HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-08-14 •
CITY OF PALM DESERT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
MINUTES
August 14, 2001
****************************************************************************************************
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 12:30 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioners Current Meeting Year to Date
Present Absent Present Absent
Ronald Gregory, Chairman X 12 3
Kristi Hanson X 12 2
Neil Lingle X 10 4
Richard O'Donnell X 9 3
Chris Van Vliet X 14 1
John Vuksic X 14 1
Also Present:
Phil Drell, Director, Community Development
Martin Alvarez, Associate Planner
Tony Bagato, Planning Technician
Ali Hamidzadeh, Building & Safety
Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager
Gail Santee, Senior Office Assistant
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 24, 2001
Commissioner Gregory moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, to
approve the minutes of July 24, 2001. The motion carried 3-0-1 with
Commissioner Lingle abstaining and Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic
absent.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. None
G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR010814.min.wpd 1
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
A. Final Drawings
1. CASE NO.:SA 01-75
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): Pines to Palms Canvas, 69-640
Sugarloaf Avenue, #69, Mt. Center, CA 92561
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of white
fabric on awning and wrought iron for Canyon Road Collection
LOCATION: 73-425 El Paseo
ZONE: C-1
Mr. Ernie Brooks of Pines to Palms Canvas explained that the
gentleman going into this retail spot is a world-renown sculpture from
Palm Beach, Florida, who has been featured in Architectural Digest
magazine. He intends to put sculptures outside on the covered patio.
The corporate colors are white and black and that is why the applicant
is requesting white awnings with black letters. Currently, there is a tan
awning over the patio which could be replaced by a white perforated
fabric awning. The perforations would allow light to come onto the patio
and displayed sculptures.
The Commission stated white would be too bright and probably
wouldn't stay white for very long. Mr. Brooks distributed a sample of
the awning material which is vinyl with canvas in it. The fabric is easy
to clean. Mr. Brooks stated they had done a white office awning on
Cook Street nine years ago and that it is still white and the fabric is still
in good condition.
Commissioner Hanson asked if the color could be changed to ivory
because the building was ivory.
Mr. Brooks explained that the railing cover, which would be the same
color, would be attached by screws on the backside for a nice clean
finish on the street side, instead of by lacing it to the railing.
Staff asked if there would be a problem with displaying the sculptures
outside the store. Mr. Drell responded the sculpturer would probably
have to get a conditional use permit.
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGM I N\AR01 0814.min 2
4
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Van
Vliet, to grant final approval of the signage subject to both the front
railing covers and the entire awning be #5402 ivory, Calliope- brand
awning. The top of the awning will be perforated to allow light onto the
patio and match as close as possible the valance and railing covers.
The lettering was approved as submitted. Motion carried 4-0 with
Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
2. CASE NO.:
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GLS GROUP, 74-854 Velie Way,
Suite 5, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval for single
family residence above 15 feet in height and over maximum square
footage for M/M Saccullo
LOCATION: 76-968 Florida Avenue
ZONE: R-1 9,000
Staff displayed the plans for this single family residence for the
Commission's review.
Action: Commissioner Lingle moved, seconded by Commissioner Van
Vliet, to grant final approval to the residence plans as submitted.
Motion carried 4-0 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
3. CASE NO.: C 01-05
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): AmH LLC, PO Box 1230, Cathedral
City, CA 92235
JAMES D. AULDRIDGE, ARCHITECT, 79-260 Fred Waring Drive,
Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: New facade and
parapets on existing building for Club Car of the Desert
LOCATION: 74-050 Hwy. 111
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 3
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
ZONE: C-1
Plans were displayed for the new facade and parapets for Commission
review.
Action: Commissioner Lingle moved, seconded by Commissioner Van
Vliet, to grant final approval to the plans as submitted. Motion carried 4-
0 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
4. CASE NO.:TT 30216
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MARIO GONZALES, GHA PALOMA
GROUP, LLC, 68-936 Adelina Road, Cathedral City, CA 92234
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of two
model homes, development site plan, and detached casitas,
SUNDANCE HOMES
LOCATION: Northwest corner of Frank Sinatra and Portola Avenue,
west of Shepard Road
ZONE: PR 5
Staff explained that this matter had been handled at staff level. No
Commission action is necessary.
