The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1995-04-25 , a �, ;� MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 25, 1995 ***************************************************************** I . CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 12 : 15 p.m. Commissioners Present: Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Richard Holden X 15 0 Frank Urrutia X 14 1 Chris Van Vliet X 15 0 Wayne Connor X 15 0 Richard O'Donnell X 14 1 Ronald Gregory X 13 2 Staff Present: Phil Drell Steve Smith Jeff Winklepleck Steve Buchanan Pat Bedrosian Donna Bitter II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to approve the following cases by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0 . III . It was moved by Commissioner O'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to approve the following cases by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0 . A. Final Drawings : 1. CASE NO. : PP 94-6 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : JAMES R. FETRIDGE for G. MENDOZA, Post Office Box 1963, Palm Desert, CA 92261 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised landscaping plan for a 10,220 square foot industrial building LOCATION: Northeast corner of Ritter Circle and Merle Drive ZONE: S . I . t �IW" � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 25, 1995 Steve Smith presented the revised landscape plan reminding the commission that the plan was before them at their last meeting and is now back in final form by landscape architect, Michael Buccino. Commissioner Gregory outlined the future phase on the plan and explained to Mr. Fetridge how uncomfortable the commission is with plans that do not show where plant material will be located. By simply listing the plants the commission can not tell if there is sufficient planting. Commissioner Gregory indicated that the irrigation design was shown on the plan. Mr. Buchanan indicated that the final plans were still out for plan check corrections and he would not hold up the plans when they have a landscape plan in this stage with a good faith effort such as this in process . Commission continued the landscape plan to allow the applicant to resubmit a detailed landscape plan showing the locations of the proposed plant material . 2 . CASE NO. : 4478 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : PALMS TO PINE5 CANVAS for NO DA TE, Pinyon Pines, Box 69, Mountain Center, CA 92361 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning with signage LOCATION: 73-655 E1 Paseo ZONE: C-1 S.P. Steve Smith presented the drawings showing a black awning with yellow copy. The applicant, Ernie Brooks, indicated that the owner was willing to use a vanilla copy if the commission did not find the yellow acceptable. Commissioner Urrutia asked how far the awning would project out. Mr. Brooks indicated that it would extend 3 feet out and will meet the furthest projection in the window. Commission approved the black awning with vanilla copy. 2 . � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 25, 1995 3 . CASE NO. : TT 24539 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : DENNIS CUNNINGHAM c/o CENTURY HOMES for BELMONTE ESTATES, 1535 So. "D" Street, Suite 200, San Bernardino, CA 92408 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of roof treatment on model unit LOCATION: Northeast corner of Hovley Lane and Cook Street ZONE: PR-9 S.P. Commission continued the case at the applicant' s request. 4. CASE NO. : CUP 95-5 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : MANUEL AND FLORA ABAREA for LAS PARRILAS TACO SHOP, 50-735 Calle Quito, La Quinta, CA 92253 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of patio enclosure LOCATION: 72-785 Highway 111, Suite B ZONE: P.C. (3) Steve Smith presented the plans for the proposed patio enclosure noting that the taco shop is located in the center next to Palms to Pines Theaters . They have an application pending with the planning commission to permit selling beer and wine. As a part of this they want to expand their patio dining. Mr. 5mith indicated that with the patio addition, there still is another 20 feet to the wall of the neighboring restaurant. Commissioner Holden asked if the property owner had approved the proposed patio addition. Mr. Smith indicated that the property owner had signed off on the conditional use permit application. Commission approved the plans for the patio enclosure as submitted. 