Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-03-25 � � MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMIIISSION TtIESDAY - MARCH 25, 1986 2:00 P.M. OOMMUM I Tlf SERV I CES OOI��ERENCE ROOM 73-510 FRED MARING DRIVE * � � * * * � � * * * * �► �► * * * * » * * * * « * � �► * * � * « * * * * * � « I. The meeting was called to order at 2:00 pm after a one hour study session. Cortmission Members Current Meetinq Year to Date + Present Absent Present Absent Ron Gregory, Chairman X 6 0 A1 Cook X 5 1 Mary Drury X 4 2 Charlie Martin X 6 0 Russell McCrea X 5 1 Rick Holden, Aiternate X 5 1 Staff Present: Ray Diaz Steve Smith Phil Joy Phii Drell Ken Weller Donna Gomez It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Chairman Gregory to approve the minutes of March 11 , t986 as written. Carried 2-0-3 iCommissioners' Drury, Cook and Hoiden abstaining) . I I. Moved by Carm i ss i oner Caok, secaxied by Comai ss i oner Mart i n to approve the following cases by n�inute motion. Carried 5-0 1. CASE N0: 1125 SA APPLICANT (A1� ADORESS): PETITE EXPRESSIONS, 72-625 Ei Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECTIAPPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identification sign. �OCATION: One E1 Paseo Building - facing E1 Paseo ZONE: PC (3) S.P. 2. CASE N0: 301 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DAVE MANOOKIAN by Bernie Leung, 73-550 Alessandro, Suite 2. Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECTIAPPROVAL SOIi(�IT: Final and preliminary approval of plans far a 16 unit apartrnent proiect. � � N I IiUTES AFICH I TEC111R11L 00lIM I SS I ON MARCM 25, 19� LOCATION: West side San Rafael south of Catalina Way. ZONE: R-3 S.O. 3. CASE N0: 300 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DAVE MANOOKIAN by Bernie Leung, 73-550 Alessandro, Suite 2, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/AF�PROYAL SO�IGHT: Final and preliminary approvai of plans for a 24 unit apartment project. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pabio and Santa Rosa. ZONE: R-3 5.0. Approval is sub,ject to the foliowing conditions. 1. A revised landscape plan to be submitted and approved by staff. 2. The balconies to be changed from wrought iron to a solid stucco balcony. 3. That the parking lot be adequatety screened. 4. CASE N0: 296 MF APPLICANT (IU�1 ADORESS): AL VANDERVELDEN, 4300 E. la Paima, Anaheim, CA. NATURE OF PROJECTIJIPPR'OYAL SOUGFIT: Preliminary approvai of an 8 unit apartment complex. LOCATION: Northwest corner of Shadow Hilts and Driftwood Drive. t��lE_s R-3 Subject to the following condition: l. Relocation of carport structure to the front of the lot with a solid wall being installed on the south end of the carport. 2 � � M I FKITES I�2CH I TECTIIRAL COlNI I SS I ON MARCH 25, 1986 III. CASES: A. Final Drati+ings: 1. CA�E. N0: 284 C APF'LICANT (AFq ApDRESS): DEEP CANYON BUILDING PARTNERS, P.O. Box 258, Palm Desert, CA 92260; RICHARD DODD 8 ASSOCIATES, 201 Shipyard Way, Berth A, Cabin F, Newport Beach, CA 92663. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL S011GHTs Approval of plans for 12,700 square foot offlce condominium. LOCATION: South side Palm Desert Drive (Highway 111) approximately 210 feet east of Panorama Drive. ZONE: C-1 S.P. Mr. Smith indicated that there was concern over the roof mounted equipment being adequately screened. Commissioner Holden thought that they hadn't raised the parapet so that it would screen the roof mounted equipment. Moved by Cortmissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Martin to grant approval sub,iect to the roof mounted equipment being adequately screened and a final landscape pian being approved. Carried 5-0 2. CASE N0: 285 C APPIICANT (ANQ ADWZESS): FRANK GOODMAN 8 DOUG GRIFFITHS, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PRO.)ECT/APPROVAI SOUGHT: Final architectural review of cortmercial office building. LOCATION: Southeast corner of San Pabio and Atessandro. ZONE: C-1 Mr. Smith indicated that the concerns of the commission in study session were that the wood should be changed to either redwood or cedar, color board of building colors shouid be supplied, street trees should be added on Alessandro and a final landscape plan needs to be submitted. 