The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1991-02-12 . �rr �►+' NffNt��ES PALM DFSF�tT ARQIITF7CiURAL REVIIId ��SSI�i �i]FS�AY, FF� 12, 1991 �r�r**�r�tit*�r*�r�r�r�r�t�r�r�r��r�t�r***� �� r�t�r*�t�t***�r* I. CALL TO �DIIt: The meetirig was called to order at 12:20 p.m. Conmission Members Ctzrrent Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ron Gregory, C�aizman X 2 1 Rick Holden X 3 0 FYank Urrutia X 3 0 Russell McCrea X 3 0 Christopher VanVliet X 3 0 Wayne Connor, Alternate X 1 2 Staff Present: Phil Drell Steve Smith Catherine Sass Jeff Winklepleck Pat Bedrosian Donna Bitter II. APPRpVAL OF NIIN[rI�S: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner VanVliet, to approve the minutes of the January 22, 1991 meeting as submitted. Motion carried 4-0-1, Chaixman Gregory abst�n;n�. III. It was maved by (7cmn;��;�r VanVliet, seoarleti by Cc�[[nissior�er McCre,a, to ap�mov�e tl�e follczain7 ca_9es by minute mr�tioaz: 1. CASE NO.• 1941 SA APPLICANP (ArID ADDRFSS): AMQ2ICAN AWNI1� for ANGELIQi7E, 44-489 Town Center Way, Palm Desert, CA 92260 1�12[7RE OF Pf�OJ�C,T/APPR(n7AL SOUC��1T: Approval of awnings LCX',�TI�I: 73-130 El Paseo, Suite H 7.OI�: G1 S.P. Approved by minute motion subject to the signage being placed either on the proposed awning or on the winclay. Appraval was not granted for both locations. . �✓ �✓ . 1� ARC�LiTflCIURAL REVIEW ��SSI�T F�RUARY 12, 1991 2. C�SE NO.• PP 90-24 APPLICAN'P (AND ADDRESS): JAMES WALLER c/o RIC�-IARD FISC�R ARC�iITECI'URE for MALAGA SQiJARE, 75-140 St. Ch�rles Place, Palm Deser-t, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECI'/APPROVAL ��: Pr'el�mi nary approval Of architectural plans only I,OC�„TI�i: Southeast corner of El Paseo and Sage 7�: C1 3. CASE 1�U.• CUP 91-3 APPLIC�NP (ArID A�RES.S): BRUCE BAtJMA1VrT, 44-239 Nbnterey Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECP/APPROVAL �QX�P: Approval of prel�minazy architecture for arcade building LOCATI�T: Painters Path and F`red Waring ZOI�: P.C. (3) Preliminary approval granted on architecture of the arcade building only with conceptual approval on the site plan. C,onmission to review golf course and batting cages once they are available. Comnissioner Holden abstained. 4. CASE N0.• 1920 SA APPLICANP (Ai�D ADDRF�S): PALM.S TO PINES CANVAS for JOY LYNN, Pinyon Pines, Box 69, Nbuntain Center, CA 92361 1�1ZURE OF PR(�7F]C.T/APPROVAL SaUQ�P: Appraval of canvas awning with lights and signage I�OC�,TI�i: 73-130 El Paseo, Suite I 2 , '�,,.,r �.rr+" � MTIVITPES AR�IITF7CIVRAL REUIEW �T�SSI�i F�R[JARY 12, 1991 7�O1�- Approval granted with the follawing conditions: 1) Awning to be the same d:imensions as adjacent awning for Angelique 2) Logo to be a maxi.mLun of 12" 3) Awning color changed to an off white or ivory 1V. C,ASES• A. Final �'�*��: l. CASE N0.• PP 90-20 APPLICANP (ArD ADDRE.'S.S): C�ISTIAN LOZANO for SANTA ROSA PALMS, 68-245 Marina Drive, Ca.thedral Ci�,y, CA 92234 I�,7.URE OF P1�U7�C,T/APPI�CNAL 50[X�lP: Appraval of architectural and landscapirig plans IAC'ATIOI�i: 73-602 Santa Rosa Way 7.0[�• R-3 S.O. Jeff Wi.nklepleck presented revised plans sYiowing the changes made. He rioted that the issues presented previously were that the landscaping plan was not adequate as well as the screening of the parking area. The screerLirig had been addressed. Can�n.issioner Urrutia rx�ted that his concern was el�minating the �rood, adding that the carmission preferred the design of the original plan but just wanted the v�ood to be chariged to a stucco finish. Applicant discussed the revised landscaping plan with caYrnission. C�aizman Gregory was concerned with the landscaping plan noting that it needed a great deal more planting. He suggested that the applicant use a licensed landscape architect to design an actual landscaping plan. Action• It was moved by Carin.issioner Urrutia, seconded by Conmissioner McCrea, to conti.nue the case directing staff to w�ork with the building depar�ne,nt to get the plans processed through plan check. Applicant to sutrnit landscaping plans for approval. Motion carried 5-0. 3 . `�.r `",,,,,r' . NIIIVU�ES ARC�IITF7Citll2AL REVIEW ��SSI�i F�Ri�►RY 12, 1991 2. C�SE N0.