Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-07-22 MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION TUESDAY - JULY 22, 1986 1:00 P.M. COMMUNITY SERVICES CONFERENCE ROOM 73-510 FRED HARING DRIVE I. The meeting was called to order at 1 :00 pm after a one hour study session. Commission Members Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ron Gregory, Chairman X 14 0 Al Cook X 11 3 Mary Drury X 10 4 Charlie Martin X 14 0 Russell McCrea X 12 2 Rick Holden, Alternate X 11 3 Staff Present: Ramon Diaz Phil Drell Phil Joy Catherine Sass Ken Weller Donna Gomez It was moved by Commissioner McCrea, seconded by Commissioner Martin to approve the minutes of July 8, 1986 as written. Carried 3-0-2 (Commissioners' Cook and Drury abstaining) . II. Moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Cook to approve the following cases by minute motion. Carried 5-0 1. CASE NO: 296 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DESERT CITIES BAPTIST CHURCH, P.O. Box 2215, Palm Desert, CA 92261 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of landscape plan. LOCATION: East side of Portola, north of Country Club Drive. ZONE: PR-5 2. CASE NO: 313 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): RICHARD SELEINE, P.O. Box 556, Silverado, CA 92676 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of 7-Eleven convenience store. A,rr MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22, 1986 LOCATION: Northwest corner of Highway III and Parkview Drive. ZONE: C-1 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 265 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BILL ALEXANDER, 483 E. Via Escuela, Palm Springs, CA 92262. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of plans for 48,000 square foot two story office warehouse. LOCATION: West side of Corporate Way. ZONE: S. I . Mr. Joy indicated that the applicant has provided screening for the roof mounted equipment as requested by commission and a revised landscape plan. Commissioners' Martin and Cook were concerned with the height of the parapet. They felt it should be raised to provide adequate screening. Mr. Wendel Veith, architect, stated that he could add another 8" block to the parapet. Commissioners' Cook and Martin felt that would be adequate. Commissioner Cook questioned who maintained the drainage basin that was to be between projects. It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Martin to grant approval subject to the following conditions. Carried 5-0 1 . That the parapet be raised 8" around the perimeter. 2. That a revised landscape plan be submitted for final approval . 2. CASE NO: PM 21655 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : JAN MITCHELL, c/o WAGNER-STANFORD CONSULTANTS, 201 Yorba Linda Blvd, Placentia, CA 92670. 2 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22, 1966 MATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of landscape plan of renaturalized street grading. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Highway III and Painters Path. ZONE: HPR In study session commission had concerns with the type of landscaping to be used. Commissioner Martin felt that the green landscaping would stand out on the hillside. Ms. Sass explained that the applicant is limited to grading only those areas that are required for safe access and all disturbed areas are to be put back to natural grade. Commissioner Drury questioned where the existing road was located and if the new road would follow the same route. Ms. Sass indicated that the roads would be nearly the same. Chairman Gregory recommended that along with the staining of rocks to match the terrain the road area should be redone also. He felt the proposed landscaping would be attractive but would stand out on the hillside. Commissioner Martin was concerned with the large cuts on the hillside being visible. He suggested that heavy planting be placed in the areas of the cuts and less landscaping in other areas. He also recommended that a natural color asphalt be used in place of black. Commissioner Cook was concerned with the placement of the site pads. He felt that they should be placed at the top of the hill rather than cutting into the side of the hill . It was moved by Chairman Gregory, seconded by Commissioner Cook to grant conceptual approval of the renaturalized landscaping plan subject to the following conditions. Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Martin opposed) . 1 . The asphalt is to be a native color. 2. That the renaturalization process include rebouldering, filling in, restaining to natural varnish and landscaping of cuts in hillside. 3 1wr► MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22, 1986 3. CASE NO: 302 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, c/o FRANK WELLS, 4337 Fairlawn Drive, La Canada, CA 91011 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of gas station and convenience store plans. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Portola and Highway 111 . ZONE: C-1 Mr. Drell explained that the applicant has submitted a new site plan showing changes that commission had requested. Applicant is now proposing to close the Portola entrance and take part in the President's Plaza assessment district for parking and access. They have also provided additional landscaping. Commissioner Cook recommended that the building and landscape isles be pushed to the south so that the one way street would appear one way and not encourage left turns from the gas station. Commissioner Drury questioned if there were adequate parking spaces supplied for the project. Mr. Wells indicated that there was adequate parking which was provided through the President's Plaza assessment district and the Frontage Road spaces. Commissioner Cook was concerned with the notch portion of the building being lower than the adjacent building to the west. Mr. Wells indicated that on a line-of-sight basis from ground level , the building to the west would not be visible. Chairman Gregory felt that the landscape plan was not designed for the desert and several of the planting materials would not do well here. He suggested that the architect come and review the plants that do well in the desert. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Martin to grant preliminary approval subject to revised landscape plan and elevation plan showing the relationship of the ARCO building to the adjacent building to the west. Carried 5-0 4. CASE NO: 308 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SHIP-N-POST, 74-140 E1 Paseo $#3, Palm Desert, CA 92260. 