HomeMy WebLinkAbout119C HUGHES INVESTMENT45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA92260
TELEPHONE (714) 346-0611
REPORT OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION
CASE NO.: 119C (Ref: 91C, Hughes Investment)
LOCATION: Northeast corner of Highway 74 and E1 Paseo
ZONE: C-1, S.P.
APPLICANT: Bank of Indio/ 81-703 Highway 111, Indio, California
(Carl Cox, A.I.A., 81-713 Highway 111, Indio, California)
NATURE OF APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of preliminary plans for bank building
on Hughes Investment site.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION:
Upon reviewing the submitted plans and the presentations by the
staff and by the applicant, the Design Review Board
continues this project.
Date of Action: August 7, 1979
Vote:
(An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City
Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the
date of the decision.)
STAFF COMMENTS: This item is postponed to August 28, 1979, meeting. Revised
plans should be submitted by August 20.
MINUTES
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
AUGUST 7, 1979
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I. The meeting was called to order at 2:30 P.M. after a 1 hour
study session.
MBERS PRESENT: Eric Johnson
Phylis Jackson
Bernie Leung
Murrel Crump (For Paul Williams)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Vern Barton
STAFF PRESENT:`
Stan Sawa
It was moved by Jac son, seconded by Johnson, that the amended minutes
of July 17, 1979, an minutes of July 24, 1979, be approved as written;
carried 4-0 (JOHNSON, CKSON, LEUNG, CRUMP)
II. Minute motion approving ca s found acceptable at the study
session - none.
III. CASES
Case No. 118C - Suchow & Sigler- Pre 'urinary Plans for exterior
remo a ing o an existing motor inn at 3-850 Highway 111; applicant
was not present. The Staff received a v bal request from the
applicant to postpone this item to the mee ing of August 28, 1979.
On a motion by Crump, seconded by Jackson, the oard moved to
continue this item to the meeting of August 28, 1Z79.
Carried 4-0 (JOHNSON, JACKSON, LEUNG, CRUMP).
Case No. 119C ;(REF: 91C, Hughes Investment) - Bank of Indio -
re 1 ans for bank building on Hughes Investment site
at the northeast corner of Highway 74 and E1 Paseo; applicant
was present.
Staff explained the proposed changes formulated by the Board
at the study session. Mr. Leung explained the architectual
changes which the Board felt was necessary to provide a building
which is compatible with the surrounding shopping center. The
concept of utilizing the same roof line as the buildings around
the bank was deemed desirable. Applicant could then have some
flexibility with regard to treatment of the walls. Applicant
explained the concept for the design as submitted. The Board
and applicant discussed on -site circulation patterns and problems.
Alternatives to the submitted plan and Board recommended plan were
discussed with the applicant stating that adequate stacking room
for the drive -up lanes was necessary.
After considerable discussion, it was determined that a revised
plan was necessary, incorporating changes discussed. The Board
instructed the Staff to set up a meeting between Public Works
Dept. , Staff and applicant to study the feasibility of an additional
driveway off of E1 Paseo.
On a motion by Leung, seconded by Jackson, the Board moved to
continue this item to August 28, 1979. The applicants were
generally instructed to provide revised plans considering the
following items:
1. Study feasibility of reversing direction of traffic
through driveup lane.
Munk .
MINUTES
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
AUGUST 7, 1979 Page Two
2. Incorporate roofline to match roofline utilized in
shopping center.
3. Study feasibility of relocating drive -up lanes to
area adjacent to east side of proposed bank building.
4. Through meeting with City, determine feasibility of
providing additional driveway from E1 Paseo.
5. Eliminate two parking spaces on east side of drive -
through lane if drive -through location is retained.
6. Study incorporation of stucco element into wall
treatments.
7. Provide 5 foot setback adjacent to all street property
lines per Municipal Code requirements.
8. Maintain approved number of parking spaces.
9. Submit preliminary landscaping plan showing species,
size, quantity, and approximate location of all plants;
said landscaping plan to be compatible with approved
landscaping plan for shopping center.
Carried 4-0 (JOHNSON, JACKSON, LEUNG, CRUMP).
