �7 i Y V 1 p 3 1 1 H 0 a d Q �'r W NOlX3S '3 WtfllllM I will5ti3NM0 I — � I (1) ` L __._ _ _ r a. __.. _ __.___—_ _ _..a.._ ._ — -• . _ _.__.._ _ _ . _.___ _... _ __ ._..... _.____. _.____ ____ _—__.__T___ ___ __ - - .---. _ — _ .,___. .._—_a__...._ mod._ "3An 01epd NVS tic) -,oq, Av WIYM3615 'VNO� 5a,1!;1-R — t4 _ lu �j y Z pb X �fKm 71 iWM3tl15 "VN0.') Ma N. v+ 1--r U ti W vF :'. �'•. � �� 3 � � tp-'- i(1 �,1Nd'1d - =ai, I I _ 1{1 i- ` . 'C�iNldid nPS w: >1 L-�— b ei s. k 0 V \u 'o Z of E boo1� kA O us C I'• -- I'ai . y f I Z19 2. S W -a CO _z fy cc V. J k I a I ~ I I w gI f i i odoen co { p N C1 N W1� 4 G 1A s V 01, o u ff' " ° v on J - C -,n t TT 4 u 9 O W mrno c(j �•. r BE C a h. 0 a p U vIE „cv c' ^� vOi n u yUl, to, c m -= a C Q c e=8'� obot � 6 $0 r 'acE c� _rC,p aG @Q; Eu U m� c m x - p_ E $cl c k-tj i � o 0`:3— $ flu$ "$. o ° c y ` v� C�C 'C A O h0 pub' ,��, Ottoc� mE auvE,b'n - R Ck. uQ� -•A um9"a L\t90 un uc u G� C .0. a u.u. C Q�ul 0 -06 C.,.. u g m� o 0,�t o r. ° yo e E o in ,orn VV r. av�7N d UO °p.$ya° q�,� N3 au � °U) a�G 27 2 E� u m E V J A a-5 ymaa a 3fn MMUL) 3 U)=z ^ �a'i L)in 0 w w of w z - - ' = m Ir — 41 I U Z i _ui oLL 1L I �' W -O i z z-1 . a I..F i w 'Ll- l ILA m r= z 9 7- ,. m -o 9 r I k I ¢ U Z I UT 4 m 1 I :3 o I I ! lip 971NV•77d ':;No7'llb 'AITMa415 li �• 2 cc - t:^ro'Z_e W Q I O J m!L z N W co 0 w 0 V'.a a aIOL a; ta- _ - U ' I TA rA Ul {v:34 111�•• 1• ,lO -,Sr „o f-/• ,.�,,S Y-= V s to: •,S „V •',;11 „C ,G ,•/ U � _ I (. 17vdwoo I I i a NEL r 'I I n o o I•.' L i• r, � � J I v � 0 v cp qV t:F x • s'3 I pi L •.. 4, Q •- �? 1 N Vol _. '3 V r v , y z ul I I { u^i ift :iF -UL N 0 z w � I v 1 ul I >1 — Q o I s I I a � i t - _q U_ o W I 0 0 > -�ai { INV I { O I I I\ � I 4- 2 tD,INVo c -- 100 �d1^,n5 Nb�l��d t- 1 t• I F�� I 0 mo ac�z z� J n +� o�•nQ '� Cal 1,Lv _ N,w u �z � �V o M?k�.-. 'M -,w c