The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2023-03-14 `'�+` ,�r+" �,�'_.,� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � _ ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION � � MINUTES "�" MARCH 14, 2006 **************************************************************************************************** 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 5 (Left at 2:30 p.m.) Kristi Hanson X 5 (Left at 12:50 p.m.-sick) Chris Van Vliet X 4 1 John Vuksic X 5 Ray Lopez X 4 1 Karen Oppenheim X 5 Karel Lambell X 4 1 Also Present: Phil Drell, Director, Community Development Steve Smith, Planning Manager Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Tony Bagato, Assistant Planner Ryan Stendell, Assistant Planner Donna Quaiver, Senior Office Assistant Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: FEBRUARY 28, 2006 Commissioner Oppenheim moved, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, to approve the minutes of February 28, 2006. The motion carried 5-0-1-1 with Commissioner Van Vliet abstaining and Commissioner Lambell absent. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS A. None 1 . � +�r�` � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES A. Final Drawings 1. CASE NO.: SA 06-47 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SUN CREST CONSTRUCTION, 17775 Main Street, Suite B, Irvine, CA 92614 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of monument sign for Paseo Vista. LOCATION: 116 Paseo Vista Circle ZONE: PR-7 Mr. Stendell made presentation saying that it would be all veneer. Commissioner Van Vliet says that it needs to be something thicker. Also, this type of stone is not meant to go into water. Applicant was asked how thick it would be. He said it had a minimum width of 18". Commissioner Van Vliet also mentions that lighting is actually in the water at the base of the sign. Is not going to light the sign but rather, the stone since it is too close to it. Applicant says is a metal sign (painted metal). Action: Commissioner Oppenheim moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to continue the request to allow the applicant to return with professionally drawn plans that show (1) slab element to be a minimum of 18" thick, (2) use real stone, (3) modify lighting so that it's not so close to the sign, (4) change material for lettering to possibly bronze or brushed metal, and (5) widen water basin to reduce amount of water that will splash outside the sign area. 4-0-0-3 with Chairman Gregory and Commissioners Hanson and Lambell absent. 2. CASE NO.: PP/CUP 03-18 APPLICANT �AND ADDRESS): FOUNTAINHEAD SHRUGGED, LLC, 1400 Quail Street, Suite 135, Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of monument sign for Wendy's. 2 , , ��r° °rrrr� ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES LOCATION: 78-030 Country Club, northwest corner of Washington and Country Club. ZONE: PC-3 Action: Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-1-1 with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioner Lambell absent. 3. CASE NO.: PP/HPD 06-03 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RICK SOMERS CONSTRUCTION INC. - Ron Paul, Architect 326 Encinitas Blvd. #100, Encinitas, Ca. 92024 LIBRI PARTNERS, LLC. P.O. Box 9856, Rancho Santa Fe, Ca. 92067 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request for approval of a Precise Plan of Design to allow the construction of a 10,521 sq. ft. single family home within the Hillside Planned Residential Zone. LOCATION: 623 Indian Cove, within the Canyons at Bighorn. (APN: 771-480-004) ZONE: HPR Action: Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner Lambell absent. 4. CASE NO.: SA 06-51 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, 73-081 Fred Waring Dr., Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 FW OFFICE PARTNERS, LLC. , 73-081 Fred Waring Dr., Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 3 . , � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of (2) wall signs and (1) monument sign. LOCATION: .73-081 Fred Waring Dr., Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 ZONE: OP Action: Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-1-1 with Commissioner Vuksic abstaining and Commissioner Lambell absent. 5. CASE NO.: PP 03-22/VAR 06-01 APPLICANT LND ADDRESS): PATEL ARCHITECTURE, 71-711 San Jacinto Dr. , Rancho Mirage, Ca. 92270 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a fire access stairway 1 ft. from the east side property line. LOCATION: 73-591 Fred Waring Dr. , Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 ZONE: OP Mr. Smith noted that since they are unable to negotiate an access from the south, they are approaching the problem in a different way. Tony Bagato makes presentation saying there is an apartment complex in front so if you are driving southbound on Fred Waring, you won't see the stairway. Mr. Vuksic states that their proposal is very creative in the form is presented, it really doesn't look like a stair. He asks why not let that kind of free-form idea flow through. Allen LeClaire says it cannot be done due to the way the stair is engineered. They don't believe stairway will be seen until you are on top of it. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved with the comment of project was very creative, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval, subject to having the bottom of the metal screen to be studied (don't follow the edge of the steps) and approved by staff. Motion carried 4-0-0-3 with Chairman Gregory and Commissioners Lambell and Hanson absent. 