Case No. 375SA-Lyndale Manor & Perry Waite - Amendment to
rove freestanding sign for commercial building at
3- 60 an
d 73-250 Highway 111; applicant was present.
Staf\discussed.
ted a background on the previously approved
freesign for both the"Lock Shop" and "B & W
Hardpplicant presented his reasons for requesting
that be permitted to be raised to the maximum 10
feetternatives to raising the sign to that height
wereed. he alternative of moving the sign to the
nortt it uld not be next to a parking space was
disctensive
On a motion by Jackson, seconded by Johnson, Board moved to
amend the approved freestanding sign, subject to the following
revisions:
1. From the bottom of the Sig
to finished grade of the
subject parking lot shall be maximum of 5 feet.
2. The sign shall be moved to the Werth so that it is
located between parking spaces. ��
3. Dwarf oleanders shall be densely plant d beneath the
sign to create a monument look to the b e of the sign.
( Carried 2-0-2 (JOHNSON, JACKSON, WITH LEUNG AND UMP ABSTAINING).
IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS
92-C - Rusty Pelican Restaurant - Request for amendment
approved elevations; applicant was present.
The applicant requested approval to retain the stone walls
shown on the submitted working drawings. At a previous
Design Review Board Meeting, this stone work was required
to be removed.
r
NDA ITEM NO. III, C-2
DATE August 7, 1979
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
CASE NO. 119C (REF: 91C, Hughes Investment)
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) Bank of Indio (81-703 Highway 111,
Indio, California 92201� (Carl Cox, A.I.A., 81-713 Highway 111,
Indli , CaIlTornia 92201)
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT Approval of preliminary plans
for bank building on Hughes Investment site.
LOCATION Northeast corner of Highway 74 and E1 Paseo.
ZONE C-1 , S
The Hughes Investment project is presently under construction
at the intersection of Highway 74 and El Paseo. The subject
site was approved as future commercial. The applicants now
wish to utilize the site for a commercial bank building.
Adequate parking is available provided there is no decrease
in the amount of parking spaces as previously approved.
The materials and architectual style of proposed bank building
would be acceptable in a different location. Th Staff feels
that material and architectual compatibility between the pro-
posed bank and center under construction should be maintained.
Applicant is also proposing vehicular ingress on the east side
of the proposed structure. Because of the traffic conflicts
that will be created on -site and along E1 Paseo Staff recommends
against any further access points. Additional, the approved
circulation throughout the site was carefully designed to
provide adequate access.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Continue request in order to review revised plans incorporating
the following items:
1.
Provide 5 foot setback adjacent to all
streets
per
Municipal Code requirements.
2.
Redesign plan eliminating proposed access
from
El Paseo.
3.
Maintain approved number of parking spaces.
4.
Utilize the same materials and colors
as approved for
balance of shopping center.
5.
Modify roofline to be compatible with
approved
building
to east.
-
6.
Show how air conditioning pad on north
side of
building
will be screened.
7. Submit preliminary landscaping plan showing species, size,
quantity, and approximate location; said landscaping plan
to be compatible with approved landscape plan for shopping
center.
i i ///i///%Z_.-
�� •\=-) I ro rruM Iuwr fee ll' Me •w.•�• !—e r
y
1•iPP• —�-
yr:T/.UMhMj , \. � _�NG r. .I �Ll.•IHCI Y:IAL
a'.
\ \ acrca�,•
tiff.
yo
\ •, 1 1
PARCEL
t PARCEL NO 4
S� %cam IPA ENO 5
ay 8
��S'.2cG .w..... IAv I'�e~...1 ` (f"I^•0'PI•r—)
..: .t
PARCEL NO 1 'C
t-
I•
PARCEL N'
UIMMELLIAl-
rc. _ T t, rl.. -'I-I 1 ll-l_t._Lli/. � q .L ,.v.f., ,..., •.,i
I n• 1P00•
a•e!•IYeY
i al- PA=Po
•1lld... I.