5. CASE NO.:
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PREST VUKSIC ARCHITECTS, 74-
020 Alessandro, #C, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of
architectural remodel to north elevation for Foundation for the
Retarded
LOCATION: 73-255 Country Club Drive
ZONE: P
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 4
10AW
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
Plans for the remodel of the Foundation for the Retarded were reviewed
by the Commission.
Action: Commissioner Lingle moved, seconded by Commissioner Van
Vliet, to grant final approval to the plans as submitted. Motion carried
4-0 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
6. CASE NO.: MISC 01-16
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): TAIT & ASSOCIATES, 9089
Clairmont Mesa Blvd., San Diego, CA 92123
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval to add trellis
over both entrances to the Albertson's store.
LOCATION: 42-205 Washington Street
ZONE: PC
The Commission reviewed the plans for the trellis to be installed over
both entrances of the Albertson's store.
Action: Commissioner Lingle moved, seconded by Commissioner Van
Vliet, to grant final approval to the plans as submitted. Motion carried
4-0 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
7. CASE NO.: SA 01-94
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RYAN BYBEE, 4833 N. Edgewood
Drive, Provo, UT 84604
FRED JENSEN, 72-333 Hwy. 111, #G, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of new
business signage for Hog! Yogi/Teriyaki Stix
LOCATION: 72-333 Hwy. 111, #G
ZONE: C-1
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 5
*400
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
Mr. Drell stated the existing signage, "Hogi Yogi", is 39 square feet.
The applicant is entitled to 40 square feet. To maintain his franchise,
he is being required to put up "Teriyaki Stix" which has to be visible
from 300 feet. The applicant had initially proposed simply adding a
black can sign reading "Teriyaki Stix" and installing it under his existing
signage. But that put him significantly over the square footage he was
allowed and the area was too tight.
Referring to the revised signage, Commissioner Hanson asked if the
"Hogi Yogi" and the "Teriyaki Stix" could be made into two individual
cans in order to reduce the amount of black background which is
objectionable and makes it look massive.
The sign program for the Desert Crossings center calls for reverse
channel letters which is what the current "Hogi Yogi" is. The signage
and logo at Chuck E. Cheese's was noted in comparison. It, too, is `fun'
and the logo is a can sign, but it faces the parking lot. In the applicant's
case, one sign faces the parking lot, the other faces Hwy. 111.
Commissioner Van Vliet stated this application pushed beyond the
intent of the sign program. Commissioner Gregory suggested giving
the project back to the applicant, stating the Commission would work
with them, but it did not wish to establish precedent as far as going
away from the sign program. He explained to Mr. Jensen that signage
programs were set to keep signage from getting out of hand. While the
proposed signage is "fun" and will catch people's attention, but the
program at Desert Crossing calls for channel letters and does allow can
sign logos. The Chuck E. Cheese's signage does both. If the
applicant's signage could be design to contain both channel letters and
a logo can sign, it would probably be acceptable. But, the proposed
can sign is too much of a departure from the sign program.
Mr. Fred Jensen explained that per franchise requirements, they must
display the "Teriyaki Stix" and logo in addition to the "Hogi Yogi". He
noted that profitability issues would not stand for$8,000 channel letters
to include both names and the logos.
Discussion consisted of putting the "Teriyaki Stix" signage at a
pedestrian level which may or may not be acceptable to Hogi Yogi
corporate. With the words stacked on top of each other, they may be
too small.
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 6
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
Commissioner Hanson sketched several options that might be
satisfactory to the Commission. One of those options consisted of
leaving the current "Hogi Yogi" signage and putting the "Teriyaki Stix"
on the awning face. Mr. Drell noted that there may be grounds for a
variance to the square footage due to corporate pressures on the
franchisee if an acceptable design solution were presented.
Mr. Drell suggested increasing the vertical size of the awning face to
about 16 inches and putting the "Teriyaki Stix" signage on it. It might
also be back lit. The current signage would remain as is.
Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner
Lingle, to continue the case with a recommendation that applicant leave
the existing "Hogi Yogi" signage on the building and increasing the size
of the existing awning's valance up to 16 inches and putting "Teriyaki
Stix" on the valance. The valance could be back-lit. Motion carried 4-0
with Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
8. CASE NO.: SA 01-95
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS)JON HOFFMAN, A2Z SIGN
COMPANY, 1777 W. Arrow Route #303, Upland, CA 91786
DR. C. ROSENBLUM, 43-585 Monterey Avenue, Suite 2, Palm Desert,
CA 92211
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval for business
signage for Desert Aurora Surgical Services
LOCATION: 73-950 Alessandro Drive
ZONE: OP
Staff distributed plans for the business signage and displayed a sample
of the lettering for the Commission's review. Plans will be forwarded to
the Planning Commission for exception to the 20-foot height limit.
Action: Commissioner Lingle moved, seconded by Commissioner Van
Vliet, to grant final approval to the signage plans as submitted. Motion
carried 4-0 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Vuksic absent.
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 7
* of
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
B. Preliminary Plans
1. CASE NO.: SA 01-87
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS: MICHAEL LIN, FRED FIEDLER &
ASSOCIATES, 2322 W. 3' Street, Los Angeles, CA 90057
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: New business signage
for ExxonMobil
LOCATION: 36-650 Cook Street
ZONE: PCD, FCOZ
Mr. Smith explained the proposed signage which will include two
monument signs, wall signs, and canopy signs. He explained that the
two monument signs would be relocated noting that the driveway on
Cook Street had been moved northwards to have shared access with
the property to the north. He displayed drawings for the proposed
monument signs.
The signs will all be the typical Mobil colors: red, blue, yellow, and
white.
Mr. Smith pointed out that the canopy vertical face was 36 inches and
the letters for "Mobil" are 22 inches indicating there would be a better
border than shown.
Mr. Hamidzadeh asked if there was enough turning radius for the fuel
tankers. Mr. Drell responded that staff had been working with
ExxonMobil to ensure that there is enough space.
Action: Commissioner Hansen moved, seconded by Commissioner
Lingle, to grant approval of the signage as submitted with the conditions
that the word "Mobil" on the canopy have at least 7-inch top and
bottom borders and that the "On the Run" signage be located on the
walls as marked with X's on the plans. Motion carried 3-0-1 with
Commissioner Gregory abstaining and Commissioners O'Donnell and
Vuksic absent.
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 8
VOW
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
2. CASE NO.: C 01-06
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) OCHOA & ASSOCIATES, 73-626
Hwy. 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Remodel of existing
retail building's elevations and building sign program
LOCATION: 73-175 - 73-221 Hwy. 111
ZONE: C-1
The Commission reviewed the remodel and sign program plans.
Action: Commissioner Lingle moved, seconded by Commissioner Van
Vliet, to grant preliminary approval of the elevations and sign program
as presented. Motion carried 4-0 with Commissioners O'Donnell and
Vuksic absent.
3. CASE NO.: C 01-04
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LYLE-HALL, LLC, 721 S. Palm
Canyon, #216, Palm Springs, CA 92262
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval
of architecture, building sign program, and landscaping for an 18,079
square foot, two-story office building, CANYON FINANCIAL PLAZA
LOCATION: 77-990 Fred Waring Drive
ZONE: OP
Mr. Smith stated there had been a Wells Fargo Bank on this property.
The applicant is proposing an 18,079 square foot, two-story office
building. Elevations were displayed showing bronze glass, stone
veneer, and seamless metal roof. The drive-up shown on the plans is
being removed. Staff finds the architecture acceptable.
Mr. Smith explained there was an unusual situation in that there is a 24-
30 inch wall around the perimeter of the property. The property outside
the wall is owned by the Desert Breezes Home Owners Association
while Mr. Lyle and his partners are acquiring the property inside the
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 9
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
wall. The proposed building represents about 80% of the
improvements on the site. There is an issue with the Desert Breezes
HOA and the applicant about who should be doing the landscaping on
the area outside the wall. The plans before the Commission do not
address the area outside the wall.
