Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-11-12 MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION WEDNESDAY - NOVEMBER 12, 1966 1:00 P.M. COMMIN+IITY 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 21 0 Al Cook X 16 5 Mary Drury X 14 7 Charlie Martin X 20 1 Russell McCrea X 17 4 Rick Holden, Alternate X 16 5 Staff Present: Ray Diaz Steve Smith Catherine Sass Phil Joy Steve Chamberlain Donna Gomez It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to approve the minutes of October 28, 1986 as amended. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Drury abstaining) . 11. Moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Martin to approve the following cases by minute motion. Carried 5-0 1. CASE NO: 1258 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): W. RAY HENDERSEN, P.O. Box 1514, Palm Desert, CA 92261 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a half dome awning with signage. LOCATION: 73-180 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 S.P. 2. CASE NO: 1260 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): TROY MARKETING, 42-100 Monterey Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identif- ication sign. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION NOVEMBER 12, 1986 LOCATION: Southeast corner Monterey and Fred Waring Drive. ZONE: O.P. (office professional ) III. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 1261 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : CENTURY 21 , 73-540 Highway 111 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of drop awning with signage. LOCATION: North side Highway 111 east of San Pablo. ZONE: C-1 Mr. Smith explained that the proposed awning had been installed without benefit of a permit and the owner was cited by the code compliance department. Commissioner Cook recommended that the sign be removed and the awning remain. The representative from Elegant Awning indicated that he did not know he needed a permit to install a drop awning. He questioned the relationship of the awning to the sign. He felt that the sign should be dealt with as a separate issue. Commissioner Cook explained that having the awning and the sign the same as having two signs. The applicant requested approval of the awning with the lettering deleted from the awning. Chairman Gregory felt that the sign should be removed and the awning remain. Commissioner Drury thought that the direction should be to the owner regarding the sign and not Elegant Awning. The applicant felt that the owner would remove the awning if he had to chose between the awning and the sign. 2 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION NDVEMBER 12, 1986 It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Drury to approve the awning as submitted with the condition that the existing roof mounted sign be removed. Carried 5-0 2. CASE NO: 1259 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EVANS INTERIOR, 73-010 E1 Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of channel letter on raceway sign. LOCATION: Columbia Center - northwest corner El Paseo and Hwy 74. ZONE: PC (3) S.P. Mr. Smith explained that he was concerned with the sign being mounted on an exposed exterior raceway. The applicant explained that they have done these types of signs for Vacation Inn and Continental Inn and several other businesses. The face is to be white with brown trim and brown cap letters with the race way to be dark brown also. Commissioner Cook felt that if the race way was the same color brown as the back ground and the white be changed to cream or ivory he would grant approval . It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Drury to approve the sign subject to the following conditions. 1 . The raceway and background to be same color brown. 2. The white is to be changed to ivory. Carried 5-0 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: 318 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DANIEL P. LODOLO, 1001 Commerce Drive, Irwindale, CA 91706. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of landscaping and architecture for Home Savings of America. 3 °4rr Nftol MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION NOVEMBER 12, 1986 LOCATION: Highway 111 and Town Center Way. ZONE: PC (3) S.P. Mr. Smith felt that the architecture of the proposed building should be enhanced. He noted that the Palm Springs branch has a nice architectural style and suggested the same style be utilized here. He stated that this item had been called up by city council . Mr. Diaz had assured council that there would be a minimum three foot berm provided to screen the parking area. Chairman Gregory explained that the three foot berm would need to be removed at the corner where the art area would be so that it would be visible. Commissioner Cook felt the building should be taller and that the building was no less articulated than the May Company which is across the street. Commissioner Martin questioned the amount of sun control provided on the southeast elevation. Mr. Dan Lodolo, applicant, explained that Ahmanson has a say in what the architecture is to be for this building. They are trying to compliment the architecture of the proposed buildings on this site. He noted that the elevation overhangs are 3-1/2 feet. Mr. Lodolo advised that the site is already at three feet below the street. Commissioner Drury had no problems or concerns with the building as proposed. She questioned what approvals have been received for this site. Mr. Smith indicated that preliminary architectural approval has been received. Commissioner Cook recommended the corners of the building have some architectural detail . Commissioner Holden recommended use of barrel tile rather than the tile proposed. Mr. Lodolo indicated that he could provide tile accents on the building. He noted that they wanted to blend in with the community. Mr. Smith presented the plans to the proposed Ahmanson development on this site. He expressed concern over the lack of architectural enhancement for this building. Commissioner Cook felt the Home Savings building was far superior to the Ahmanson proposal . 4 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION NOVEMBER 12, 1986 It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant preliminary approval subject to the use of barrel the and a three foot berm that effectively screens the parking area which would not restrict the view of the art area. Carried 4-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstaining) . 