4 . . �' � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES 6. CASE NO.: CUP 06-02 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): TERRY & CARLEY CECHIN, 77-717 Mountain View, Palm Desert, Ca. 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval for construction of a detached motor-home garage in the rear yard with a 15' rear yard setback. LOCATION: 77-717 Mountain View, Palm Desert, Ca. 92211 (APN: 637-300-029) ZONE: RE 40000 Action: Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner Lambell absent. 7. CASE NO.: PP 04-13 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LOWE'S HIW, INC., 1530 Faraday Ave. # 140, Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of trellis system to screen view into lumber pick up area. LOCATION: 35-850 Monterey Ave., Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 ZONE: PC-2 Action: Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner Lambell absent. 8. CASE NO.: SA 06-55 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): IMPERIAL SIGN CO., INC., 46-120 Calhoun Street, Indio, Ca. 92201 5 . . '� ''� ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of (1) wall sign at Castelli's LOCATION: 73-098 Highway 111, Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 ZONE: C-1 Applicant says that main sign is so small that can hardly be identified that is the main reason for the request. Action: Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet for approval. Motion carried 4-0-0-3 with Chairman Gregory and Commissioners Hanson and Lambell absent. 9. CASE NO.: PP 04-11 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RANCHO MIRAGE BUILDERS, INC.; 41-945 Boardwalk, Suite U, Palm Desert, CA 92211 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a 1,820 square foot office building. LOCATION: 73-920 Alessandro Drive ZONE: OP Mr. Smith asked for a motion to add the working drawings for applicant, whose plans are on the table for review. If acceptable, he would add case to the minute motion items after added to the agenda. Actions: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval to add this item to agenda. Motion carried 6-0- 0-1 with Commissioner Lambell absent. Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner Lambell absent. 6 . • `"�r✓ "� ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES B. Preliminary Plans . 1. CASE NO.: C 06-01 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MARK GILES, KKE ARCHITECTS, 525 E. Colorado Blvd., 4th Floor, Pasadena, Ca. 91101 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of elevations for a 50,000 square foot retail building with a tower element at 45' in height. Ashley Furniture LOCATION: 34-750 Monterey Avenue; Gateway Shopping Center ZONE: PC Diane Hollinger requested the landscaping at rear be modified. Commissioner Vuksic recommended adding trellis to structure to east elevation as well as leaving awnings on building. Regarding the tower element, he recommended some texture like tile, be added. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet for preliminary approval, subject to (1) adding trellis structure to east elevation, (2) leave awnings on building, (3) use decorative tile on tower element, and (4) modify landscape plan at rear (east). approval. Motion carried 4-0-0-3 with Chairman Gregory and Commissioners Hanson and Lambell absent. 2. CASE NO.: PP 06-02 APPLICANT LAND ADDRESS): W A R E M A L C O M B , A n d r e w Zertuche) 10 Edelman, Irvine, Ca. 92618 PACIFIC POINTE PARTNERS, (John Salman or Gary Levinski) 3636 Birch Street, Suite 260, Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of constructions of (7) separate industrial buildings totaling 143,942 sq. ft. (9.6 acres) 7 • ' �r'` '"�'' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSIOfJ MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES LOCATION: 73-555 Leilani Way, South of Dinah Shore Dr. and Gateway (APN 653-250-036) ZONE: S-1 Mr. Smith told commissioners that plans for this item were in each of their packets. He stated that the most significant feature on this item is the grade difference between Gateway at the south-west corner down to Leilani Way (30 ft.), so there is a considerable slope condition. The landscape plan for some reason, did not include any landscaping on the upper portion of the slope. That will be required through the Landscaping Manager's office. Commissioner Van Vliet asked applicant if the building pads had different elevations. Applicant replied that buildings get full advantage of the slope and that grading plans are correct. Commissioner Van Vliet's concern was that no stepping was shown in any of the building elevations, rather, they look flat. That is a very significant difference. Applicant said that there will be steps in the building, but after revising the grading plans there won't be as many. They are trying to minimize it to maybe one or two. The intent is for the building to stay flat and architecture should not change. There will be a step of about 2.5 ft. between buildings G and H. Commissioner asked if one of the buildings will be 30 inches taller than the other and if that is the intent on the rest of the buildings to have steps. Applicant said that it was the civil engineers intent and as architects he said they could not do that. Mr. Drell asked why couldn't they step the buildings. Applicant replied that's the way they were designed. Mr. Drell mentioned that they are always trying to eliminate horizontal roof lines and it appears as designers, they are fighting to maintain it. He also said that commissioners is not trying to discourage them to go with horizontal roof lines they don't like and have to change the grading plans for that intent. Commissioner Oppenheim asked if they have considered the impact of looking at the top of buildings' roof equipment from Gateway Drive, especially if they are going to lower them even further. Actual relationship is about 7 ft. above but if they lower it, you can be looking on top of the building. 