HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-11-26 r
%W
MINUTES
PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
I. CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 12:30 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Current Meetins Year to Date
Present Absent Present Absent
Richard Holden X 4 2
Frank Urrutia X 6 0
Chris Van Vliet X 5 1
Wayne Connor X 5 1
Richard O'Donnell X 6 0
Ronald Gregory(excused) X 5 1
Staff Present: Phil Drell
Steve Smith
Martin Alvarez
Daisy Garcia
Donna Bitter
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor,to approve the
minutes of the November 12, 1996 meeting as submitted. Motion carried 3-0-2,
Commissioners Holden and Van Vliet Abstaining, Commissioner Gregory Absent.
III. CASES:
A. Final Drawings:
1. CASE NO.: 4732 SA
APPLICANT(AND ADDRESSI: STEVE WILLIAMSON for FITIGUES, 15108
Alicante, La Mirada, CA 90638
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Reconsideration of aluminum
awnings
LOCATION: 73-100 El Paseo, Suite 6
ZONE: C-1
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
Steve Smith reported that the applicant has withdrawn the request for approval of the
aluminum awnings as they will be installing the previously approved Sumbrella
charcoal fabric on the existing frames.
No action was taken.
2. CASE NO.: 4728 SA
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ARCHITECTURAL NEON& SIGN CO. for
WORLD GYM FITNESS CENTER, 74-990 Joni Drive, Suite 3C,Palm Desert, CA
92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of minor signage
using can sign
LOCATION: 111 Town Center
ZONE: P.C. (3)
Steve Smith reported that the commission's recommendation for use of reverse
channel letters was approved by the city council. The applicant, Mr. Gary Wright,
was now before the commission to ask for approval of a can sign reading "Fitness
Center"because it is very difficult and very expensive to do something this small in
reverse channel letters. Mr. Smith indicated that the can sign would be located in the
middle of the north wall. Mr. Wright indicated that the lower section of the sign
reading "Fitness Center" would be illuminated, as well as the %" white border.
Commissioner Urrutia felt that the illuminated letters would be acceptable but did not
want the border illuminated.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to
approve the can sign on the north wall subject to only the letters reading "Fitness
Center" being illuminated. Border is not to be illuminated. Motion carried 5-0,
Commissioner Gregory Absent.
2
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
3. CASE NO.: 4734 SA
APPLICANT(AND ADDRESS): ARCHITECTURAL NEON & SIGN CO. for
DAKOTA BAR& GRILL, 74-990 Joni Drive, Suite 3C, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised business
identification signage
LOCATION: 73-260 El Paseo
ZONE: C-1
Steve Smith reported that the request was for approval of an 18" x 20' long sign to
be placed on the existing wood strip. Sign colors would be turquoise,white and red.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to
approve the revised signage as submitted subject to painting the background of the
sign to match the color of the existing wood strip. Motion carried 5-0,Commissioner
Gregory Absent.
4. CASE NO.: 4742 SA
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): THE CALENDAR GIRLS SIGNS for
TANPOPO RESTAURANT,73-885 Highway 111, Suite 2,Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of free standing
pedestrian sign
LOCATION: 72-221 Highway I I I
ZONE: C-1
Steve Smith reported that the request was for a free standing sign. He indicated that
he explained to the applicant that the sign was too big and that the commission could
not approve an additional free standing monument sign for the center as the
ordinance states that every center is allowed one free standing only. Mr. Smith noted
that the applicant felt that their existing wall sign is not visible from Highway 111.
Mr. Alvarez indicated that "Tanpopo" would be blue with a white background.
3
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
Commissioner O'Donnell asked if they would be removing the wall sign if this sign
was approved. Mr. Alvarez indicated that the applicant wanted approval of the free
standing sign while keeping the existing wall mounted sign.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to
approve relocating the existing wall sign down making it more visible from Highway
111. The proposed free standing sign was denied. Motion carried 5-0,
Commissioner Gregory Absent.
5. CASE NO.: 4744 SA
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALMS TO PINES CANVAS for DEL
GAGNON, 69 Pinyon Pines, Mountain Center, CA 92561
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning with
signage
LOCATION: 73-612 Highway 111
ZONE: C-1
Martin Alvarez reported that the proposed white awning was 20' long with 8" black
letters. Commissioner Holden asked if they were prepared to remove the existing
pole sign. The applicant, Ernie Brooks, indicated that they were not willing to
remove the pole sign.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to
approve the awning only, without signage, as the City's ordinance states that the
existing pole sign would have to be removed if any new signage was installed and
the applicant was not willing to remove the pole sign. Motion carried 5-0,
Commissioner Gregory Absent.