2. CASE NO: 277 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WITOLD MULLER, 10410 Lower Azusa Road, El Monte, CA 91731 ; JIM FEIRO, 73-955 Highway 111 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. MATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of landscape plan for three triplexes. LOCATION: South side Fred Waring Drive between San Pasqual and San Pablo. ZONE: R-2 Chairman Gregory reviewed the landscape plan and made written comments to be addressed by the applicant. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Chairman Gregory to grant preliminary approval subject to the conditions listed by Chairman Gregory as shown in the file and subject to final drawings showing equipment access to the pool and lawn areas. Carried 5-0 3. CASE NO: 317 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HARRY SCHMITZ, P.O. Box 3992, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of seven unit senior apartment project. LOCATION: Santa Rosa Way between San Pascual and Portola Avenue. ZONE: R-3 S.O. Ms. Sass explained that the applicant had requested to be reviewed by planning commission prior to review by architectural commission after the architectural commission had expressed concern over the site plan. She noted the changes that had been made which included addition of a few feet of landscape area at the rear of the project, deletion of one parking space to add landscaping and addition of a 5 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION NOVEMBER 12, 1986 bench, table and picnic bench. She stated that the usable open space required by code had not been provided. Mr. Diaz indicated that we seem to be getting the wrong type of developments on the wrong sites with the SO zoning. He explained that the minimum unit size for a studio is 450 square feet. The applicant is providing 600 square foot units which is the minimum s i ze for a one bedroom un i t. He suggested that the front unit be placed at the rear of the site and the size of the three rear units be reduced. This would allow for additional usable open space at the front of the site. He noted that the SO zone was not created to provide crowded sites. He advised that the applicant could ask for a variance on the side yard setbacks which would provide additional open space. Chairman Gregory was opposed to less than 10 foot setbacks. Commissioner Drury was concerned that the units would be too small for active seniors. Ms. Sass indicated that One Quail Place has units that are approxi- mately the same size as what is proposed for this project. Commissioner Martin agreed that the front unit should be moved to the rear of the site to provide additional usable open space. Commissioner Cook felt that the open space provided was enough for the seven residents that would be living there. Mr. Schmitz indicated that the project has been developed under the R-3 standards. He noted that he is allowed to go two story but chose not to. Ms. Sass explained that under the R-3 standards this site would have only been allowed five units rather than seven. She recommended that the applicant go to two story which would easily handle the seven units and provide more than adequate usable open space. Commissioner Drury had no problem with the plans as drawn. She questioned what other type of amenities seniors would need. Mr. Diaz noted that they could use a sma 1 1 poo 1 , horse shoe or shuffle board area. Commissioner Cook indicated a shuffle board area could be provided at the rear of the site. 6 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION NDVEMBER 12, 1986 Commissioner McCrea felt that several small open space areas would not be as valuable as one large open space area. He agreed with the recommendation of having three units along the rear of the site and having one large open space area at the front of the site. Commissioner Cook was concerned with other senior projects that have less open space area than is proposed here. Chairman Gregory suggested the applicant present drawings by the next meeting showing the three units along the rear of the site. He noted that there may have to be some changes made to the plan because the applicant is asking for the maximum on this site. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Chairman Gregory to grant preliminary approval subject to the rear area at units 4 & 5 be used as additional open space recreation area. Carried 2-1-1 (Commissioner McCrea opposed, Commissioner Cook abstaining - Commissioner Martin left before the vote) . 4. CASE NO: 283 MF APPLICANT (AND AODRESS): ROBERTSON HOMES, 1003 Cooley Drive, Suite 102, Colton, CA 92324. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of architecture for single family homes. LOCATION: Northeast corner Cook and Fred Waring. ZONE: PR-7 Commissioner Drury noted for the record that she may have a conflict of interest with this case. Mr. Joy indicated that the tract had already been approved and recorded. They are now asking for approval of architecture for the single family homes. Commissioner Martin questioned the setback of the single family homes from the apartments. Mr. Joy indicated it was between 60 and 70 feet. He noted that there is a 17 foot setback from curb to the perimeter wall with an eight foot meandering sidewalk provided. Commissioner Martin requested elevation drawings of the rear and sides of the homes. He was concerned with solar protection on these exposures. He questioned the size of the overhang on the front 7 la MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION NOVEMBER 12, 1986 elevations. Mr. Holmes, architect, indicated that the overhangs are between four and five feet. He explained that the rear elevations hold down the roof line all the way across the rear. Commissioner Cook requested plans showing detail on the side yard walls. Commissioner Martin felt the architecture was fine but requested that the elevation plans be reviewed at the next meeting. It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Cook to grant preliminary approval for landscaping and architecture subject to review of the rear and side elevations and the block walls between homes. Carried 5-0 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: V. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 2:22 p.m. STEVE SMITH, Associate Planner /dig 8