Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-10-28 CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 2003 **************************************************************************************************** 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 17 3 Kristi Hanson X 17 3 Richard O'Donnell X 10 10 Chris Van Vliet X 19 1 John Vuksic X 18 2 Ray Lopez X 18 2 Karen Oppenheim X 10 1 Also Present: Steve Smith, Planning Manager Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Tony Bagato, Planning Technician Donna Quaiver, Senior Office Assistant Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 14, 2003 Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to approve the minutes of October 14, 2003. The motion carried 3-0-2-2 with Commissioners Gregory and Oppenheim abstaining and Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS A. Mr. Smith stated that the next meeting is scheduled on November 11, 2003, which is Veteran's Day and City Hall will not be open. He asked 1 'err► `wrr�' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES the commission if they would like to re-schedule the meeting for Monday, November 10 or Wednesday, November 12 or not at all. Commissioner Gregory commented that the ARC can't afford to skip a meeting. The commissioners stated that they'll check their calendars and confirm Monday, November 101h as their next meeting. A. Final Drawings 1. CASE NO.: CUP 03-24 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DELTA GROUPS, MICHAEL COLLIER, 5 Park Plaza, #1400, Irvine, CA 92614 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of 56' high wireless telecommunications mono-palm and equipment shelter. LOCATION: 39-105 Portola Avenue, Santa Rosa Country Club ZONE: O.S. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim to continue the case at the applicant's request to allow them to submit revised photo simulations. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Oppenheim absent. 2. CASE NO.: SA 03-141 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HEALTH NUTZ, 74-121 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of non-illuminated blue awning with business signage. LOCATION: 74-121 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Smith showed the commission a color sample of the proposed awning. This request was before the commission at their last meeting, however, the applicant had asked for approval of a red awning. The G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 2 "400, t ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES proposed awning will re-cover the existing awning structure, which is currently forest green. Commissioner Vuksic commented that he may have been too vague or too nice at the last meeting. Commissioner Van Wet stated that their comments from the last meeting included toning the color down, make it less shocking, using a rust color which would be much more subdued than the primary red color, choose a color combination that would give the awning more punch without being "too hard on the eyes", possibly use earth tones, etc... Commissioner Vuksic commented that the currently proposed blue awning is "hard on the eyes". The awning makes up the entire facade. He doesn't have a problem with colors if they're used in a way where it's an accent to the building. If someone asked to paint their building blue, unless there was some artistic merit to that, he probably wouldn't approve it. This proposal is no different from that. If it is going to be the extent of the architecture, it does need to be more subdued. The applicant has a lot of choices. It could be a rust color, sage, adobe or something else in brownish or reddish tones, but the primary colors wouldn't be approved. Commissioner Hanson concurred with Commissioner Vuksic's comment regarding painting a building primary blue and agreed that it would not be approved. Commissioner Gregory stated that this is the type of awning which becomes, in essence, architecture. There is no architectural detail on the upper edge of the building. It's all awning. The commission has to look at it in an architectural sense, as opposed to being an accent. He asked the applicant if there would be a problem with using a more architectural color, such as sage or another earth tone. The applicant stated that she didn't like light-colored awnings. Commissioner Gregory commented that if they were looking at paint being applied to a building, they would feel more comfortable with an earth tone. Noone is saying that they have to use a light color. The commission would like something that's less primary. Commissioner Gregory suggested that perhaps this could be handled at a staff level. Mr. Smith commented that with that direction, if the applicant brings in something that's obviously in the earth tone range, staff will handle it. If the color that's submitted isn't within that range, it'll be added to the next agenda. If it's something that's obviously acceptable, then staff will approve it. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to continue the request to allow the applicant to submit an GRIanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 3 fir+ ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES acceptable awning color, per staff approval. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. 3. CASE NO.: SA 03-148 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EVER-GLO SIGNS, KARL SCORE, 2128 S. Grove Avenue, Unit B, Ontario, CA 91761 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of two business identification wall signs using channel letters. The Press Enterprise. LOCATION: 73-726 Alessandro Drive ZONE: OP Mr. Bagato showed the commission a red chip as a sample of the proposed signage. The square footage complies with the signage area. The red is included in the Press Enterprise trademark. Mr. Smith stated that the previous sign that they approved on this building was for Tarbell Reality, which used reverse channel letters. The proposed signage uses through-the-face illumination. Commissioner Van Vliet asked the applicant if they could use reverse channel letters. Karl Score, representative from Ever-Glo Signs, stated that the visibility wouldn't be nearly as good. The red is part of their trademark. The Press Enterprise is looking for something that matches their other locations, which they have throughout the Southland. They use this trademark lettering with the color red on all of their building frontages. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that it's going to be awfully bright and too red. Commissioner Hanson asked why they needed the two can signs on the sides of the main sign. Tom Parody, publisher for the "D", stated that the can signs represent separate publications from the Press Enterprise Company. The "D" represents the new daily that they're launching in Coachella Valley and the "El D" represents the Hispanic publication. Commissioner Hanson wanted to know the difference between the "D" and the Press Enterprise. Mr. Parody stated that they're two separate publications owned by the Press Enterprise company. Commissioner Hanson commented that none of the signs go together. The applicant hasn't made it so that it's an architectural set up. They're basically trying to put three logos on one sign, which is a lot. Commissioner Van G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 4 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES Vliet concurred and commented that the applicant is trying to do too much. Commissioner Vuksic commented that he has an issue with the size of the sign, even though it meets the requirements. It looks so big and overtakes the architecture. Mr. Score presented drawings that show the sign scaled down by about 10%. Commissioner Vuksic suggested reducing the sign by 20%-25%. Commissioner Oppenheim suggested moving the two can signs to another location on the building. Mr. Smith asked how the two outer logo signs are going to work. Mr. Score stated that one is an internally illuminated rectangular can sign, but it's not terribly bright. Commissioner Hanson stated that they're trying to put way too much on the front of the building and it looks very chopped up. It doesn't do any good to do that. Mr. Parody stated that the Press Enterprise doesn't have a strong presence in this market, but they will be expanding. Commissioner Hanson commented that she doesn't see how the three signs relate. Even though they may relate in business, they don't relate on a sign for a building. Somehow the applicant has to come to some conclusion about what it is that they want people to know is there and not try and do all three together because they don't go together. Mr. Score commented that the Press Enterprise has leased a very large portion of the building and it conforms to the City's requirements. Commissioner Gregory stated that the ARC is a subjective review board. Also, noted for the record was that plans indicate 6500 white, but the maximum is 4500, per City standards. Commissioner Gregory stated that the photograph submitted by the applicant indicates a young mesquite tree, which within a year would totally obliterate the sign. As a warning in advance, that tree will inevitably be topped and then they would have to deal with the landscape bureaucracy. Ms. Hollinger stated that if the applicant would like to remove the tree or change the landscaping, they should show their plans to Public Works. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson for approval subject to (1) reduce entire sign size by 20%, (2) use reverse channel letters with red faces and black returns, and (3) move the two non-illuminated logo can signs to a different location, per staff approval. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 5 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES 4. CASE NO.: VAR 03-04 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JERRY SANTUCCI, 72-526 Beavertail Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of 36% lot coverage and roof height of 15'4" for a single family residence. LOCATION: 43-280 Texas Avenue ZONE: R-1 9,000 Mr. Bagato stated that the applicant's roof height is 15'4" the lot coverage exceeds the lot percentage by 1%. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if the exterior walls are 2 x 4 construction. The applicant was not present and Mr. Bagato couldn't confirm the wall thickness. Commissioner Hanson stated that she doesn't have a problem with it. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. 5. CASE NO.: PP 03-20 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RICK JOHNSON, P.O. Box 2130, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architecture of two-unit apartment project. LOCATION: 74-210 Alessandro Drive ZONE: R-3 Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for preliminary approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 6 r.r V"rr ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES 6. CASE NO.: MISC 03-38 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JOE ESPOSITO, JR., 77-130 Michigan Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of a carport structure 20 feet from the curb. LOCATION: 77-130 Michigan Drive ZONE: R-1 9,000 Mr. Bagato commented that he spoke with the homeowner and suggested that he use 6" x 6" posts on the proposed carport. Mr. Esposito, applicant, agreed to use 6" x 6" posts. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if the brackets would be exposed. Mr. Esposito commented that the brackets won't be exposed since he is planning to stucco the posts. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion subject to using 6" x 6" posts. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. 