Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-10-14 MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION TUESDAY - OCTOBER 14, 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 19 0 Al Cook X 14 5 Mary Drury X 13 6 Charlie Martin X 18 1 Russell McCrea X 15 4 Rick Holden, Alternate X 14 5 Staff Present: Ray Diaz Steve Smith Catherine Sass Ken Weller Donna Gomez It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Chairman Gregory to approve the minutes of September 23, 1986 as written. Carried 3-0-1 (Commissioner McCrea abstaining) . 11. Moved by Commissioner McCrea, seconded by Commissioner Drury to approve the following cases by minute motion. Carried 4-0 (Chairman Gregory abstained on Birtcher-Dunham case). 1. CASE NO: APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): B I RTCHER-DUNHAM, 73-080 El Paseo #101 , Palm Desert, CA 92260; RON GREGORY, 73-960 Highway 111 #2, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of landscape plans for Birtcher Dunham project. LOCATION: Highway III and Fred Waring Drive. ZONE: PC (4) 2. CASE NO: 312 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EDWARDS CONSTRUCTION, 11703 Anabel Avenue, Garden Grove, CA. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1986 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of working drawings for four-plex. LOCATION: South side of Shadow Mountain west of San Luis Rey. ZONE: R-3 13,000 (3) Approval subject to addition of two foot planters at both garages. 3. CASE NO: 305 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ROB COTY, 2005 Noya, Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval for a five unit apartment project. LOCATION: Northeast corner of San Pascual and Santa Rosa Way. ZONE: R-3 Approval subject to the following conditions: 1 . Relocation of cabana to area that complies with code. 2. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by this commission prior to building permit issuance. 3. Commission pointed out that the submitted plans were not prepared by a licensed architect as required. 4. CASE NO: 316 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DR. G. ROBERT ROGERS, MESA VIEW PARTNERS, 73-261 Highway 111 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of redesign of a residential project consisting of one single family residence, one duplex structure and one vacant lot for a future R-1 type structure. LOCATION: A triangular shaped parcel directly southeast of the intersection of Mesa View Drive and Highway 74. 2 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1986 ZONE: R-1 S.P. Approval subject to the condition that the perimeter wall tie-in with the existing Summit wall to the east. III. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 1240 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CLEVE'S RESTAURANT, P.O. Box 1227, Palm Desert, CA 92261 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of freestanding business identification sign. LOCATION: South side Frontage Road between Vacation Inn and Continental Inn. ZONE: PC (4) S.P. Mr . Smith explained the sign and indicated that staff was recommending denial of said proposal because code does not permit the requested freestanding sign. Mr. Bob Stewart, representative for Cleve's, explained that the property is difficult to see from Highway III and stated that the freestanding sign would be the only identification visible. Mr. Diaz felt that the commission could not approve the proposed sign and suggested that it be denied. He noted that the sign could be reviewed by this commission and comments made concerning the acceptability of the proposal . Commissioner Martin felt the design of the sign was adequate but that it would have to fall within the scale of the other existing signs on this site. Chairman Gregory noted that if the sign were smaller it would be acceptable provided it was approved by city council . It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to deny the sign based on the code restrictions that make approval of the proposed sign out of this commission's jurisdiction. Commission noted that if the sign were approved by council then the 3 *fte `%W MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1986 commission would require the sign to be reduced in size to match the surrounding hotel signs. Carried 4-0 2. CASE NO: 1247 SA & 1248 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DAVE KERBY, 3385 Somis Drive, Riverside, CA 92507. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of sign program for two businesses in Jensen's Center. LOCATION: End units facing Larkspur Lane and parking lots. ZONE: C-1 S.P. 1247 SA FIRESIDE PHARMACY Mr. Smith explained the proposed sign and it's location. Commissioner Drury was concerned that the proposed sign didn't meet with the current sign program approved for the center. She felt the colors were fine but the signs should all be in cans. Mr. Dave Kerby explained that one of the signs would be put in an existing can but the other would be individual letters. Mr. Sandy Baum indicated that there were several signs in that center that deviated from the approved sign program. Chairman Gregory thought that this item should be continued to allow the applicant to provide drawings showing how the signs will attach to the building and their location. He also requested pictures of other existing signs in this center. Mr. Kerby requested that the commission review the can sign today and if it is acceptable he would be willing to change the individual letter sign to a can sign identical to the other can if commission preferred. Commissioner Drury felt that the signs should be the same ( i .e. both can or both individual letters) . She had no problem with both signs being cans. Commissioner Martin agreed. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Martin to approve the north facing channel letter sign and deny the can sign 4 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1986 facing Larkspur. If the applicant wishes to use an identical channel letter sign on Larkspur as the sign facing north, such a sign is hereby approved. Carried 4-0 1248 SA MR. MUSIC Mr. Smith explained that the applicant was proposing a 30" can sign and noted that staff was concerned with the "CD's, cassettes and stereo's" wording on the sign. Commissioner Martin suggested that the sign be redesigned with emphasis on the scale of the graphics. He felt the colors were fine. It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Drury to continue this case to allow for restudy of lettering scale within the sign. Carried 4-0 3. CASE NO: 1251 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ALKOBAR LIQUOR, 73-510 Highway 111 , Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identifi- cation sign. LOCATION: 73-510 Highway III Mr. Smith explained the proposed sign and indicated that staff was concerned with the existing food and liquor signs. He noted that the sizes of the food and liquor signs were unknown therefore the additional allowable signage was not known. Commissioner Drury felt the number of signs were beginning to clutter the building. She stated that only one or two signs saying liquor and food should be on the building. The applicant indicated that the liquor and food signs were very low on the building. Commissioner Drury felt that one large sign would provide adequate visibility. Commissioner Martin thought that the sign should be mounted on the fascia and the food and liquor signs deleted. He noted that the proposed signs would also state "liquor", which is not needed again. 