Z F
�,\\\ �WL1I•
L' Q "!J lJ L2J
?It 4" 219,)47 9F
O'Jd01IA Al" 00%If
NLP114 I t(M> ).91G
Wig L 5aw4 iLL 12,000
WL%J4 04 ike) 124VO
91j6 17 1 0104 fA10 $1211
MMQ4 (uaLuf)) lei
Nu P q • 14 Vain
(x Jn1.) is •--
ul M'(L 2)0
�m�iPv4n 1
--
f a•p �.
5
L%
FL P44FO
•w...f M ti•v. P M
i?e JC.vprw': :e•l,m rx;.e ,.+..rtF a,
LEGAL D=SC[MMCN:
I+KIa i er �*a•�. M,P waY,,J v. e++v.- aw �.ae,,
0. M pv[paes , .:V,[ K w MeJ.. M 6c [W .yrvne
J ...r[ M nw �/ 1t w mt [.eaa T n..s•:.n n.+epe
of ouo uaJq.
PnOJECT: PAr bY0.rtO&
JOB LOCATION: em:e rF wroyww-•
jFIM OfNy^i , 4L'�cGJ
BUILDING ZCIUE: Ww0=tAL
OCCUPAIUCY: V-f
CUFUSTRUCTIOIU TYPE: ]II
FIRE ZC�'2: 2
CUIDIIUG SCI. FT.: !9y7
AREA TABULATIOM: ^.w m. cr.
ypnJr - ie ep . rFo..,veo eJ Wx L ,
e.
, YJPY6i�,VY 7 Y �b o. �lY ]3
j � C
1 a 3
IL-J L
4
�����
• z
E.—d 12,13' is
r
1 II
E%-si sLE/AT[okl "•. I'
: I-;
G
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
PLANNING DIVISION
BANK OF INDIO
Applicant 1 M.s. w,nl1
81-703,Highwav 111 347-6156
Mailing Address Telephone
Indio California 92201
City State Zip- Code
REQUEST: (Describe specific nature of approval requested)
To construct a 4,500 square foot ± Bank Building with
3 drive-thru facilities.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Parcel 1 of Parcel map 13584 Book 59/91-92 County of Riverside
being a portion of the NW ;, SW 4, Sec. 20, T.53., R.6E.
ASSESSOR IS PARCEL NO. 627-190-036
EXISTING ZONING C-1
Property Owner Authorization THE UNDERSNiNED ES T THEY ARE HE Op( 8[ VfiTj[ PRNRF?6hCOW D HEREIN AND HEREBY GIVE AUTHOR-
IZATION FOR TM U F THIS A 1 N. ij{U j�f, i 11Y
J.F. Huffman
NATURE DATE
AGREEMENT ABSOLVING T OF PALM DESERf,0FLWL LIABILITIES RESATIVE TO ANY DEED RESTRICTIONS.
I DO BY MY SIGNATURE ON THIS AG EN OLVE THE CITY OF PALM DESERT OF ALL LIABILITIES REGARDING ANY DEED RES-
/ RICTIO�THATY BE APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN.
2?
SIGNATURE DATE
�-
Applicants Signature
SIGNATURE
IFOR STAFF USE ONLY) ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
❑ MINISTERIAL ACT E.A. Me.
❑ CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
❑ NEGATIVE DECLARATION
❑ OTHER
-/0s-2.Z
DATE
ACCEPTED BY 5E? _11'3br�g
CASE No.�� I t9 e- t
REFERENCE CASE NO.��G
r
The Design Review Board process is the method by which the City of Palm Desert
reviews detailed design and construction plans prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
RTS
a
DEPARTMENT DESIGN ( LE
NING t DEPARTMENT
APPLICATION OF ENVIRON- * REVIEW ISSION r\ BUILDING AND
MENTAL BOARD VES oR L� SAFETY
SERVICES (ADVISORY) S PROJECT)
STAFF
INTERIOR REMODELS, MINOR ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, OR PLUMBING PERMITS
PROCESSING SCHEDULE:
CONSTRUCT
ION
SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES and similar projects require 2-4 working days before they may
be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for plan check.
MULTI -FAMILY, COMMERCIAL, and other projects that must be reviewed by the D.R.B.
and Planning Commission usually require 10-20 days.
In order to facilitate processing, the applicant or a designated representative
should attend the review hearings to answer questions which may arise regarding
the project.