7. CASE NO.: MISC 03-31 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SCOTT POWELL, GREEN MARK, 74-991 Velie Way, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of a screen wall to obstruct view into storage yard from Cook Street. LOCATION: 74-991 Velie Way ZONE: S.I. Mr. Bagato showed the commission samples of perforated metal screening and vinyl. The applicant is proposing using the vinyl to cover the metal screening. The metal without the vinyl is see through. Commissioner Gregory thought that there may be different perforation sizes for the metal screening. Commissioner Hanson stated that she didn't like the idea of having vinyl over the metal screening. Scott G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 7 iron'' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES Powell, applicant, stated that the vinyl could be attached to the inside of the metal. Commissioner Hanson stated that she's fine with that. Commissioner Gregory asked how the screening would be mounted. Mr. Powell stated that it'll be mounted on 2Y2" square galvanized steel posts which will be attached to the existing wall. Commissioner Vuksic asked the applicant if he would be interested in using a metal screening material with fewer perforations so that he won't have the maintenance issue of the vinyl. Mr. Powell commented that they opted to use the vinyl covering rather than search through different perforations. He had hoped that the steel would provide enough integrity and they're hoping that the vinyl won't tear since it'll be glued to the metal. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval subject to applying the vinyl on the back side of perforated metal screening. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. 8. CASE NO.: MISC 03-42 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MAMA GINA'S RESTAURANT, 73- 705 El Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Patio expansion and replacement of windows, per Facade Enhancement Program. LOCATION: 73-705 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. 9. CASE NO.: MISC 03-37 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CAPTAIN COOK'S SEA GRILL, Dee Dee Waliquist, 72-191 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of exterior color change. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN g ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES LOCATION: 72-191 Highway 111, Captain Cook's Sea Grill ZONE: PC-3 Mr. Smith stated that this item was on the ARC agenda a couple of weeks ago and it was continued so that the commissioners could have the opportunity to view the building personally. Dee Dee Wallquist, Manager for Captain Cook's, was present to answer questions. Commissioner Gregory stated that the building and sign have already been painted. It's an intense blue. Mr. Smith stated that there was an original approval on the building, which included approval of the colors. If you re-paint your building in the exact same colors or similar colors, it's no issue. If you vary from what was originally approved significantly, then you're no longer in compliance with the original approval by this body and/or the City Council. This color change resulted in the Code Compliance Department visiting the property. Therefore, it was referred to the Architectural Review Commission for their review. Ms. Waliquist suggested repainting the sign. Commissioner Van Vliet asked the commission what their main objections were. Commissioner Oppenheim stated that this paint job didn't bother her as much as a lot of the other buildings. It looks attractive, however, there's something that doesn't seem right for it right there. It's not offensive but those colors may not belong right there. She suggested that the colors on the building be toned down. Commissioner Vuksic stated that colors like this work when there's artistic merit to it, but it doesn't look like it's there yet. It was suggested that the applicant consult with someone who has an artistic eye for color. Ms. Wallquist stated that she would like to paint the roof, which is currently rust. Commissioner Gregory stated that the applicant should get some professional assistance because right now it's so heavy handed. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the commission welcomes something interesting. Commissioner Gregory suggested that the applicant bring some color samples in for the ARC to review before she re-paints the sign or building. Commissioner Hanson stated that they would like to see another color scheme, which apply both to the building and the sign. The teal almost matches the trim on the complex which is fine. There are many other colors that are "deserty" that will still give punch but are not quite that blue. It has to be a matter of coming up with some other samples to look at before they re-paint the building. A dustier blue can be very beautiful. It doesn't have to be dull and uninteresting. It has to be more towards the warm tones versus the GRanning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 9 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES cool tones. The current wall color is a very appropriate color for the beach, but it's not appropriate here in the desert. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to continue the request to allow the applicant to return with color samples to address the primary blue color on the building and monument sign. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. 10. CASE NO.: MISC 03-43 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHOICE ENTERPRISE, 74-925 Highway 111, Suite 14, Indian Wells, CA 92210 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a four-unit apartment complex. LOCATION: 73-765 Shadow Mountain Drive ZONE: R-3 Mr. Urbina stated that there are some unresolved issues with this project. The applicant would like to get some clarification from the ARC on some of the previous conditions when this came in for preliminary approval. Regarding the landscaping, the median was an addition, which was carried over to a Planning Commission condition of approval. The Landscape Specialist is requesting some changes to the plant palette. Ms. Hollinger commented that there isn't enough room for the planters. Commissioner Hanson commented that you don't want people driving any closer to the building, which is the purpose of the planter. The ARC knew it was a compromise and they were squeezing the planter in, but it was a way to break up the large concrete area. The planter will keep cars from getting to close to the columns. Mr. Urbina stated that another condition was that the applicant consider a play area or seating area at the end of the driveway. Commissioner Hanson stated that it was a grassy area that they had suggested. Ms. Hollinger commented that the whole landscape plan needs to be redone. Commissioner Hanson stated that if there are three bedrooms per unit, there may be some children so it would be a good idea to have a place for them to play. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES Mr. Urbina stated that some questions came up at the Planning Commission meeting regarding the ARC conditions. One ARC condition was to recess all windows. The applicant is reluctant to do that. He wants approval to use 2 x 6 pop-out window trim. Commissioner Vuksic commented that it looks like the applicant recessed the windows on the front. He has 2 x 6 walls. Instead of having a 2 x 4 trimmer, the applicant wants to create a surround around the windows. Commissioner Gregory stated that surrounds look tacky. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that just because windows are in a 2 x 6 wall, it doesn't mean that they're recessed. They could be nailed on the outside, which is probably what the applicant intends to do. Commissioner Vuksic stated that they had asked the applicant to use a 2 x 4 trimmer so that he could get a 2" return on the outside. The windows need to be nailed onto 2 x 4 trimmers. Mr. Urbina stated that another condition was to bring the stonework up to the horizontal line of the windows. The applicant did raise the stonework on the two columns on the elevation facing the driveway to be flush with the bottom of the windows, however, he did not raise it all the way up on the front elevation. There's a gap of 6". Commissioner Hanson stated that this is probably where there's an inset detail on the front windows. Mr. Urbina is requesting that the ARC approve the height of the stonework, as shown on the elevation. Commissioner Gregory commented that landscape pertains to more than just plant material. More attention needs to be worked on making things actually function better. They had talked about the element at the end of the driveway and whether a seat would be incorporated with that and the way that the curb detail is for the planters could be done a little better. There's room for more improvement without substantial cost to the developer. He would like to see these items incorporated as part of the landscape revision. It's not just plant material that needs to be addressed. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic for approval subject to (1) recessing windows, and (2) approval by Landscape Manager. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 11 ''0✓ ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES 11. CASE NO.: MISC 03-40 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): STAN & MICHELLE SMITH, 72-796 Willow Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval to park RV in side yard of single family residence. LOCATION: 72-796 Willow ZONE: R-1 10,000 Mr. Smith stated that the site is adjacent to Highway 74 on the frontage road. Mr. Urbina stated that the applicant has a side yard that faces west on the frontage road. There's an existing stucco block wall that ranges in height from 6' 6" to approximately 8' in the front. The applicant proposes to install two 8' wide by 8' high solid metal gates. A message was left for the applicant to provide a color brochure showing the design of the proposed metal gates since they will be 8' high and collectively 16' wide. This was noticed to the neighbors and 2-3 responses were received in support of the request. Staff did mention that one of the mitigation measures that we would propose in the event that the request is approved is that there be a wrought iron fence attached to the top of the existing block wall to raise the overall fence height to 10' and the existing bougainvilleas be trained to form a hedge wrapping around the suggested wrought iron fencing on top of the block wall. Staff would like to receive some feedback on that idea from the ARC. Mr. Smith noted that no members of the public were present to comment on the request. Commissioner Hanson stated that this is a very visible spot from Highway 74 and she would rather see more trees in the landscape area rather than add a wrought iron fence on top of the existing wall. It would look funny unless it was continued all the way around. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that the ordinance doesn't address corner issues. Mr. Smith stated that it also doesn't address the fact that the street headed northbound is elevated. Commissioner Hanson stated that the RV will be very visible. The RV is huge. Commissioner Gregory stated that he feels very uncomfortable about this request as well. He's concerned with the northbound direction. This is a huge RV and our effort is to make it seem like it's not really G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 12 WNW ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES there and he doesn't feel that they can be successful with this situation. It's a really tough location and maybe it just doesn't work. It might be easier if the RV was smaller, but this one is huge. It's not just their neighbors who are impacted by this. Everybody in the City will see this while driving on Highway 74. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to continue the request to allow the applicant to be present. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. 12. CASE NO.: MISC 03-44 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PAUL & MARILYN TESLOW, 2 Calle Claire, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of a 17Y2 roof height on a single family residence. LOCATION: 2 Calle Claire, Desert Springs Estates ZONE: PR-4 Mr. Bagato stated that the roof heights in the Desert Springs Estates vary from 18' - 30' and the applicant is requesting a roof height of 17Y2'. The setbacks meet the City code, but don't comply with the CC & R's of his homeowner's association. The request before the commission is only for the roof height. The plans were available for the commission to review. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic to add sign proposal SA 03-150 to the agenda. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. 13. CASE NO.: SA 03-150 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CB WEALTH MANAGEMENT GROUP, CATHY BROWN, 44-672 Monterey Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260 G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 13 rrr ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of a business identification monument sign. LOCATION: 44-672 Monterey Avenue ZONE: OP Mr. Smith stated that the business has an existing wall-mounted sign on the tower element. The applicant is requesting the addition of a free- standing sign that has dimensions of 5' x 5'. The actual signage face is approximately 4' x 5'. He asked the applicant what the space at the bottom of the sign is for. Cathy Brown, applicant, stated that it's a structural element so that people can see it as they drive by. Their problem was that when they originally had only a wall sign they thought that this would be sufficient for visibility. They've been in that location for 2 '/2 years and people are still having a problem figuring out where they are. They put up a temporary sign that Code Compliance has let them know was not in compliance. Mr. Smith stated that in the picture that was submitted, the bottom of the sign is shown flush with the top of the planter. He asked the client if that was how it was going to be or was it going to be another foot higher than that. Ms. Brown stated that the sign company designed the sign to be flush with the planter. The height of the sign from the bottom is 4'. The top of the sign should not be higher than 6' above the sidewalk level. Commissioner Hanson stated that they have signs that say CB Wealth Building and CB Wealth Management Group. How many times do you want to say the same thing? One time is sufficient. Ms. Brown stated that those are two different things. The idea is that now that there are tenants in the building so the sign is designed to be a directory in the CB Wealth Building. She is also a tenant in her building with her company being CB Wealth Management Group. Mr. Smith asked about illumination of the sign. Ms. Brown commented that she was assuming that she could use the spot light, which is located on a tree. The sign is not internally illuminated. Commissioner Van Vliet commented that he really doesn't want to see anymore monument signs in this area. They've had other applicants come and the ARC have told them to take the sign off the building if they want a monument sign. Ms. Brown commented that it's her understanding that there's a fixed amount of space that they can use for signage based on their frontage square footage. They have 45 feet of frontage on Monterey. With what they've used on the building, it still G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 14 'Awl' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES leaves an available amount for signage. It's very difficult to see their address because of a tree that's blocking it. Mr. Brown stated that they have tenants who have no exposure and people drive right by their building. Commissioner Hanson commented that she can understand and appreciate why they want to have a monument sign. She has a problem with having CB Wealth three times on the building. Chose one so that the sign doesn't have to be so big. Commissioner Gregory stated that by consolidating CB Wealth into one sign, the applicant can make it larger. They'll have more impact with it rather than saying it twice small. The ARC typically has an issue with these billboard, or menu-type signs because they're like little signs that you can't see and people will end up making a u-turn. If the sign could use CB Wealth once, then it could be made bigger and it would be more visible. Commissioner Hanson asked what the sign is made of. Ms. Brown stated that it'll be a stucco sign with the same color scheme that's on the building. Commissioner Vuksic complimented the applicant for the sign that's on the building. It looks really good and fits in with the architecture. Commissioner Van Vliet commented that he feels that there's too much clutter on Monterey with signage and he doesn't think that all the tenants need to be listed on the sign. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic for approval subject to the monument sign being reduced in height by removing CB Wealth Management Group from the menu and reducing the sign height proportionately. Motion carried 4-1-0-2 with Commissioner Van Vliet opposed and Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. B. Preliminary Plans 1. CASE NO.: PP 03-19 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DAVID PREST, PREST-VUKSIC ARCHITECTS, 72-624 El Paseo, Suite B-6, Palm Desert, CA 92260 G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 15 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architecture and landscaping for four office buildings. LOCATION: Portola Avenue, north of Country Club Drive ZONE: OP Mr. Smith stated that this proposal is on a five-acre piece of property north of the Cornerstone complex. Mr. Bagato stated that the site is in a location with Desert Willow to the east and north with Palm Desert Greens on the west side. The complex is going to be done in three phases. Buildings A and B are going to be identical in architecture, but flipped. Phase III will include a two-story building that will come in at a later time with a separate proposal to the Planning Commission. The project meets all the site plan development requirements. Building A was shifted because Public Works was requiring a deceleration lane. The landscaping is close to preliminary approval, but it won't be part of the approval today. Staff is recommending approval. The