3 � � MI NNITES ARCH I TECTtNtAL tAMM I SS I ON MIIRCH 25, 19�i Mr. Goodman indicated that a color board had been submitted which showed the building to be a sand color. He questioned the amount of trees wanted on Alessandro. Mr, Smith indicated that they were generally 25' on center which would rec�uire four trees on Alessandro. Cortmissioner Martin suggested that the street trees be pulled out to the curb instead of placed in the center of the sidewalk. Commission discussed the location of the trees and thought that staff should work with the public works department on the placement of the trees. Moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Cook to approve this case sub�ect to the foilowing conditions. l. The wood on the building be either redwood or cedar. 2. Addition of street trees on Alessandro (approx. four) . 3. That the trees be pulled out to the curb with the location being approved by staff and the public works department. 3. CASE N0: 283 MF APPLIC/1NT (AND ADi)RESS): ROBERTSON HOMES, 1003 Coo 1 ey Dr i ve, Su i te 102, Colton, CA 92324. I�iATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOIIGtIT: F i na 1 approva 1 of p 1 ans for a 220 unit apartment pro,ject and perimeter landscaping. LOCATION: Northeast corner of Cook 5treet and Fred Waring Drive. ZONE: PR-7 Mr. Rick Churchiil explained the praject and pointed out some changes that had been made. Commissioner Martin questioned the solar protection that would be provided for the first floor windows of the two story units. He felt that there shouid be additional protection added. Mr. Moli , architect, indicated that there would be dual pain wi�dows with mini biinds which meet title 24 regulations. He suggested that he use solar screens or have three pain windows. 4 � �rr� M I I�JTES ARCH I lEC'TiIRlIL t�0lIM i SS IOti lIARCt! 25. 19Adi Commissioner Martin felt that there should be a solution to this problem which the architecture could address. He thought that adding screens would not be appealing architecturally and suggested that an overhang be provided. Cortmissioner Drury had concerns with the entire project being one cotor. She felt that different colors enhance the character of the pro,ject. Commissioners' Cook and Martin had no concern with the proiect being the same color throughout. It was moved by Cortmissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Cook to refer this case beck to the applicant for restudy of the following conditions. Carried 5-0 1 . Overhangs to be extended to 30" over sliding glass doors. 2. That the 8accharis Pilularis be replaced with another plant. 3. That 20x of the trees be upsized to 24" boxes and that thirty 48" boxes be inciuded. 4. That additional trees be piaced on the east property tine. 5. Buildings 32 and 35 require additional solar protection on first floor west facing windows. 4. CASE N0: 292 MF APPI_IG�IT (M!D ADOilESS): SANBORN � RYLEE, 250 Newport Center Dri ve, Suite 200, Newport Beach, CA 92660. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of 77 unit retirement development. LOCATIONs Northeast corner San Pascual and Catalina. ZONE: R-Z S.O. Mr. 5mith indicated that commission's only concern in study session was if the roof mounted equipment had been adequately screened. Mr. Rylee explained that the equipment had been properly screened so that it would not be visible. 5 � � MINUIES AR(rti l TECTIJR�AL OOMMI I SS I ON 11ARi�1 25, 1986 It was moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Holden to grant final approval . Carried 4-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstaining) B. Preliminary Pl�s: 1. CASE N0: 295 C APPIICANT (AND ADI�RESS)= LEN COR, 7333 Camino Del Cielo, Yucca Valley, CA 92284; WARNER ENGINEERING, 7245 Joshua Lane, Yucca Vailey, CA 92284; JOHN GREGORY ASSOCIATES, 72-691 Spyglass, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROJ�CT/APPROVAL SOt)GtiT% Preliminary approval of a 19,400 square foot office/warehouse structure. LOCATION: North side of Lennon Avenue, 