5 �r wVMr+` MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1986 The applicant suggested that he put only "Alkobar" on the signs and leave out the "liquor". It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Martin to approve the proposed signs with the wording "Alkobar" only in red script lettering. Carried 4-0 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: 317 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): THOMAS MILLER for Residence Inn, 11753 San Vicente, Los Angeles, CA 90049. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of redesign of a 168 unit residence inn, with restaurant and a gas station. LOCATION: Northeast corner of Highway III and Deep Canyon Road. ZONE: PR-5, N.S.P. and PC (4) S.P. RESIDENCE INN Ms. Sass outlined the changes that had been made to the plans. Commissioner Drury questioned the height requirement for this site. Mr. Diaz indicated that the PC 4 zone was now limited to a 30' height. Ms. Sass noted that the current height is at 32' . Chairman Gregory stated that he was still not satisfied with the architecture. He felt it was a victorian style design which wasn't appropriate for the desert area. Commissioner Martin felt the design had improved and was superior to the surrounding hotel projects. He questioned Chairman Gregory if his concern was with the steep roof. Chairman Gregory indicated that was a large part of his concern. Mr. Littlejohn, architect, explained that some of the units have mezzanines ( lofts) which require the extra height. Chairman Gregory indicated the height wasn't his concern, it was the steep slope of the roof. He noted that with heavy landscaping it could be a nice project. 6 `wrr° MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1986 Ms. Sass indicated that a secondary access to Deep Canyon at the north portion of the site will be required. Chairman Gregory stated that he would approve the site plan but would request new elevation drawing and foot prints. It was moved by Commissioner McCrea, seconded by Commissioner Drury to grant preliminary approval of the hotel site plan subject to the following conditions. 1 . New elevations be provided detailing roof pitch. 2. Preliminary landscape plan to be reviewed and approved. 3. Provide a section-through drawing on Deep Canyon and Highway III centerline into the property. Carried 4-0 MOBIL STATION Ms. Sass explained the items that had been addressed due to concerns from the commission. Commissioner McCrea felt that a darker tan color stucco on the building would be more appropriate. Mr. Flood, architect, noted they preferred the lighter color but felt that it was open for discussion. Commissioner McCrea made a motion to grant preliminary approval subject to conditions. Chairman Gregory asked if planting could be added around the Mobil Mart. He felt this might mitigate some concerns. Commissioner Martin was still in favor of the industrial type of station and indicated he would vote against the current proposal . He felt that if it was to be village style they should match the architecture of the hotel and be completely village style. Mr. Flood felt they were compromising their design by trying to provide changes city council might want. Commissioner Drury was concerned with the three small structures on the large site. She felt they were out of proportion with the site. 7 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1986 She was also concerned with the Mobil Mart being located near a restaurant. Mr. Flood explained that they were trying to provide adequate circulation by keeping the structures small . He noted that the restaurant and Mobil Mart had no relation to each other. Commissioner McCrea withdrew his previous motion. Commissioner Martin explained that if the applicant wished to go ahead with the original industrial type of design he would be willing to approve that. It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Chairman Gregory to grant preliminary approval to the original proposal and site plan subject to the following conditions. 1 . Canopy to have texturized surface. 2. Stucco on buildings to be a muted off-white color. 3. Provide meandering sidewalk around perimeter of site. Carried 2- 1- 1 (Commissioner Drury opposed, Commissioner McCrea abstained) . 2. CASE NO: 317 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HARRY H. SCHMITZ, P.O. Box 3992, Palm Desert, CA 92261 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: 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 proposal was for a seven unit senior apartment complex. Chairman Gregory felt the site was crowded and suggested deleting one unit to provide additional open space and landscaping. Commissioner Martin noted that one parking space could also be deleted. 8 *4r 1400 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1986 Mr. Diaz felt the design of the site would encourage shut-ins among the senior residents and questioned the amount of usable open space. Mr. Schmitz explained that the required open space is provided which he has tried to locate in one centralized area. Mr. Diaz stated that the standards may need to be increased because of people crowding sites. Chairman Gregory explained that if the applicant disagreed with the commissions decision then he should appeal to city council . He noted that even though the project meets code this does not mean that the commission has to approve it if it is not acceptable to them. He felt the site was too crowded. Commissioner Drury expressed concern over the parking backing into a planter area. She suggested deleting one parking space to provide additional space for backing. It was moved by Chairman Gregory, seconded by Commissioner Martin to continue this case pending planning commission review of the site plan. Carried 4-0 3. CASE NO: SAT ANT 3 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SUNRISE ELECTRONICS, 73-540 Highway III , Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of satellite antenna. LOCATION: North side of Highway III east of San Pablo. ZONE: C-I S.P. Mr. Smith explained that the applicant had previously requested approval of a pole mounted satellite antenna which would face south. Commission denied the request due to the visibility. He noted that the rear of the building is now blocked by a newly constructed building and other satellites of this type have been approved. Commission informed the applicant he would be required to provide the appropriate engineering information for wind load. It was moved by Commissioner McCrea, seconded by Commissioner Martin to approve the satellite antenna as submitted. Carried 4-0 9 lwo MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1986 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: V. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m. STEVE SMITH, Associate Planner /dlg 10