architect, David Prest, is present to answer questions. Commissioner Hanson asked about the overall height of the building. Mr. Bagato stated that it's 20'6" from grade. Commissioner Hanson commented that the buildings are very nice. Mr. Smith asked Mr. Prest how the buildings are different from the Foxx building. Mr. Prest stated that the forms are a little bit similar, but there won't be any granite. The Foxx building has a zero setback on one side and the proposed buildings are all four-sided buildings. He wanted to compliment his client because they really could've maxed this site out and they didn't. It's way over-parked. His goal was not to do anything close to what was done on the Cornerstone complex, although it has very nice architecture, but he wanted to be quite different and distinctive with something that they felt was a little more sculptural in nature and really talked them into using one material. The client actually wanted to use some stone on the buildings, but he really feels that the plaster by itself with different colors, shapes and massing really does everything that he needs it to do. Mr. Bagato commented that the roof plans show a lot of variation. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for preliminary approval. Motion carried 3-0-2-2 with Commissioners Vuksic and Gregory abstaining and Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 16 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES C. Miscellaneous 1. CASE NO.: MISC 03-43 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EDDIE SANIN, 72-139 Desert Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Review for certificate of conformance. LOCATION: 45-665 Verba Santa ZONE: R-1 Mr. Smith noted that the applicant wishes to obtain a certificate of conformance for a triplex in the R-1 zone. Planning has come up with a schedule of improvements that would be needed. There is a process by which the applicant can make it a conforming property, which gets them additional rights under code. It's a matter of what does it take to bring it up to the standard that we think is acceptable in this area. Mr. Urbina stated that staff identified five issues that need to be addressed. The first issue is submitting a scaled site plan that shows a minimum of six off-street parking spaces to be provided, of which three would have to be covered by carports or garages in order to meet the off-street parking requirements for two spaces per unit with one of the spaces being covered. This is an existing triplex on property zoned R- 1, which is non-conforming. The second issue is to submit a paving plan. There is an existing driveway that leads into the rear yard, most of which is paved but the condition of the asphalt has severely deteriorated. We would want it brought up to current paving standards. The third item is to submit a landscape plan. The landscaping that exists at the site is rather sparse with a few palm trees and a few oleanders. The ground cover is dirt. There's no landscaping at all in the rear yard. The fourth item is to submit elevations showing how the existing roof- mounted mechanical equipment, including some duct work on the roof, would be screened in an architecturally compatible manner. The fifth item is the issue of some outdoor water heaters. According to the Building and Safety Department, the outdoor water heaters would G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES have to be enclosed within a structure. Staff would like to see revised elevations that show an architecturally compatible enclosure for the water heaters. Eddie Sanin, applicant and triplex owner, was present and stated that he purchased the property as a "fixer-upper". He has already put $75,000 into the property in improvements, but needs a little bit more time to finish the items that were mentioned by Mr. Urbina. In the meantime, he's refinancing the building in order to continue the improvements. He can't refinance without a certificate of conformance in case it burns down. Mr. Urbina stated that before the applicant proceeds with anymore improvements he wants to see a scaled site plan that shows that he can provide six off-street parking spaces with the dimensions required by the City as well as a landscape plan and revised elevations showing the screening of the roof-mounted mechanical equipment. It was recommended that Mr. Sanin hire someone such as an architect to produce those plans to that level of detail. Mr. Smith stated that the idea of presenting this to the ARC is to ask the commission if they have any additional comments that would make this triplex fit into the neighborhood. Commissioner Hanson stated that she thought that these were all reasonable requests and she wouldn't add anymore to the list. Commissioner Gregory stated that if the applicant did get an architect or designer to do the work that's requested by the City and if it were approved by the ARC, would that be sufficient for him to get the loan from the bank? Mr. Sanin stated that this would be sufficient. Mr. Smith stated that the applicant won't get the certificate of conformance until the improvements are physically there and we go out and inspect them. Commissioner Gregory stated that if the applicant could go to the lender with something in writing showing what it would take and that the ARC has approved it, then the bank would be more comfortable approving a loan. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson continued the request with the understanding that the Commission agreed with the required improvements delineated in the staff report dated 10-28-03 and will review the plans showing the proposed improvements at a future date. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners O'Donnell and Lopez absent. GRIanningTonna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 18 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2003 MINUTES VI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 2:10 p.m. STEVE SMITH PLANNING MANAGER G:Planning\Donna Quaiver\wpdocs\Agmin\AR031028.MIN 19