8 . . °,,�,,r w�r� ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES Commissioner Vuksic inquired about building D. He sees windows with some awnings which is pretty good, but they are only half of them. The other half of them don't have anything, is just glass. In the west elevation you see windows and more windows on top of windows, but he doesn't see anything in the floor plan indicating any change in plane. Then there is a 3/4 " panel recess surrounding the window which is really minimal. On the roof plan it shows that when you notch down, you will be looking at the ends of those panels. There is no return of any kind giving it a castle-like look. Return should be at least 2/3 of 20' . The roof drains are on the outside of the building. Applicant said they were going to hide them with same color paint. Commissioner asked why not run them inside. Applicant noted they would be facing the interior courtyard and also would be more expensive and need more maintenance. The Chairman summed up that the main concern is the flatness of some of the really massive walls since the 3/4 " reveals are not enough. Awnings over windows work if that was the solution but something has to be done on all that glass. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved to continue the request to allow the applicant to return with revised elevations reflecting revisions to the grading plans and also show slope sections on the landscape plan. seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Lambell and Hanson absent. 3. CASE NO.: PP 06-01, C/Z 06-02 APPLiCANT �ANU ADDRESS): TERRA NOVA PLANNING & RESEARCH, 400 S. Farrell Drive, Suite B-205, Palm Springs, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request preliminary approval of elevations for a 268-unit condominium community and a 41 ,476 square foot neighborhood commercial center. The Vineyards LOCATION: Northwest corner of Cook Street and Frank Sinatra ZC3NE: PR-5 9 . . `r�►r �' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES Apurva Pande, Arch. made presentation showing changes to the plans which he felt would relieve monotony. Commissioner Vuksic inquired about the of windows with details going around them which he can't tell what they are. Mr. Pande explained they are recesses. Also, looking at the side elevation Commissioner Vuksic says he sees a deck on the second floor with a trellis over it and looking at the rear elevation there seems to be a deck also. Mr. Pande confirmed it is a trellis. Regarding thickness of the walls, Commissioner Vuksic mentioned that recommendation to correct it was made during previous meeting and he thinks they still look thin. Mr. Pande replied that originally they were 8" thick and now they are 12" and some to 15" Overall, Commissioner Vuksic stated that revisions look good with the recommendation of further studying on balcony elements. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for Preliminary approval subject to studying cantilevered balcony element on residential elevations. Motion carried 4-0-1-2 With Commissioner Gregory abstaining, and Commissioners Lambell and Hanson absent. 4. CASE NO.: C 06-02 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SCANLAN KEMPER BARD COMPANIES, 1211 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 2600, Portland, Oregon, 97204 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of exterior remodel of shopping center. LOCATION: 73-091 Country Club Drive ZONE: PC-2 Jim Thury, Arch. presented project mentioning that their intent was to match the architecture as best they could to the already approved Bristol Farms. The windows are set in and out to add some thickness to the wall. Also, additional improvements will made through the canopy entry elements and tower. 10 . . �r � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES Commissioner Van Vliet made a suggestion to vary the colors of the canopy elements so that they ali the same colors as Bristol Farms. They have three different colors of their canopy elements, having all canopies identical is probably a cheap fix. Diane Hollinger inquired about landscaping, which will have to be reviewed.. Commissioner Vuksic mentioned that building B of the Bristol Park, is a small piece of building and he likes the architectural element added to it. Regarding building A, he thinks that those elements are just there and likes the fact that they are different, they are not two of the same thing; however, he is not sure they are different enough and thinks color would help. On building C architectural elements look good, with the exception of building A, those elements