3 , � �' MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 25, 1995 5 . CASE NO. : 4476 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : HOT POCKETS FAMILY BILLIARDS, 72-175 Painters Path, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of additional business identification signage LOCATION: 72-175 Painters Path ZONE: C-1 Jeff Winklepleck presented the drawings for the proposed signage indicating that the applicant is requesting approval to install hardwood painted signs reading "Billiards" . The signage would be facing north and south on both sides of the building along the parking lots . Commissioner Van Vliet questioned the size of the signage. Mr. Winklepleck indicated that it would be 2 ' x 12 ' with 18" letters . The applicant indicated that the copy would be a printed block style in red letters on white background with red trim. Commissioner Urrutia preferred the use of redwood because of its durability and aesthetics . Commission approved the signage as submitted subject to using redwood for the sign material . B. Preliminary Plans : 1 . CASE NO. : CUP 88-8 Amendment APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : ALIBABA FARZANEH for CLUB 74, 73-061 E1 Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of plans for patio remodel LOCATION: 73-061 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 S.P. Phil Drell presented the plans noting that it was a new design and will be an open patio. The copper will match the existinq copper on the building. 4 . � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 25, 1995 Commission approved the revised preliminary plans for the open patio remodel as submitted. 2 . CASE NO. APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : CHARLE5 L. MARTIN for BANANAZ, 73-733 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval to construct a 40" high patio wall to allow for expansion of outdoor patio dining LOCATION: 72-291 Highway 111 ZONE: P.C. (4) Steve Smith presented the drawings to show that the applicant is looking for approval of a 40" high perimeter wall to allow for expansion of their patio dining on the Fred Waring Drive side. Commissioner 0'Donnell asked about relocating the reader board. Mr. Smith read the city' s ordinance regarding the use of the reader board and the fact that it can only display coming and existing attractions . He assured the commission that code enforcement would go out and check on what is being displayed on the board. The applicant, Charles Martin, noted that they do not need to put a lot of seating out in this area and that a large area of the patio would be cut out around the trees . The only access to the patio would be from inside the building. There is no structure involved. Commissioner Van Vliet asked how much room would be left between the wall and the sidewalk. Commissioner Holden stated that he would need to see the elevations . Commissioner O'Donnell requested that the vegetation also be shown on the elevations . Commissioner Gregory felt that the wall should be pulled back 8 ' from the sidewalk to provide for planting. Mr. Drell informed the commission that the applicant would need a planning commission action on the expansion. � 5 . '� � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 25, 1995 Commission continued the plans directing the applicant to come back with a more detailed plan showing the planting between the wall and the sidewalk, as well as the details surrounding the existing trees . Wall to be pulled back from the sidewalk to allow for planting. IV. CASES: A. Final Drawings : 1. CASE NO. : 397 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESSj : MR. PAUL GRAVES for COLONY CABLEVISION, 41-725 Cook Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of relocation of dish antenna currently located on the building roof LOCATION: 41-725 Cook Street ZONE: S. I . Steve 5mith reported that he went to the site and met with Paul Graves and his staff. He made a video tape of the proposed mock-up locations showing the different areas where the antenna could work. The video showed a possible location above the second story element at the rear and a location by the air conditioning equipment on the lower roof deck. Mr. Smith indicated that the location on the lower roof section works best for the applicant. Mr. Smith added that he thought the antenna should be painted to match the fascia in the background. Commissioner Holden thought the commission had suggested moving the antenna more to the west side. Mr. Smith noted that they were within five feet from the edge of the roof on the west side. Commissioner O'Donnell asked Mr. Graves if there were any other alternate sites the he was willing to present to the commission. Mr. Graves explained how the antenna feeds down into the studio right below its present location. Commissioner O'Donnell discussed his concerns in that the commission has been so rigorous with other applicants in helping to find aesthetic means of 6 . wr.