The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1996-03-26 , � � � MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 26, 1996 ***************************************************************** I . CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 12 : 30 p.m. Commissioners Present: Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Richard Holden X 12 1 Frank Urrutia X 11 2 Chris Van Vliet X 12 1 Wayne Connor X 12 1 Richard O'Donnell X 13 0 Ronald Gregory (excused absence) X 11 2 Staff Present: Steve Smith Jeff Winklepleck Steve Buchanan Daisy Garcia Donna Bitter II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to approve the minutes of the March 12, 1996 meeting as amended. Motion carried 5-0 . III . CASES: A. Final Drawings : 1. CASE NO. : TT 24773 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : JOHN STEIGERWALDT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT for PALOMA WEST, 85 Alpine Village, Mountain Center, CA 92561 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVA� SOUGHT: Final approval of perimeter landscape plan LOCATION: South of Hovley Lane, 2000 feet west of Portola Avenue ZONE: PR-5 Steve Smith presented the landscape plans noting that Eric Johnson had reviewed them and felt that the perimeter lighting was excessive and intense. Mr. Johnson suggested that some of the perimeter lighting should be deleted, retaining only the lighting at the entrance. Commissioner Connor did not feel that there was too much lighting with the proposed seven lamps . , , +� � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 26, 1996 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner 0'Donnell, to approve the final perimeter landscape plan as submitted. Motion carried 5-0 . 2 . CASE NO. : 4616 5A APPLICANT (AND ADDRES5) : STEVE METSOVAS, Post Office Box 5147 , Orange, CA 92613 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of free standing monument sign LOCATION: 73-850 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Jeff Winklepleck presented the drawings for the proposed monument sign indicatinq that it would be very difficult to see. He indicated that staff did not have any concerns with the proposed sign but felt that the wall signs appear to be better than the monument sign. Commissioner Urrutia agreed and felt that the signs on the building were better. Commissioner Holden felt that it was more of a directory sign than a monument sign. Mr. Smith noted that with the location of the trees on this site, the monument sign would not be visible. He added that the ordinance states that every center is allowed one monument sign, but not to list all the tenants in the center. This is when it becomes a directory sign, not a monument sign. Mr. Smith noted that technically a monument sign is for center identification only. Commissioner Holden also discussed his concerns with encouraging people to read directory signs while driving 45 to 50 miles per hour along a main highway. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to deny the proposed monument sign as they felt it was more of a directory sign and would cause a hazard along Highway 111 . Motion carried 5-0 . 2 � � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 26, 1996 3 . CASE NO. : CUP 96-2 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : CHARLES L. MARTIN, ARCHITECT, for MONTEREY LAW CENTER, 73-333 Highway 111, Palm Desert, California 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised final landscape plan LOCATION: 44-712 Monterey Avenue ZONE: R-2 Commissioner Holden noted the commission' s concern with the lack of landscapinq because of the harshness of the building. Commissioner Connor indicated that the revised plans showed an addition of four bougainvillea plants and cobble stone. Commissioner Holden asked if staff heard from the property owner to the rear regarding the height of the block wall . Mr. Smith indicated that the property owner to the rear, Kimberly White, spoke to Donna Bitter on her requirements for the wall . Commissioner Urrutia felt that the plans should be submitted for the entire site to include all landscaping and walls . He added that the building permit process should be stopped until an acceptable landscaping plan is submitted and approved. Commission agreed and directed Steve Buchanan accordingly. Mr. Buchanan asked about any requirements for covered parking. Mr. Smith indicated that the commission required the added landscaping in order to help shade the parking as well . Action: It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to continue the request directing the applicant to provide a complete, detailed site plan with acceptable landscaping and walls as discussed. Motion carried 5-0 . 3 � � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 26, 1996 B. Preliminary Plans : 1 . CASE NO. : PP 96-3 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : 0. MICHAEL HOMME, Post Office Box 258, Palm Desert, CA 92261 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of preliminary plans for remodel and addition to an existing building LOCATION: 44-331 Monterey Avenue ZONE: O.P. Jeff Winklepleck presented the plans indicating that additional trees would be needed in the back to provide shade to the parking area. He noted that Eric Johnson had reviewed the landscaping plans and found them to be acceptable with the additional trees as noted. Action: It was moved by Commissioner 0'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the preliminary plans subject to the placement of additional trees to meet the city' s parking lot shade tree requirement. Motion carried 4-0-1, Commissioner Holden Abstaining. C. Miscellaneous : 1 . CASE NO. : APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : SEBASTIAN PRIETO for PRIETO' S HOME FURNITURE DESIGNS, 73-168 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of wrought iron fence LOCATION: 73-168 Hiqhway 111 ZONE: C-1 4 . � � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 26 , 1996 Mr. Smith presented the drawings for the proposed fencing indicating that it is the applicant' s goal to be able to place wrought iron furniture in front of his building. He noted that the applicant will need a conditional use permit. Commissioner Urrutia asked about the height of the fence. The applicant, Mr. Preito, indicated that it would be 6 ' high with the gate being straight across at the top. Commissioner Urrutia asked what the pilasters would be made of. Mr. Preito indicated that he was not sure if they would be brick or wrought iron. Commissioner Holden discussed how the fence should be straight across the front of the property and not jogged back at the ends as shown. Commissioner Urrutia suggested trying to soften up the fence line with some annual color and eliminating the columns . He recommended saw cutting the concrete 18" to 24" along the base of the fence to add low landscaping. Mr. Prieto indicated that his only request at this time was for approval of the fence. He will submit a proposal for his signage at a later date. Action: It was moved by Commissioner O'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the wrought iron fencing subject to the following conditions : 1) Move fence back to line up straight between the two adjacent building fronts; 2) Delete columns and saw cut concrete to install an 18" to 24" planter along the base of the fence for placement of low shrubs and/or annual color. Motion carried 5-0 . 2 . CASE NO. : APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : JAMES STEWART, 72-907 Sonora Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of block wall fence 5 � � � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 26, 1996 LOCATION: 72-907 Sonora Drive ZONE: R-1 Steve Smith presented pictures of the home indicating that it was on the corner of Sonora Drive and Acacia. He noted that the applicant, Mr. Stewart, removed a 37 year old cedar fence that was 4 feet back from the curb. Mr. Smith noted that the right-of-way extends 12 ' back from the curb; however, there is a large pine tree 12 ' back from the curb. Mr. Stewart, therefore, was asking for approval of a 6 ' high wall, 7 feet back from the curb. Mr. Smith indicated that the public works department would grant an encroachment permit if the commission approved the slump stone wall . Action: It was moved by Commissioner 0'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the 6 ' high slump stone wall, 7 feet from the curb. Slump stone to match color of house. Motion carried 5-0 . D. Discussion Only Items : Mr. Winklepleck reported that the representatives from Foxx Development were present with conceptual elevations for the remaining lots at The Grove (44 homes) . They asked the commission to briefly review the elevations and indicate any concerns they may have. Mr. Smith asked about the height of the homes. Mr. Foxx indicated that the homes would be 17 ' 9" , which is what the existing homes are now. Mr. Foxx added that the colors and roof tiles would be the same as the existing homes . Commissioner Connor noted his concerns with the lack of overhangs on most of the homes . Mr. Foxx asked if the commission had any concerns with the setbacks of architectural pop-outs . Commission indicated that it should not be a concern. Mr. Smith added that the model plans should show one drought tolerant landscaping plan. 6 . . � '� MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 26, 1996 IV. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 1 : 15 p.m. S VE SMITH PLANNING MANAGER 55/db 7