6. CASE NO.: 4745 SA
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALMS TO PINES CANVAS for EMMETT
GOLF CARTS, 69 Pinyon Pines, Mountain Center, CA 92561
4
%we �..�
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning with
signage and lighting
LOCATION: 42-480 Ritter Circle
ZONE: S.I.
Martin Alvarez presented the drawings for the proposed 10'x 3'high awning in blue
with white letters and logo. Commissioners Urrutia and O'Donnell felt that the
proposed awning served no purpose. Commissioner Urrutia suggested that the
signage be placed on the building. Commissioner Holden felt that the proposed
awning did not integrate into the architecture of the building. Mr. Smith asked about
possibly moving the awning to the south side of the building. Commissioner Holden
agreed with moving the awning over the two garage doors on the west elevation.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to
continue the request to allow the applicant to redesign the awning for placement over
the two roll-up garage doors. Motion carried 5-0, Commissioner Gregory Absent.
7. CASE NO.: 4748 SA
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALMS TO PINES CANVAS for THE
JEWELRY BOX, 69 Pinyon Pines, Mountain Center, CA 92561
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning with
signage
LOCATION: 73-111 El Paseo, Suite C
ZONE: C-1
Martin Alvarez reported that the request was for approval of five awnings. The
smaller awnings would be 24" long by 20" high and the larger awnings would be 8'
by 36"high. The letters would be 10" high on the large awning with 6" letters on the
smaller awnings.
5
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to
approve the five awnings as submitted. Motion carried 5-0, Commissioner Gregory
Absent.
8. CASE NO.: 4749 SA
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALMS TO PINES CANVAS for
CHOCOLATES, 69 Pinyon Pines, Mountain Center, CA 92561
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning with
signage and lighting
LOCATION: 73-655 El Paseo, Bldg. J
ZONE: C-1
Martin Alvarez presented the drawings for the proposed awning in white with 12"
capital and 8" lower case brown letters.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner O'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to
approve the awning as submitted. Motion carried 5-0, Commissioner Gregory
Absent.
9. CASE NO.: PP 94-7
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): THE NADEL PARTNERSHIP, INC. for
LUCKY STORES, 1990 So. Bundy Drive,Fourth Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90025
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Reconsideration of landscape
plan at west perimeter
LOCATION: Northeast corner of Highway 111 and Deep Canyon
ZONE: P.C. (4)
Steve Smith presented the originally approved landscape plan for the Luckys project
noting that the trees installed are not on the city's list to meet the parking lot shade
6
�...� f
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
tree requirements. He indicated that what was approved is not what is being installed
because the public works department approved a grading plan that moved the
sidewalk. Commissioner Holden discussed his concerns with the noise and lights,
etc.not being screened from the residential area after the commission spent so much
time with the applicant to ensure the proper screening. Commissioner Van Vliet
asked that the landscape architect come back to the commission with a revised plan
to address the issues that have now come up. Mr. Smith indicated that he spoke
earlier to Commissioner Gregory and that Commissioner Gregory felt that a wall was
now needed on the northwest corner of the site adjacent to the nine parking spaces
next to the retention basin. Commissioner Urrutia agreed. Commissioner Connor
indicated that the hopseed has a problem with long term growth and needed to be
replaced with a more reliable plant.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to
continue the request directing the applicant to address the following:
1) Replace the hopseed with a more reliable plant as it tends to have a
problem with long term growth; and
2) Add a minimum 36" high stucco wall,with planting on both sides, to
extend parallel to Deep Canyon Drive, adjacent to the nine parking
spaces next to the retention basin; and
3) Provide screening of the tunnel/loading dock area from Deep Canyon.
Motion carried 5-0, Commissioner Gregory Absent.
10. CASE NO.: CUP 96-2
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHARLES L. MARTIN for MONTEREY
LAW CENTER, 73-733 Highway 111, Palm Desert, California 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revisions to
approved landscape plan
LOCATION: 44-712 Monterey Avenue
ZONE: R-2
Steve Smith presented the revised landscape plan noting that the originally approved
landscape plan has been changed because it did not relate to the grading and what is
7
..r
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
there now. Commissioner Connor asked if the commission had approved the
monument sign noted on the revised plans. The applicant, Charles Martin, indicated
that he had the proposal for the structure with him today to present to the
commission. The proposed monument sign structure would be black glass and
stucco to match the building colors. He added that he was not asking for approval
of the signage but for the structure only. Mr. Martin added that the public works
department and Southern California Edison had him take out the trees in the back.
Commissioner Connor noted that the parking lot did not meet the city's parking lot
shade tree requirements. Mr. Smith added that there had to be a tree for every three
parking spaces. Commissioner Connor questioned the curb and the paving.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to
approve the structure only for the monument sign as submitted and approved the
revised landscaping plan subject to conforming to the City's parking lot shade tree
requirements. Motion carried 5-0, Commissioner Gregory Absent.