� °'�'` MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 25, 1995 shielding dish antennas; and Colony Cablevision, as a leader, should show some leadership and create a proper location for the antenna. He stated that he is not satisfied with the roof mounted antenna. Commissioner Urrutia asked about the option discussed at previous meetings with placing the antenna in the parking area. He felt that the applicant should still look at other possibilities than what was presented today. Mr. Graves felt that the reception would not be as good if the antenna was placed in the parking lot. Commissioner Urrutia felt that if the antenna was located in the parking lot it would create a buffer between the street and the single story building. He felt that the antenna could be raised 10 ' to 12 ' in the parking lot and it would still be blocked out by the building and yet not impact on the reception. Commissioner 0'Donnell agreed. Action: It was moved by Commissioner 0'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to approve the location of the dish antenna at the landscaped area at the end of the first double row of parking west of the building (as marked on the plan submitted) . Staff to grant final approval if it is possible for the applicant to work out the engineering at this location. Motion carried 6-0 . C. Miscellaneous : Mr. Smith noted that there had been considerable discussion at the last meeting concerning certain "landscape" plans that were to be reviewed. He outlined a policy adopted by the City of Indian Wells stating that if an applicant submits a landscape plan for a project that is not drawn by a licensed landscape architect, the city will turn the plans over to a licensed landscape architect to produce final drawings and bill the applicant for the fees charged by the licensed architect. Commissioner Connor discussed his concerns with landscaping not being installed correctly. He felt that staff should be able to review the plans once the landscaping is installed to insure that it is installed as drawn before signing the project off as final . Commissioner Connor discussed the situations where after a project is completed, the property owner simply shuts off the water and the trees and plants die out. 7 � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APRIL 25, 1995 Mr. Smith explained that the city no longer has a staff person who actually inspects every detail of the installed planting. This duty was performed by Frank Gonzales who is no longer with the city. Commission felt that once Eric Johnson was back on a more full time basis, the problem should be reduced. Commissioner Urrutia felt that if Mr. Johnson does not return on a full time basis, then the city needs to hire someone to do these much needed inspections . Commission asked who was performing detailed landscape inspections at Desert Crossing. Mr. Smith indicated that he was not sure if it was in fact being done and he would check with Mr. Drell who is the planner on that case. Commissioner O'Donnell discussed his concerns with the trash enclosures now being replaced throughout the city with the bright orange enclosures from Western Waste. If the city cannot insist that they all be enclosed, he feels they should be painted a more neutral color than the bright orange now being used. Mr. Bedrosian indicated that the roll-off dumpsters have to be screened from public view. Mr. Smith indicated that he would refer this matter to Lisa Constande, Director of Environmental Conservation. V. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 2 : 05 p.m. � i _ ; ,��,-, ST VE SMITH ASSOCIATE PLANNER SS/db 8 APR-i8-1995 �$��3 FROP9 LITY 0� I�;PIAN �IELLS TQ 3�17�98 P.02 � - -' ` �`' iN�IAN WELLS MUNiCt�At CQ�t� �� have this m�nirnum number �nd size o# �ncurred by the City for the rev�ew ,�f said trees on each firoM�ge. Trees existin� on p18ns by p►ofessianai desi�n consultants. the site at the tiR►e c�f cwtstruct�on sh��ti tOrd. 312 f 3, 1993�. nat be cou�^rted toward ths mimmum tree �o�,�;�;bn�. ALC approvai maayr iristallatiory. P�Im tr�es sP�ail be counted 21._.��-??