Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-12-09 MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1986 1:00 P.M. COMMUNITY SERVICES CONFERENCE ROOM 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE I. The meeting was called to order at 1 :00 pm after a one hour study session. Commission Members Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ron Gregory, Chairman X 22 1 Al Cook X 17 6 Mary Drury X 16 7 Charlie Martin X 22 1 Russell McCrea X 19 4 Rick Holden. Alternate X 17 6 Staff Present: Ray Diaz Steve Smith Catherine Sass Phil Drell Donna Gomez It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to approve the minutes of November 25, 1986 as amended on page 5. Carried 4-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstaining) . II. Moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to approve the following cases by minute motion. Carried 4-0 1. CASE NO: 1271 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ROBERT PITCHFORD, 73-960 El Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a storefront remodel and replacement of existing signs with awnings. LOCATION: 73-660 E1 Paseo ZONE: C-1 2. CASE NO: APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MARRIOTT NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of entry to single family homes. LOCATION: South side of Country Club Drive v*Apo, MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION DECEMBER 9, 1986 III. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 1268 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PAPA DAN'S PIZZERIA, 73-131 Country Club Drive C-1 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning with signage. LOCATION: Plaza De Monterey ZONE: PC (2) Mr. Smith presented plans and pictures of the awning with signage that had been installed without a permit. He explained that the awning is over an east facing window. Staff's concern is with the consistency of wording to be allowed on awnings. AT Signs was present and a representative indicated that they made the awning and advised their client on how to install it. Chairman Gregory felt that a small description of the type of business is fine but he was opposed to listing the services and products provided. Mr. Diaz felt that advertising telling what services they provide should be done elsewhere. He felt the wording "Italian Cuisine" would provide adequate description of the business. Chairman Gregory suggested that the bottom green panel be removed and the wording be changed to describe the business. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to approve the awning as installed, subject to removal of the green panel . Applicant may return to commission with a more appropriate submittal for copy on the green panel . Applicant to be assessed an additional fee for the installation of awning without benefit of permit pursuant to building department permit procedures. Carried 4-0. 2. CASE NO: 271 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : COUNTESS VON HUELLESSEM, 73-405 El Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260. 2 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION DECEMBER 9, 1986 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning as installed. LOCATION: 73-405 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 S.P. Mr. Smith explained that the proposed awning has been installed without a permit. Although the applicant did have approval from the architectural commission the awning seems to have not been installed as approved. Commissioner Martin could not recall how they intended the proposed awning to be attached to the building at the time of approval . Commission had questioned whether this was an awning or a cloth sign. Commissioner Drury had no problem with the awning. She felt the approval and plans did not indicate exactly how the awning was to be attached to the building therefore it was not attached incorrectly. It was suggested that the commissioners review the awning as installed on-site. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to continue this case. Carried 4-0 3. CASE NO: 317 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): THOMAS MILLER, 11753 San Vicente, Los Angeles, CA 90049. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Redesign approval per architectural commission preliminary approval of 10/14/86. LOCATION: Highway III at Deep Canyon. ZONE: PC (4) and PR-5 RESIDENCE INN Ms. Sass explained that the applicant has made revisions and submitted additional plans that were requested by the commission. She indicated that the architecture had changed. Commissioner Martin felt that they needed to have the same architect for the gas station and the hotel . 3 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION DECEMBER 9, 1986 Ms. Sass indicated that planning commission required a village style gas station. She noted that since the architecture of the hotel had changed the gas station architecture did not complement the hotel . Commissioner Martin inquired as to the west elevation curb area in regard to berming and landscaping. He was concerned with the view of the cars in the parking area from Deep Canyon. Mr. Baum explained that the driveway slopes down and with the provided berming and landscaping there will be adequate screening. Chairman Gregory indicated that the landscape plan was conceptual only and felt the planting should be up-sized. Commissioner Drury was satisfied with the roof pitch but did have concerns with the berming and wall details. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Martin to grant preliminary approval subject to the following conditions. 1 . Color and tile samples to be submitted for review. 2. Maximum height to the 30 feet. 3. Final drawings detailing the berming and grading of the north and east elevations to be provided. 4. Review of berming and walls around perimeter of project. Motion carried 4-0. MOBIL STATION Mr. Baum indicated that planning commission was opposed to the industrial design therefore the following submittal is based on their request. Mr. Flood, architect, explained that planning commission wanted a design that would be compatible with the hotel . He felt that the materials to be used were compatible with materials used locally. He noted that the tile and landscape plan would be submitted with the hotel so that they may be compatible. Chairman Gregory suggested that the ends of the canopy be closed in to provide a more village style. 