4 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22, 1986 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Sign and wall mural approval . LOCATION: 74-140 E1 Paseo ZONE: C-1 Applicant submitted revised plan showing changes that commission had recommended. It was moved by Commissioner McCrea, seconded by Commissioner Martin to approve the sign as submitted. Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Cook opposed) . B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: 312 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MR. & MRS. J. WAMBAUGH, 74-660 Anojo Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210; ROBERT RICCIARDI , 45-275 Prickly Pear Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of 7900 square foot commercial building. LOCATION: North side of Highway III east of Cabrillo. ZONE: C-1 Mr. Drell indicated that a more detailed plan had been submitted showing the items questioned at previous submittal . Commissioner Martin stated that he would rather see the compressors placed on the roof and landscaping around the columns. He noted that there must be a 42" wall or hedge at the rear parking lot. Commissioner Cook recommended that some screens be placed around roof mounted equipment. It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant preliminary approval subject to the following conditions. 1. Final landscape plan to be reviewed;north elevation landscaping should remain as proposed and front east end of building to have additional planting. 5 r MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22, 1966 2. A 42" wall to be provided around north parking lot to provide screening. 3. Mechanical equipment to be relocated. Carried 5-0 IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. CASE NO: 307 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALM DESERT VILLAS INC. , P.O. Box 1942, Palm Desert, CA 92261 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval for a 113 unit senior housing apartment project. LOCATION: South side of Country Club 1600 feet east of Monterey. ZONE: Propose PR-5 Senior Housing Overlay Applicant submitted revised plans and indicated that changes had been made to the site plan showing shading and solar protection. Commission was concerned that there were too many cross streets and suggested that the street be jogged and the one cross street be deleted. Commissioner Martin stated that he liked the idea of an institution at the front of the lot. Mr. Drell indicated that planning commission was requiring an active recreation area. It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Drury to grant conceptual approval . Carried 5-0 2. CASE NO: 309 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MANOR CARE, 1940 Old Tustin Avenue, Santa Ana, CA 92701 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of senior complex. 6 '11✓ wnw MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22, 1966 LOCATION: Country Club Drive east of Monterey Avenue. ZONE: Mr. Drell explained that the applicant was requesting final approval of a senior project. He indicated that the project is approved through the state and that this commission is to review architecture and landscaping. Chairman Gregory noted that the landscaping needed to be revised because of the usage of undesirable plants in certain areas. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant final approval subject to a final landscape plan being approved by the commission. Carried 5-0 3. CASE NO: 304 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HARRY SCHMITZ, P.O. Box 3992, Palm Desert, CA 92261 . NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of six unit senior project and carports. LOCATION: 44-620 San Rafael ZONE: R-3 S.O. Mr. Cook presented a plan which showed flat roofed carports that planning commission required and requested final approval . It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant final approval subject to final landscape plan approval prior to building permit issuance. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Cook abstaining) . 4. CASE NO: 285 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : FRANK GOODMAN, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of landscape plan. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pablo and Alessandro. ZONE: C-1 7 W MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JULY 22, 1986 Final landscape plans were submitted and final approval requested. Commissioner Martin asked what the large hole at the corner of the building was used for. Mr. Oliphant indicated that it was a night deposit for General Escrow. Commissioner Martin noted that the night deposit area was blocked by landscaping. Mr. Gregory stated that they had planted as much as possible by deleting five parking spaces and adding landscaping. Commissioner Martin felt that the plan had been improved considerably. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to approve the plan as revised (landscaping removed from front of night deposit area) . Carried 4-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstaining) . 5. WILLIAM KASPER AWNING Mr. Weller explained that the awning had not been installed according to the approved plans. He noted that commission should review the awning and determine what should be done. Commissioner Martin felt that the awning should be installed the way it was approved by the commission. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Cook to require that the awning be removed entirely and patch holes in sidewalk or install as approved by this commission. Carried 5-0 V. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 3:05 p.m. RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary /dlg 8 ARCO Petroleum Picts Company 515 South Flower Street Mailing Address: Box 2679-T.A. " Los Angeles, California 90051 Telephone 213 486 3511 I August 5, 1986 Mr. Ron Gregory Chairman, Architectural Commission City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear Chairman Gregory: I am in receipt of the draft of the minutes of the Architectural Commission meeting of July 22, 1986. There is one minor point which I feel should be changed. It is stated in the minutes that I indicated that the top of the notch of our proposed building is higher than the top of the adjacent building. My intent in that statement was not that the notch was higher, but that on a line-of-sight basis from ground level, the building to the west of us would not be visible through the notch. Thank you for your Commission's support in this matter. Yours truly, Frank F. Wells, Jr. Real Estate Representative Los Angeles Region Signed, but not read by. FFW:bj cc: Mr. Phill Drell Dallas Holmes, Esq. APP _7011 ARCO Petroleum Products Company is a Division of Atlantic RichfieldCompany (4-80)