� �--- toward this minirr+um if eight feet or higher• inctude such canditions as are consistent with the intent and purpases of this Provide elevatiants) ias described in b.4 Chapter,�s the AL�de�ams re�s�na��e and above? with $II �roposed tandscaping nscessarlr• �i?rd. 31� §i, 1�93}. de��nested. 2�,so.12a rme umitabons � A�,� A}f Isndsc2��e plans shaU incorporate a �. t� construction in �ccord$nce re�sonabie percerit�ge of native trees and with the permit for any development for shrul�s, ta prQwid� t�bit�t 'for wildiife snd which design apprdval has been granted reduce irrig�tion requirements. has not been c�mmenced within ane i1} year from the date of noti�i�tion a� ALC 7here are several common ptant species appraval, the ALC approvsi shali which sre CapBbae of hsrborin8 dise�ses or autamatically iapse +�rtd be void. Upon insects th�t threaten tFte Co��heil� Valley �p�lic�tion, 2�n extension of time of up to Citrus, date, �r��e, �eget�ble or field crop ninety t90} days msy be pr�nted by ttie ondustry. The appfycant must contact tf►e Commur�ity Development Oire�tor. l�rd. Agricultural Commis�ioner's office tS19) 3�2 §1. 1993)• 342-$291 or t714) 7$7-2651 for Madfi��tians. information regard°m�iandscape materi�f t� �:�60.13 ,r-��, qu�rantine laws. � �1.6Q�t30(� Up�r request of the �1 60.104�i�1{9l Con�e= ; n �pp�icant, me�difocations #o an approv�d pi�n. Plan sh�l) �e submitted delineati�� pl�n t�r desig� msy be con�idered by the size, It�cation. li�ht spread, illuminating ALG. capacity (cactdle power} and hours of ��.60.7 30(a)(i1 An application far ap�r�tiar� of proposed exteriot kighting. - spprova{ af a modi#ication shall cons�St of 27 60.10Q[b]ii�� M�S�� t��$°r�$��'ry tc permit the ALC to ��Baartl. �11A�ximum size 8ai I2" x adequately review the application and 14"�. Ssmple of materials should be ksRi render a �ndittg. Submittal requiremerrts ta a mir►imum size:ir►clude exterior�inishes may incltade such items aa r$vi�d�Ns'it� of resider�e incfudi�g door ar�d orvrndow ptasts. elevations, RhotoS p�t '�'g ' �trim c�tors. $nd �arden watls, along with exi��ing site cor��itio�rs or any addi#ianaf ext�rmor colors. iaesert tone coi�rs are P�$n��ii°�e�irtrnentd Stcff. �At the preferred). discretion of the Co�rnmunity Deveiapment �9.�►0.10�t�1�"L �. �►n+��p[i�atit►r� birector, a rtiew applicatia� fes may be � fee ir�an smdunt prtblished by the Plannin� reQuired to review the propos$I• _ Dep��tmet�t is required far revi�ew of desig� �1.6.0..�,�,QS�i� In reviewin�requestad ' p�ci�8es. maadi�icetions. the� AeLC shatl, determine if NOTE; Revi�� of des�gn package� t�,requested madifications are consister+t aontainir�la�tds�cape plar�s not�reP�red by with ths PtarPose end intent of ttris Chapter a CaCfnmia lic�r�se�d landscape archit�t and wi'�h the �rrsl objectives of thg will be subject t�o �dditiana! review fess zonor►Q t�le and shatl 9iva ar wirdtihold v . —. --.. . Fsbtusry. 19�5 �'t-138 APR-18-2995 �8�23 F��M CIT'� �F It�DiAN WELLS 'TO 3417�98 P.E3 ,. __.... 8. pLAN"�"'lltt� $ERVICE C�ARGES AI�ID P" `N�fT FEES .._. .... ,� ,.___�... '�' .�..,... ,. ... _ ... ..__... _ ._. ,w,�,,: t�:a�tlr� �" >� . . `,. . . . s. A�rc�l�and tand�Pe�ie�' � � . C7-} Archit�cturf Latrdscsp��d►m�r�ittee Rerisw of De�n Pscics�es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . =150.Q0 {2.} Staf�Rav3ew of D�esign Pa�d�c�qss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ �0.00 C3.1 Pro�rs�ional Des�n Reriew of i,�s�scspe Plsns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � CDST ' � t, �r O�ed Bu�U�s�' {1.j App�cstion fa��ex�► Dnsntsd B�i� �stal�i�tx»ent . , p�c�t0o�t p�pcas�iny Fe� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.04 e4nnual Pernut�ae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . . �850.�0 42.f AppNado� 'br ss�cuath► orienied�ess E�ttploy�e pppit�tion Proa�inQ Fee . � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . #�5.00 l4►rr��l Pemnit Fes . . . . . . . . . , . . � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i5Q.00 (3.l . App�c�ti�n f�r Plaea�emant of N�vrsr�ck . Appir.�ion Pr000e�i� Fe�► . . . . . . � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i�5.00 � A�r�uri P�rr�it�rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . �10.00 �°E�+tabiiNNd b�r Ws�0lution Nd. 92-192 dn[iscsmbsr i'�, 1 a9�r�nd a�ns�No. 312. Eff�dvr �ts of th�se fses is�arY 7. 18�3. '� � �qh�st�sd by �iesdu�ian No. 93-t3� edoprted a� N�ember a. i9�3 in canjunctlon �w�Efi +Dr�intncs N�, 33� and �34 adaptsd an Nove�ber 18. 4 9��. Fess �rffe�#ive o� D�e�mbK 4�. 7��3. � .1AlIWA�RY S, i�9G TQTAL P,�3