Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-02-22 � � MINU1'ES PALM DESERT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING "I'UESDAY - FEBRUARY 22, 1983 2:00 P.M. - CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS * * � � � � � -� � � � -� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � * � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � I• The meeting was called to order at 2;00 P.M., after a one hour study session. MEMBERS PRESENT: Vern Barton A1 Cook Ron Gregory Rick Holden Bernie Leung Charles Martin STAFF PRESENT: Ramon A. Diaz Stan Sawa Steve Smith Patricia Armitage On a motion by Mr. Cook, seconded by Mr. Holden, the minutes of the February 8, 1983, meeting were approved with the third paragraph of Case No. 157 C being corrected to read "that the parapets will be a minimum of two feet high and would continue levelly allowing the roof to slope to a maximum of six feet". Motion carried 4-0-2 (Mr. Martin and Mr. Leung abstained). At this point Mr. Cook requested that staff check the "Season's" restaurant sign to make sure it conformed with what the design review board had approved at its meeting of February 8, 1983. II• CASES APPROVED BY MINUTE MOT'ION: On a motion by Mr. Cook, seconded by Mr. Gregory, the following cases were approved by minute motion: 1• CASE NO: 188 MF (Amendment No. 1) APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PACIFIC COASr BUILDERS, INC., BALLEW AND ASSOCIATES, 18205 Sky Park East, Suite K, Irvine, CA 92714. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of plans for two new unit types. LOCATION: Northeast corner of Cook Street and Country Club. ZONE: PR-3 S.P. 2• CASE NO: 804 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): AFFILIATED CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260 and IMPERIAL SIGN COMPANY, 46-120 Calhoun Street, Indio, CA 92201. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of plans for a freestanding monolithic concrete monument sign. LOCATION: Southeast corner of Cook Street and Hovely Lane. ZONE: S.I. - S.P. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. - 1 - � � DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 22, 1983 III. CASES: Final drawings or items not requiring planning commission confirmation: 2. CASE NO: 802 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MARIO DELGUIDICE, 56-805 19 Palms Highway, Yucca Valley, CA 92284. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a sign program for a restaurant. LOCATION: Within Las Sombras Center - Northwest corner of Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive. ZONE: P.C. (4) S.P. Mr. Diaz indicated that this application was for approval of two signs reading "Pietro's"; one located at the front of the building facing the parking lot and one facing Highway 111. He added that the board's concerns at the study session were the kind of material used; whether both signs would be the same and that the graphics (a bottle of wine and pizza) shown on the sign were not appropriate. Mr. Romaine Mahan representing the sign company, replied that the graphics represent the restaurant's logo. Mr. Mario Delguidice the owner, indicated that he understood the board's concerns and was aware that other applicants faced restrictions for their signage but asked if it would be acceptable to have the graphics deleted on the sign facing Highway 111 and to retain the sign as presented (with the graphics) facing the parking lot. The board with the exception of Mr. Holden, felt this would be acceptable. Mr. Holden stated that the script and style of the sign was acceptable but felt the graphics were not appropriate and was afraid that this would set a precedent for this type of sign. Although Mr. Cook felt that Mr. Delguidice's proposal was acceptable, he too wished to make it clear that the sign should be approved as a one time situation. Mr. Gregory asked Mr. Delguidice how the sign would be lighted. Mr. Delguidice replied that it would have an enclosed fluorescent lighting system which would be hung from the top over the parapet. Mr. Leung suggested that it be hung suspended from the parapet wall. On a motion by Mr. Cook, seconded by Mr. Leung, the board approved the sign plans subject to the deletion of the graphic material from the sign facing Highway 111 with the sign facing the parking lot to remain as presented, the lighting of the sign to remain as submitted with the lighting source being at the base of the parapet. Motion carried 5-1 (Mr. Holden voted nay). - 2 - � � DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 22, 1983 4• CASE NO: SA 531, Amendment No. 1 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MILTON'S RESTAURANT, 73-030 El Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT': Additional business signage. LOCATION: 73-030 El Paseo, southwest corner of Highway 74 and Highway 111. ZONE: PC (3) S.P. Mr. Diaz stated that the applicant had returned with a plan drawn to scale as requested by the board at its meeting of February 8, 1983, and that the board had indicated at the study session that it felt the letters should be placed with a relief of an inch and a half to two inches between the wall and the letters and the color should be ivory. Addressing the board's concerns, Mr. Don Gittleson applicant, indicated that this would be acceptable but the letters would have to be painted ivory since they only come in white, red, black or green. On a motion by Mr. Holden, seconded by Mr. Gregory, the sign was approved subject to the letters being an ivory color and their being mounted one and a half to two inches from the wall. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. Preliminary plans requiring planning commission confirmation at its meeting of February 28, 1983: 1. CASE NO: 144 MF (AMENDMENT') APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, 45-445 Portola, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request for preliminary approval of revised unit plans for the final 35 lots in the Vineyards Tract. LOCATION: Krug and Masson Streets (i.e. Southwest corner of Portola and Rutledge Way. ZONE: R-1 Mr. Diaz indicated that this was a request from Lewis Homes to change the designs on the final thirty-five lots of their Vineyard Tract located westerly of Portola. As discussed during the study session, the existing Vineyard Development is completed to the west of the present units. He distributed copies of letters and a signed petition from many of the residents of the existing homes and summarized their concerns which he felt could be worked out with the developer. The board agreed that the new houses should be compatible with those already built; they felt that asphalt compound roofs would not be acceptable and questioned the reason for the three car garages. Bill Sullivan, Vice President of Lewis Homes replied that most people prefer a third garage for a workshop, or for recreational vehicles. It is a positive marketing aspect for the project. He did not foresee any problems with having the materials match the existing homes or with changing the roofs which he said were only used as a substitute for the shake roofs which the city does not allow. - 3 - � 1 . � � DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUT'ES FEBRUARY 22, 1983 CASE NO. 144 MF LEWIS HOMES (CONTINUED) Replying to Mr. Holden's question regarding whether the developer had any objection to making the walis match the existing ones, Mr. Sullivan replied that they would be willing to put in tie-in masonry walls if the board felt it would be preferable. Mr. Cook asked if Mr. Sullivan could present a color study which might help to lessen the impact of the garage doors and if they had extended the buildings to the sideyards as far as possible to extend the house. Mr. Sullivan replied that they would present a color study for the garage doors and then introduced Mr. Gayle Presswood, Architectural Coordinator for the development who indicated that there is some flexibility to slide the garage to its optimum to soften the board's concerns. Regarding the landscape plan, Mr. Sullivan indicated that it was prepared with the same guidelines as the existing pians. Chairman Barton asked if any of the residents would like to speak and reminded them that this was not a public hearing. Mr. David Schey, Mr. Lee Schmidt and Mr. Gordon Lewis all spoke in opposition to the plans as submitted. Their main concerns being the three car garages, the roofing material, the reduced size of the floor plans and the necessity in general for architectural compatibility of the homes. Mr. Lee Schmidt asked who in the city controls the overall development. Mr. Diaz replied that the city could not force a person to continue to build an identica! project to the one already built if it had proved financially unsuccessful. He added that in this case, the developer had not heard any complaints from the property owners about their homes and from Mr. Sullivan's statements it was felt that he would be in agreement to make the necesssary changes. On a motion by Mr. Cook, seconded by Mr. Leung, the application was denied and sent back for a restudy in order that the following concerns may be addressed: 1. Asphalt shingles shall not be used. 2. Overhangs shall be the same as those approved on Phase I units or greater. 3. Colors shall be the same as those of the existing Phase I units. 4. Tie-in masonry walls shall be provided as constructed in Phase I. 5. Front landscaping shall match the previously approved landscaping for Phase I. 6. Applicant will study three car garages as to color, location and design and attempt to lessen the impact. Motion carried 5-0-1 (Mr. Gregory abstained). - 4 - �rrr' '`� DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 22, 1983 2. CASE NO: 179 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CARLSON DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, P.O. Box 819, Anaheim, CA 92805. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGH?: Preliminary approval of plans for addition to Kentucky Fried Chicken. LOCATION: Highway 111 and Lupine ZONE: C-1 S.P. Mr. Diaz stated that this was a request to add indoor seating to a restaurant facility located at the Smith's Food King Shopping Center. He indicated to the applicant that the board upon revieweing the plans at the study session had been concerned with the appearance of the elevations in relation to the existing planter areas. Mr. Dave Carlson, Representative of the Carlson Design and Construction Company, replied that they would use the natural elevation to extend the front and the side but would work with the board with any landscape amenities. Mr. Holden indicated that their concern was that the grade change incorporate a step planter area. Mr. Carlson replied that this would be acceptable. Mr. Carlson indicated that the tile presently used on the roof had been discontinued and they would like to replace it with terra cotta. The fascia would remain the same. Chairman Barton stated that the board would like to see a sample of the material before considering it for approval. Mr. Diaz asked that the applicant submit the sample by Tuesday March lst, 1983, and submit a drawing showing that it would tie-in with the existing building. On a motion by Mr. Cook, seconded by Mr. Holden, the preliminary approval was granted subject to the two conditions set forth in the staff report and listed below, which cover the landscape plans and added Conditions 3, 4 and 5 also listed below: 1. 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 design review board. 3. The grade change shall incorporate the step planter. 4. T'he roof material shall be submitted to the board for approval. 5. The revisions shall be done on the site plan and shall illustrate the impact on walkways and adjacent structures. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. - 5 - � , • �' � DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 22, 1983 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: None V. ADJOURNMENT: On a motion by Mr. Cook, seconded by Mr. Holden, the meeting was adjourned. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. , - ���"� � � , . ���' ;,y t ��t �i !�.�'�2 RAMON A. DIAZ, Se�r" ary /pa �.� - 6 -