STAFF USE ONLY:
Date Received
Date of
ACTOR Meeting
ACTION
APPLICANT NOTIFIED
Staff
ORB
P.C.
C.C.
Department of Environmental Services Form 1
Design Review of:
CITY OF PALM DESERT
APPLICATION FORM
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PROCESS
Bank Building
TYPE OF PROJECT
CASE NO. I l'D G
BANK OF INDIO, 81-703 Highway 111, Indio, California 92201
Agreement of compliance to be signed by those applying for review.
I hereby acknowledge that I have read and agree, to comply
with all the following requirements, and understand that
the Department of Building and Safety will not issue a
building permit or allow occupancy on the use permitted
until this signed confirmation has been received by the
Department of Environmental Services.
The development of this project shall conform substantially
to all development plans submitted in behalf of this case,
and as revised according to the Design Review Board process.
Any minor change requires approval by the Director of Envi-
ronmental Services. Any substantial change requires ap-
proval by the Design Review Board.
All requirements of any law, ordinance, or regulation of
the State, City, and any other applicable government entity
shall be complied with as part of the development process.
This approval is applicable, subject to the development of
this project, commencing within one year from approval date
and being promptly completed.
Landscaping (with irrigation system) shall be installed
prior to final inspection and receiving certificate of
occupancy.
Curb, gutter, curb cuts, and tie-in paving shall be provided
along the full frontage of the lot by means of installation
prior to final inspection or other provisions as approved by
the City Engineer. Construction shall conform to City Stan-
dards and all requirements of the City Engineer.
7-a-
(Date)
?i -
J.F. HifMan
Vice President
Department of Environmental Services Form 1
0 a
CASE NO.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CHECKLIST
INITIAL PLAN REVIEW
NOTE: Planning Division Staff are required to
reject applications if any applicable
exhibits are not received and checked.
I. Completed Application Form (one (1) copy)
II. Address labels for project sponsors
(two (2) copies, gummed labels & typed list)
Not required for a single-family dwelling
application, or staff approved signs.
III. Detailed Plot Plan
Design Review Board and Commission
(AA
Review/Approval A. Q
- Three (3) full size (one (1) of which is
to be colored)
- One (1) reduced copy (812-"xll", or 13")
B. Staff Approval B.
- Three (3) full size
IV. Information Sheet and/or Plan Block
V. Cr-,�;ite Analysis & Preliminary Drainage and
Grading Plan (Three (3) copies, may be com-
bined, where appropriate, with plot plan)
VI. Ar hitectural Elevations (all sides of the
uilding(s))
A. Design Review Board and Commission Review/
Approval A.
- Three (3) full size (one (1) of which
is to be color keyed)
- One (1) reduced copy (81"xll" or 1311)
B. Staff Approval B. C_J
- Three (3) full size
DRB Checklist Page Two
** VII. S'gn Program (elevation(s) and details, if
applicable)
- Three (3) copies to scale
VIII. Co or and Material Exhibits
- Color and Materials written description ✓
(one (1) copy) _
- Color and Materials sample board
(max. 8"x13", 3/8" thick)
IX. SDF oor and Roof Plans
- Three (3) copies to scale ✓
* X. L dscape Plan (3 copies, 1 colored)
- Plant List, (1 copy) p/
* XI. �xterior Lighting Plan (3 copies)
XII. Filing Fee
A. Commission Review/Approval ($50.00) A. 1 ' I
B. Staff approval, single-family
dwellings ($15.00) B. L_
C. Sign Program Only ($15.00 DRB or C. L�
$10.00 Staff)
* Items X and XI may be combined.
** Sign Program only - submit items IIIB, VI, VII,
VIII, and Sign Fee.
Initial Plan Exhibits
Received and Checked by:
ng. Div. Staff DJtEj
FINAL CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
I. Three (3) copies of drawings to be submitted for plan check.
Drawings must reflect all Conditions of Approval.
Final Construction
Drawings Received by: /
Ping. Div. Staff Date
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA
I' '
.. ._! .
' �•
0
w
Received : fATY TREASURER w
u
Total a
Q y
Y
u
w
z
u
b�/