Mr. Smith noted there was an existing freestanding sign on the corner
of Fred Waring and Washington which sits outside the perimeter wall on
Desert Breezes property. There is no sign application signed by the
HOA, therefore, the monument sign plan was not presented to the
Commission. The Commission was given a signage plan for the
building which was acceptable to staff.
Mr. Steve Lyle, the applicant, stated the project had been presented to
the Planning Commission when the parking lot, entrances, general
landscaping, and two pads were being developed. One of the pads has
a building occupied by Hospitality Dental. Hospitality Dental's lease
has specific parking spaces near their building and along some of the
side facing Washington. He pointed out that the parking for the
proposed building was designed to start at Hospitality Dental's last
space along Washington, continue along Fred Waring with more
spaces provided for at the west end of the building and at the west end
of the property. They are hoping for a bank on the corner and have
planned convenient parking for customers. The building can be entered
on the west side through back doors with the thought that employees
would park on the west side and enter through those doors. The
parking along the western perimeter is to be covered by a structure.
The parking along the west end of the building will be protected by the
building's overhang.
Mr. Lyle has met with the Desert Breezes HOA about the perimeter
landscaping and the monument sign at the corner. He asked to
withdraw the entire sign program at this time as it should be presented
all at once. There could be an opportunity to put the monument sign
inside the wall, but they preferred trying to work with the HOA and
having it located outside the wall. He did provide renderings of the
monument sign in hopes of getting comments from the Commission to
make sure he is on the right track. Mr. Lyle stated this would be an
owner-occupied building as Lyle Commercial will have offices upstairs.
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 10
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
Commissioner Van Vliet asked about any roof mounted equipment.
The applicant's architect responded that they had adequate room to
screen any roof mounted equipment. This would be made definite in
the working drawings.
The Commission found the architecture of the building acceptable and
asked members of the HOA if they had objections to the architecture.
Ms. Cindy Finerty, representing the Desert Breezes HOA, stated the
association approved the architecture, however, they felt the
architecture, landscaping, and signage should all be dealt with at the
same time.
Ms. Finerty stated this was a unique situation where the HOA owns the
perimeter lot and Mr. Lyle owns the interior lot. She stated Mr. Lyle
would like to have a monument sign on the HOA property. There is an
existing bank sign which has been covered with tarp for the past three
years. The HOA has been working with the previous owner as well as
with Mr. Lyle to try to have it removed. She distributed photos of the
corner in question and noted it was the east entrance into the City at
Fred Waring and Washington. The HOA had requested the previous
owner to remove the covered sign. They were told that the monument
sign was a valuable part of leasing or selling the property inside the
wall. Through the HOA's attorney, they expressed that the sign is on
Desert Breeze's property and they were interested in enhancing their
landscaping which is not anywhere near City code. The only way they
can start the landscape upgrade is to get rid of the sign as they wanted
to make the City's entrance a focal point. After meeting with the
previous owner and with Mr. Lyle, no agreement has been reached.
Mr. Lyle acknowledges that the perimeter lot does belong to Desert
Breezes, but he would still like to have a monument sign there.
Ms. Finerty pointed out a green box which also sits on their perimeter
lot. This box is used to synchronize the traffic signals along Fred
Waring. The Public Works Department is working with CVAG to get
that moved to another location where there are other utility boxes. The
HOA's desire is to upgrade the landscaping to something similar to
Desert Willow with lantana, ocotillo, Mexican birds-of-paradise,
bougainvillea, deer grass, and aguave on the lower part under the
planters. They would work with Mr. Lyle and where he has his trees so
that they don't block his building.
The HOA believes that since Mr. Lyle is responsible for 80% of the
improvements, he should be required to landscape the perimeter area.
He has no plans to do this as it "doesn't pencil out". He has been given
estimates of$30-40,000. The HOA has gotten a bid from Lundin
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 11
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
Pacific for $19,650 to include landscaping from the driveway on
Washington around the corner to the driveway on Fred Waring. The
HOA wants Mr. Lyle's project to be successful, however, they would like
to see Mr. Lyle help with the landscaping since his monument sign is on
their property. He has offered to do just the corner area where the
monument sign will be located. They received a bid for that area at
$1,650. The HOA does not believe that that is adequate to allow a
monument sign at the corner. At this point, the HOA would prefer
going on its own and not have to deal with the monument sign. They
have been advised by their attorney that they are within their rights to
have the monument sign removed. They have worked with all parties
concerned, but would like to move on with their landscaping plans.