250 feet east of Corporate Way. Z(k1E s S. I. This item was continued for two weeks upon the request of the applicant. IV. DISCl1SSlON ITEMSs 1 . CHEVELL'S - Awning Mr. Smith exptained that the proposed awning would be placed over the window on the west side of the buiiding facing E1 Paseo. The aw�ing wiii be back lit with the signage to be 8' X 16" and wiil have closed ends. Moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Comnissioner Martin to approve the awning. Carried 5-0 2. PIETRO'S RESTAURANT - Walt with artwork Mr. Del Guidice, owner, indicated that the artwork would give his buildi�g individuality and would coordinate with the other buildings in the area. He stated that art committee encouraged and approved his ideas. 6 � � MINUTES ARCH I TECTLJRi1L OOMM I SS I ON MARCH 25� 1966 Chairman Gregory felt that the artwork shouid be done in a more subtle way. He thought that all of the different designs would not be visibie to high speed traffic and wouid not be appreciated. Mr. Del Guidice feit that the artwork would be admired by pedest�ians using the Highway 111 waikway. He wents to provide something different and unique that people wili come to see. Commissioner Martin thought the artwork was good but felt that it didn't fit on the buiiding as proposed. He suggested that a singie piece of sculpture be placed in a courtyard type setting. Commissioner Drury agreed with Commissioner Martin. Commissioner Holden felt that the wall appeared to be a base for the s i gn. He suggested that the s i gn be cut down i n s i ze and that it be placed within the wall area not on top of the wail . Mr. Smith suggested that a couple of panels occupy artwork with the sign mounted on the center panel . Chairman Gregory indicated that he would prefer to see the sign on the wail and a freestanding sculpture in the open grass area in front of that. Commissioner Martin thought that there should be one freestanding sculpture which could be three dimensional . He felt that the sign and the artwork need to be separate. Commissioner Cook questioned how much of this would be considered signage and how the difference between signage and graphics was determined. He thought that a better ,job could be done by integrating the sign and the artwork into the wall . He recommended that the ends of the wal )s be winged. He stated that if they needed additional height for the wall that would be fine. Commissioner Holden thought that any approval of the artwork should be done in con,junction with the art cortmittee. Mr. Del Guidice indicated that the art committee already granted their approval . He noted that he wouid work with the commission on the placement of the sign. Mr. Del Guidice asked if someone from the commission would be willing to talk with him during the redesigning of the wall . 7 � � MINUTES ARCHITECTLIRAL COMMISSION MARCH 25. 1966 Moved by Commissioner Hoiden, seconded by Cortmissioner Cook to approve the wall with the addition of wings at each end. Approval does not include artwork or signage. Carried 4-1 (Commissioner Martin voting against) . 3. APARTMENT PROJECT - Parkview (former Ward project) Mr. Martin explained the site plan changes � had been made to the plans and asked for final approvai . Commissioner Cook recomrnended that some type of break or landscaping be added to the parking area to provide some relief. Mr. Drell indicated that ordinance requires 52 parking spaces. He suggested that the applicant eliminate the excess garage spaces and add landscaping. Moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Cook to approve this case with the condition that three landscaped areas be instailed in the garage parking area replacing approximatety six garages. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Martin abstaining) . 4. HOMME - 289 C Commission reviewed that pians and indicated that they had no concerns. It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Martin to approve the plans as submitted. Carried 3-0-1 (Cortimissioner Cook abstaining) V. ADJOURlN�NT: The meeting was ad,�ourned at 3:55 p.m. ������� � STEVE SMITH, Associate lanner /dig 8