11. CASE NO.: TT 23940-3
APPLICANT(AND ADDRESSI. FOXX DEVELOPMENT for SUNTERRACE,
73-111 El Paseo, Suite 200, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of elevations for
two additional units for Plan 1
LOCATION: Sunterrace (Northwest corner of Hovley Lane East and Eldorado
Drive)
ZONE: PR-5
Steve Smith reported that the commission and staff expected to review the plans for
the additional two units. In anticipation staff sent out notices to 29 existing property
owners in the development advising them of this meeting. He noted that the
applicant was not present but asked the commission to hear from the homeowners
who took the time to come to the meeting. Commissioner O'Donnell explained to
the homeowners that Mr. Foxx was scheduled to come to the meeting today with
plans for two other models.
Ms.Ellen Kauti,homeowner, indicated that the existing homeowners do not know
8
�.✓ fir+'
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
what Mr. Foxx was proposing to build and should not be able to continue with the
house he is building now.
Mr. Patrick Leahy, member of the Sunterrace Homeowners Association's
Architectural Committee, indicated that the association did see the plans for the first
model. Ms. Kauti noted that the homeowners were not shown the plans and wanted
to make sure that the new homes being built were comparable to the existing homes
in regards to exterior elevations,landscaping, etc. Commissioner O'Donnell read the
minutes from the meeting of November 12, 1996,where Mr. Foxx outlined the price
ranges for the existing homes as well as the projected price range for his homes. Ms.
Kauti stated that the sales price noted by Mr.Foxx at the last meeting was incorrect.
Commissioner O'Donnell suggested that the homeowners meet with the homeowners
association's architectural committee to review these plans. Commissioner Holden
informed the homeowners that the architectural commission will look at the plans to
make sure that the new homes are comparable to what is there now. He added that
they are an aesthetic board and it is their responsibility to make sure that these homes
fit in with their homes. Commissioner Urrutia noted that Mr. Foxx did present the
plans for the first model at their November 12th meeting and the commission did
approve the plans for that model only because they felt that what was proposed was
comparable to what was there now. Commissioner Holden added that a public notice
was not required for him to build in Sunterrace because he is taking over an existing
approved project. Mr. Smith added that the agenda for the architectural commission
meetings is posted outside the council chamber on the Friday afternoon before the
following Tuesday meeting. He indicated that the homeowners could check the
posted agendas or contact Donna Bitter the Monday before the meetings to see if Mr.
Foxx was on the agenda for review of the plans.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to
continue the request as the applicant was not present and did not submit plans prior
to the meeting. Motion carried 5-0, Commissioner Gregory Absent.
12. CASE NO.: PP 95-7
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DENISE ROBERGE, 73-250 El Paseo, Palm
Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of landscape plan
9
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
LOCATION: 45-245 Portola Avenue
ZONE: C-1
Phil Drell presented the landscaping plan. Commissioner Connor noted that the plan
was unusual and high maintenance but that he did not have a problem with the plan.
Mr. Drell indicated that they have installed some of the larger trees prior to the
construction of the parking lot and that they want to put in 24" box trees instead of
the carports. The representative for the applicant, Mr. Craig Duncan, indicated that
the wedge in the wall will move closer to the parking lot which will move the trees
closer to the parking lot.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to
approve the landscape plan subject to replacing the arbutus unedo strawberry tree
with a more reliable tree as it will not survive in the desert. Motion carried 5-0,
Commissioner Gregory Absent.
B. Preliminary Plans:
1. CASE NO.: PP 96-11
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GENERAL CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT for PACIFIC ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, 41-865
Boardwalk, Suite 12,Palm Desert, CA 92211
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised
preliminary elevations and landscaping plans for 20-unit assisted living complex
LOCATION: 44-424 San Carlos and 73-685 Catalina Way
ZONE: R-2
Steve Smith reported that the applicant had revised the site plan with the direction
given by the commission at their last meeting. He showed how they created an
entryway into the administration building and moved the trash enclosure area.
Commissioner Urrutia felt that the trash enclosure should have better access from the
kitchen. He also discussed his concerns with the wall in front of parking spaces 14,
10
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
15 and 16 stating that the wall needs to be moved back to add landscaping. The wall
should be adjusted accordingly all the way around. Commissioner Urrutia added that
a landscape buffer was needed around the wall behind parking spaces 9, 10, 11 and
12 and a hammer head should be created at the rear of parking space 12 at the left
side of the administration building.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor, to
approve the preliminary plans subject to the following conditions:
1) Wall in front of parking spaces 14, 15 and 16 to be moved back to allow for
landscaping with remainder of wall adjusted accordingly; and
2) Create landscaping buffer around the wall behind parking spaces 9, 10, 11
and 12; and
3) Create hammer head at rear of parking space 12; and
4) Expand the on west elevation all the way around to the rear of the building.