need to have a little more differentiation, but other than that, they are good. It makes the rest of the building look like an old center with a paint job with those sort of spanish forms added on to them. Mr. Thury said that they are actually new columns of 2 ft in diamater. Their intent is to box out and create new columns. Commissioner Vuksic continued with building C which he thinks needs to deepen the wall instead of returning it. Actior�: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner V�n Vliet to continue the request with the following comments: (1) Building A needs more differentiation between canopy elements with a possible color change. Use stucco in the columns as opposed to stone veneer. (2) Building C to have a deepened arch instead of returning it. (3) Applicant to take a tour of the shopping center with the Landscape Specialist to review landscaping. M o t i o n c a r r i e d 5-0-0-2 w i t h Commissioners Lambell and Hanson absent. C. Miscellaneaus Items 1. CASE NO.: MISC 06-10 APPLICANT �AND ADDRESS): STEVE GORDON, 73-385 Pinyon Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of exterior remodel in conjunction with the City of Palm Desert's Facade Enhancement Program. 11 . . '�` ",�,' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES LOCATION: 73-730 EI Paseo ZONE: C-1 Cynthia Miller, Designer made presentation showing that building consists of three small spaces (suites). Her proposal is to cover steps and columns with granite type stone as well as bringing height to match adjacent building which is higher where they meet. The other adjacent buiidir�g is low in the front and owner is waiting for tenant's leases to expire to make improvement. The back has already been done. Mr. Drell asked if all spaces had the same awning and her answer was yes, because is a small building. He suggested that the owner provide tenants space within a frame to express a little of their identity, not to put them all in the same "uniform". Regarding sign space, he would recommend that tenants be permitted to express themselves. People should see the tenant instead of the building. By eliminating recessed rectangular area above awnings, tenants will have the opportunity to meet their sign needs. Design guidelines for tenants would be of great help if created. Commissioner Van Vliet asked about the cornice details which he recommends to return at the end of building. Ms. Miller asked about landscaping issues since there are only cut-out squares on the sidewalks of EI Paseo, used for palms. There is also another one in the back of the building. Diane Hollinger said they have to come up with something appropriate, since there are no planters at thc� front. Chairman Gregory inquired about the mechanical equipment locations. Ms. Miller replied was that they are on the roof in the center of the building; well hidden and cannot be seen from the parking lot. Actian: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for preliminary approval. Motion carried 5-0-0-2 with Commissioners Lar�bell and Hanson absent. 2. CASE NO.: MISC 05-30 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ELDORADO ANIMAL HOSPITAL, Nancy Creek, 74-320 Highway 111, Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 12 . - �rrdr '`�r�` ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of revised elevations for exterior remodel in conjunction with the Facade Enhancement Program. LaCATION: 74-320 Highway 111 Z�DNE: C-1 Action: Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner Lambell absent. 3. CASE NO.: MISC 06-08 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESSI: JOAN & NICK MINERVINI, 74-653 Yucca Tree Dr., Palm Desert, Ca. 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of a wall exception to allow the construction of a 6' high vinyl fence (option 1), or slump-stone wall with decorative block (option 2) in a street side y�r� with a minimum set back of 11' 5" from curb face. LOCATION: 74-653 Yucca Tree Dr. ZONE: R-1 Mr. Stendell introduced applicants giving a brief detail of request. They have submitted a landscape concept but needs to be firmed up with Diane Hollinger. Also, mentioned that he received an e-mail from neiahbor saying that they were not in opposition to the wall but would r�ther see it in the slump-stone and decorative block. Applicant, Mr. Minervini stated that house was built in 1955, is actually the beginning of neighborhood and is located right on the corner. It has historical value and they want to continue with the same theme of wall on the backyard. Mrs. Minervini said they have an issue with people walking on the grass and so far the NO-TRESPASSING sign is not working, and local gardeners as well as other people use that area as eating place and she wants to discourage that. They are requesting fence (split-rail) 2' from the curb as a solution. They presented photographs of all the areas being discussed. Mr. Drell considers that 2' is too close, so 4' would define better their property. 13 . . � '�" ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES Commissioner Van Vliet asked if this issue can be handled on a staff review basis to which Mr. Drell replied probably not. Mr. Drell requested Commissioners to make a decision on this matter. Since drawings presented by applicants are made to scale, and taking ir�to consideration that is a small portion, an also meet the recauirements, request seems approvable. Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval, subject to (1) approval by the Landscape Manager, (2) wall being constructed of slump block with decorative orco block on top at maximum 6' in height, and (3) split-rail fence to be located on private property at minimum 4' from curb. Motion carried 5- 0-0-2 with Commissioners Hanson and Lambell absent. 4. CASE NO.: MISC 05-29 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MICHAEL HURSTl 78-080 Calle Estado # 203, La Quinta, Ca. 92253 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of revised elevations for exterior remodel of a commercial building in conjunction with the City of Palm Desert's Facade Enhancement Program. LOGATION: 73-280 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Commissioner Vuksic stated that he sees differences in windows from the existing, actually from the old elevations to new elevations. He asked if the intent is to re-do the windows and have them actually in different locations. ��Ir. Drell suggested that new and more accurate drawing be presented as well as new sign program. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim to continue the request to allow the applicant to return with (1 ) a new sign program, and (2) a more accurate representation of how the window area will look. Motion carried 4-0-0-3 with Chairmain Gregory and Commissioners Hanson and Lambell absent. 5. CASE NO.: MISC 06-11 14 . . � � ARCHITECTURAL RE'�,/IEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MARK BOVENZI, 56-078 Palms Dr., La Quinta, Ca. 92253 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of portion of roof and entry tower to exceed 18' height restriction. LOCATION: Lot#50 , Canyon View Estates, TRALT 29713 �ur�E: PR-7 , Action: Commissioner Lopez moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0-0-1 with Commissioner Lambell absent. 6. CASE NO.: SA 06-54 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BEST SIGNS, INC., 1550 S. Gene Autry Trail, Palm Springs, Ca. 92264 NA�"URE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of (3) riionument signs for Vons at Palms to Pines Plaza. LOCATION: 72-655/72-705 Highway 111, Palm Desert, Ca, 92260 ZO�IE: PC-3 Mr. Urbina presented proposal explaining showing existing signs on 111 next to W�shington Mutual, which will be replaced with a n�onument sign. However on EI Paseo, they are asking for two identical monument signs. Currently there are no monument signs on EI Paseo. The zoning Ordinance says that they should have at least 1600 sq. ft. of frontage in order to justify two monument signs, otherwise they have to restrict it one. So staff's recommendation is only allow one sign on EI Paseo. Their frontage is actually 680 sq. ft. so an exception permit would be needed. Since there are no signs in this area, you would never know there is a Vons in there. People get there because they identify it as the Vons shop��ing center. E3ut people who don't know the area, cannot tell it's riqi�t there. Commissioner Oppenheim stated that since it is the Vons sfiopping center, being the anchor store, she would go for a smaller sign. 15 , . � �' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES Commissioner Van Vliet stated he did not have problems with the signs but they will have to adjust the landscaping and irrigation. Mr. Urbina concurred on this and would like to have it conditioned to eliminate the grass around the signs to prevent over-spraying and staining the new signs. Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Oppenheim for approval, subject to modifying landscaping to eliminate over-spray on monument signs and subject to applicant obtaining a Planning Commission approval of an "exception" to permit the second sign on EI Paseo. Motion carried 4-0-0-3 with Commissioners Gregory, Hanson and Lamb�ll absent. 7. CASE NO.: TT 34074 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALM DESERT FUNDING, CO. LP c/o Hover Development Co., Inc., 3 Civic Plaza, Suite 215, Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Request approval of Uns•✓ersity Park Master Development Plan. L�CATION: South of Gerald Ford & west of Cook Street ZUNE: PCD Mr. Drell presented the overall architectural design concept for this large residential project. He also mentioned they have been working with them very closely . Mr. Vuksic made the comment that there are nice proportions and det�ils. He likes that the windows look like they are recessed. He also li��:es the basic arc;�itectural components, very nicely arranged. Commissioner Lopez discourages gravel in media islands. Commissioner Oppenheim says she likes the colors, are very pleasing and also likes the variety. Overall, architects intent has been to present a variety of styles in buildings , so asks if city has preference in terms of more modern styles. Commissia��er Vuksic responded commission does not dictate, styie. Whatever �tyle is good. General opinion was it is a very nice project. 16 , , . �� rr� ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSIGN MARCH 14, 2006 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet for approval of the conceptual architectural plans contained in the draft University Park master development plan. Motion carried 4-0-0-3 with Commissioners Gregory, Hanson and Lambell absent. VI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m. STEVE SMITH PLANNING MANAGER 17