4 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION DECEMBER 9, 1986 Commissioner Martin felt that the proposal was no where near village style. He noted that the structure looked heavy on the small columns. He indicated that if the station was going to be village it should be completely village. He had no problem with the car wash. He felt the canopy structure had to have some tie in with the village style and the mini market needed some detail . Commissioner Drury felt that making the station totally village style would make it appear busy and would be impractical for the use. She thought it had enough of the village style and still appears clean. Chairman Gregory indicated that he would prefer to see the columns larger and noted that the closing of the ends of the canopy were not necessary, it was only a suggestion. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant preliminary approval subject to the condition that the columns be larger. Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Martin opposed) . 4. CASE NO: 297 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): L & T DEVELOPMENT, 74-133 El Paseo, Suite 9, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of 20 unit senior citizen apartment project. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Catalina Way and San Carlos Avenue. ZONE: R-2 S.O. Chairman Gregory outlined his concerns with landscaping in writing. Commission noted that the submitted plans were not prepared by a licensed architect or engineer as required. Therefore, it was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Martin to continue this case. Carried 4-0 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: TT 22111 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BIRTCHER MESA VIEW, 73-080 El Paseo, Suite 101 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. 5 ww MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION DECEMBER 9, 1986 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary subdivision design (grading and lot lines) . LOCATION: 38.589 acres south of Homestead, north of Mesa View Drive and east of Palm Desert Tennis Club. Ms. Sass explained that staff was concerned with the pad elevations, -the overall perimeter appearance of the project and the public improvements. Mr. Diaz indicated that the applicant is waiting for the city to start their storm drain so that they may connect to it. Mr. Mike Smith, engineer, explained that they would be taking the existing storm drain and continuing it underground. He indicated that the residential lots adjacent to the east elevation were built down which makes the applicant's lots higher. He stated that his client would not be objected to trying to lower the eastern pads. Commissioner Drury asked what was the maximum they could lower the pads. Mr. Mike Smith indicated that they would try and come within one foot of the existing property line height. Commissioner Martin suggested that pilasters be used where the wall will have to be stepped up. Mr. Mike Smith explained that they may have to move their wall back a couple of feet which would provide additional clearance. Commissioner Martin felt that this idea would be advisable. Moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Drury to grant approval subject to the following conditions. 1 . Lowering of pads at eastern elevation. Z. Further exhibits detailing the joining of existing lots. 3. Slump stone wall to have pilaster at each elevation change. 4. No wall to exceed six feet in height measured from either side. Motion carried 4-0 6 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION DECEMBER 9, 1986 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: AWNING STANDARDS Commissioner Drury felt that the awning program for the city should be studied by staff. She indicated that there has been some confusion that should be cleared up. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Martin to ask staff to study the city awning program and determine some outlines. Carried 4-0 DAN LOVE'S BARBECUE Mr. Love explained they are proposing to add false windows and a copula that is a replica of the Palms to Pines copula. The br i ck w i 1 1 be sand blasted also. Commissioner Drury asked if the copula was within the height limit. She requested that dimensions be provided. Commissioner Martin felt that the applicant should concentrate on improving the entrance so that it would have better visibility. He was adverse to any changes to the front of the building. Mr. Love indicated that the entrance improvements and sign program would be submitted at a later date. He noted that the copula was to be under the height of the existing Palms to Pines copula. Chairman Gregory felt the artificial windows were fine but thought the copula needed to be studied. Moved by Chairman Gregory, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant approval of proposed changes excluding signs and copula. Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Martin opposed) . BUILDING FEES Mr. Weller indicated that code presently allows the building department to require double fee when permits are obtained after the installation of work has been done. It is not the normal practice of the department to collect the extra fee except in extraordinary circumstances. Commission felt that given the extent of the problem tie: work being completed prior to approval by the architectural commission and prior to 7 Nro" MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION DECEMBER 9, 1986 issuance of building permit) the penalty should be significantly increased and the implementation of said penalty should not be discretionary. It was moved by Commissioner McCrea, seconded by Commissioner Martin to recommend to city council that a significant penalty be imposed on persons who commence work prior to approval of the architectural commission and prior to obtaining a building permit for the work. Carried 4-0. V. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 3:07 p.m. r STEVE' M TH, Associate Planner /dig 8