Motion carried 5-0, Commissioner Gregory Absent.
2. CASE NO.: CUP 96-18
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): McFADDEN &McINTOSH ARCHITECTS
for CAM'S CORNER, 73-929 Larrea Street, Suite 1A, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Reconsideration of
architectural canopy at proposed fuel station
LOCATION: Northwest corner of Highway 111 and Deep Canyon
ZONE: C-1
Steve Smith reported that the case went before the planning commission where the
applicant presented the completed traffic study. The matter received considerable
discussion and there still were a considerable amount of neighbors who were opposed
to the idea of a service station or convenience store. The planning commission
approved the conditional use permit subject to a list of conditions, one of which
called for a re-design of the canopy. Mr. Smith indicated that the planning
commission felt that the canopy was too massive and too bulky and that it needed to
be less of a statement. He showed that there are three new proposed elevations of
the canopy which has been reduced in height considerably and is now flat. The
applicant, Chris McFadden, explained that Option No. 3 is 36" deep, Option No. 4
11
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
is the standard Chevron station canopy with all steel fascias, and Option No. 5 is the
articulated edge with an element in the center. Commissioner Urrutia asked if all the
canopies proposed are stucco. Mr. McFadden indicated that this was correct.
Commissioner Urrutia noted that the signage would be a separate issue.
Commissioner Van Vliet asked what the total height would be on the revised canopy.
Mr. McFadden indicated that it is 17' 6" high.
Action
It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Connor,
approved Concept No. 3 as submitted for the architectural canopy. Motion carried
5-0, Commissioner Gregory Absent.
C. Miscellaneous:
1. Discussion regarding College of the Desert driving range chain link fence and
screening of same.
The applicant, Ed Pratt, addressed the commission informing them that he and Steve
Smith met informally to try to come up with some ideas to help soften the look of the
chain link fence surrounding the driving range. He explained that the letter
distributed to the commission talks about the phasing of the plan. Mr. Sandy Burns
added that they negotiated the RFP's with the school district and their insurance
carrier would not give them insurance without the driving range being fenced in. He
added that they did get approval from the school district to install the fence but that
they were before the commission today to figure out a screening solution that meets
the city's requirements but keep within the driving range budget. Mr. Burns
indicated that he would like to take a random dollar figure and come up with a plan
that works for the city to get the situation resolved. Mr. Pratt explained that they are
a new company struggling with a new product and that they really could not afford
to create planters, irrigation, etc.
Mr. Smith explained that he took Mr. Pratt's letter to Councilman Crites and that he
did not think we were going far enough with Mr. Pratt's recommendation. That is
why the situation was before the commission today. Commissioner Connor felt that
one of the things that they could do to help is to come up with some type of plan that
would address the entire project and what it would look like in the end. He added
that they needed to see how Phase I ties into Phase II. Commissioner Connor
discussed his concerns with seeing a high wall that closes off the view. He also
12
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
asked who would be maintaining the oleanders. Mr. Pratt replied that they would be
maintaining the oleanders. Commissioner Connor asked who was maintaining the
landscaping around the utility boxes now. Mr. Pratt replied that the college was
maintaining the landscaping.
Commissioner Connor added that when the project was done, the look will need to
be more compatible with what the city is doing now with desert plant material.
Commissioner O'Donnell stated that when he met with school management before
going on sabbatical he stated that there were some designs that could be used. He
offered to take management to locations to show examples of what could be done.
Commissioner Holden added that there are ways to break up the massiveness.
Commissioner Urrutia felt that another idea would be to add some wrought iron in
different areas.
Commissioners O'Donnell and Connor agreed to work with the representatives of the
driving range and staff to work out some solutions. Commissioner Holden stated that
the commission did appreciate what the owners of the driving range are doing.
2. Oral presentation by the City Manager regarding the relationship between the
Art-In-Public-Places Committee and the Architectural Review Commission.
Phil Drell addressed the commission at the city manager's request stating that the city
manager talked to John Nagus regarding the mandatory art placement requirement.
They talked about including the art placement requirement information with
applications distributed by the department of community development to ensure that
the applicant makes the decision on their art placement. This way, if the applicant
indicates that they will be placing their own art selection on their project, it will have
to show on the elevations presented to the architectural commission. Commission
agreed with the suggestion and added that the public works department needs to also
sign off on the landscaping plans stating that the plans are consistent with the grading
plans.
13
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 26, 1996
V. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m. to a special meeting at 12:00 on Tuesday,
December 3, 1996 to consider a proposal from Intra West.
STEVE SMITH
PLANNING MANAGER
SS/db
14