Mr. Lyle noted it was very clearly written in the Desert Breezes' CC&Rs
how the perimeter property was to be dealt with. The perimeter
property buffers not just the subject property, but also other adjacent
properties. He stated he paid 3-4 percent towards the association.
There are reserves that have been built up for this perimeter property.
He stated the CC&Rs indicated a spirit that everyone should work
together to benefit the whole property - its attractiveness, its desirability.
In order for them to attract a bank which would be a good tenant, they
need to have the monument sign on the perimeter property. Because
there are no left turns out of the driveways, the bank has concerns. Not
having the monument sign would probably mean they won't get a bank.
Mr. Lyle stated they were within their rights to request the Commission
consideration of the building's architecture. However, the sign program
should not be considered at this time as the applicant wanted time to
work further with the HOA to make it work.
Commissioner Gregory noted that some of the issues in this application
were beyond the scope of the ARC. Mr. Drell responded this project
was originally designed and approved under the County and the City
currently has no indication of what was approved. Typically, once
something is approved and installed, the City does not usually require
upgrading to City standards assuming that what was originally
approved has been maintained. The question is whether the City can
require that the perimeter landscaping which was part of the pad
approval a part from the ownership issue. The City cannot require the
developer to do re-do landscaping on property that does not belong to
him. Even if it did belong to the developer, if what is there was
originally approved and has been maintained, there is a question of
whether the City can make them upgrade it. This will be a negotiation
between the HOA and the developer of how much landscaping the
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 12
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
developer is willing to upgrade in exchange for being allowed to keep
the monument sign on their property.
Commissioner Hanson stated that the perimeter landscaping should
coordinate with the interior landscaping and until the parties agree, one
could not be considered without the other. Commissioner Gregory
noted that the City would prefer seeing a Desert Willow style landscape
on both sides of the wall. He recommended the two parties attempt to
work together. Ms. Finerty noted that they have been trying but are
thousands of dollars apart at this point. Commissioner Gregory stated
that an agreement is doable and could be win-win situation.
Mr. Knight proceeded to provide information for landscaping for both
partys' benefit. He stated the parking lot tree ordinance affects this
property. The ordinance requires 50 percent coverage from shade
trees. The applicant has proposed covered parking on the west
perimeter and against the west face of the building in order to mitigate
the parking lot tree requirement. He has not made a decision on this
and would like to leave it up to the Commission about how much they
are willing to trade the trees for the covered parking. For the balance of
the landscaping on the applicant's property, there has been an attempt
to meet the City's and landscape requirements. There is a large turf
area next to the existing dentist building. This will eventually be another
pad. Parking spaces will be a limiting factor on how that pad will be
built out.
Mr. Hal Hall, one of the applicant's partners, stated the dentist office
portion is landscaped and developed. There are trees existing on the
site which are not shown on the proposed plans. Mr. Drell asked to see
a plan that shows all the existing landscaping. Commissioner Gregory
recommended that the covered parking be averaged out to 50%. Mr.
Manuel Mendoza, designer, stated over 40 percent of the proposed
project's parking spaces are covered and they will provide trees to
shade the remaining 10 percent. Mr. Knight stated trees needed to be
in the parking lot in order to soften the look of the asphalt and building.
The only thing the Commission can provide is preliminary approval on
the building and wait for the parties to resolve their issues. Mr. Drell
stated the applicant could not proceed further until the signage and the
landscaping issues were settled.
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 13
vow
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2001
MINUTES
For the record, Mr. Lyle asked that the existing monument sign not be
removed until an agreement had been reached. Mr. Drell noted that it
was on the record, however, this Commission will not have a
determination on that issue.
Action:
Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson,
to grant preliminary approval only to the architectural plans as
submitted. Motion carried 4-0 with Commissioner O'Donnell and Vuksic
absent.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m.
STEVE SMITH
PLANNING MANAGER
GAPlanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\AGMIN\AR010814.min 14