• 1918 SA APPLICANP (AND ADDRSSS): BEST SIGNS for CLUB PARIS, 2600 Cherokee Way, Palm Spririgs, CA 92260 I�ZURE OF PROJ�CP/APPROVAL SO[�: Approval of monwnent sign IACATIo[v: 74-695 Highway 111 7.O�iE• C-1 S.P. Applicant was not present. Camtissian's concern was that the sign was riot of the design quality needed for this size of a monument sign. Action: It was moved by Comnissioner Urrutia, seconded by Catmissioner VanVliet, to cantinue the case with the suggestions that the sign be upgraded significantly. Nbtion carried 4-0-1, Chairman Gregory abst8i ni n�r. B. PI'Eli mi na�ry P121ILS: 1. CASE N0.• TT 24984 APPLICAN'P (AI�ID ADDRESS): SUNLITE DEVELOPNIE,E,N'P, INC., 77-622 Country Club Drive, Suite "V", Palm Desert, CA 92260 I�ZURE OF PROJE7C,T/APP�L SOUC3�P: Approval of revised perimeter wall and existing landscape plan I�1TIol�T: West side of Deep Canyon, South of F`red Waring 7,(�lE• PR-5 Steve Smith presented revised plans with r.a�ments from the publ:ic w�rks depart�nent. He recalled that two week,s ago a petition was submitted by the developer saying that the adjacent property aaners had ryo objectian to the height of the homes. The applicant had revised the plans to a maxiirnun height of 18' . P�. Smith also presented the petition received, signed by area property owners stating that they did not want the 21' high l�anes. They felt anything over 15' would effect the privacy they have had for the past 15 years. 4 . \.r �� . � ARCHITF7C,9.URAL REVIEW �T�SSI�i F�Ri�RY 12, 1991 Ntr. Smith noted that the applicant was naw requesting to change the landscaping exterior treatments. He added that formerly camLission granted prel�m�nary appraval on plans that included a more detailed wall and landscaping. Staff noted that the original wall was a series of ins and outs. The revised plan naw showed a straight wall. Caim.issian noted their preference on the original submittal, keeping the variations in the wall. Action: It was moved by CamLissioner VanVliet to continue the landscaping plans. Nbtion died due to a lack of second. The applicant discussed the landscaping in front of the wall. Chaizman Gregory noted that the reason public works will not approve the fichus trees was because the Coachella Valley Water District will r�ot approve these trees as a major element, adding that they are encouraging more water efficient planting. Caimissioner Holden felt that if the wall had sane unique design to it, then the landscaping would rwt be an important part; l�owever, the applicant was stating that the land,scaping was a major element to screen the wall, while the revised plans did riot shaw this. Action• It was moved by Ca►missioner Urrutia, sec�nded by Commissioner McGYea, to continue the landscaping plans directing the applicant to address the follawing items discussed: 1) Commission preferred the original sulxnittal on the exterior wall and landscaping, keeping the variations in the wall. 2) All slump stone, pilasters and cap materials to be painted the same color. 3) Alternative; the wall could have less detailing but a new landscape concept providing screening of the wa11 would be necessary. Motion carried 5-0. Steve Smith distributed information from the Office of the Agricultural Commission stating it's current position on acceptable trees and where they can be obtained. C�airman Gregory npted that the applicant will have a difficult time obtaining cit�us trees, as they were badly damaged fran the frost. 5 • '�rir+ `�w.r+° . � ARQ�IITP]Cr[JRAL RE�7IEW Q,�T�SSIOI�i FF�RUARY 12, 1991 Steve Smith presented revised plans shaw.ing the addition of a trellis added to the back of the hanes. He noted that averhangs up to 18" were added to soR� of the units. He also discussed the problems with the garage sizes on Units A and C. He rx�ted again that the revised plans naw reflect the 18' height limit. The petition received shawed 14 signatures of property owners along Goleta Avenue opposing the higher elevations. Staff discussed the appeal process available to either party at no charge. Resident, Roger Hester, noted his concern with their views. Another concern was the high windaws. The applicant rioted that the highest windaw would be 6' 9". Chairman Gregory felt the revised line of site changed to 18' was made as requested. Action• It was maved by Catmissioner Urrutia, seconded by CaYm.issioner Van Vliet, to continue the l�ouse plans riotirig that there still was work needed to be done on the solar protection. Applicant understood changes discussed with Caimissioner Urrutia. Nbtiari carried 5-0. 2. CASE 1�U.• 'I'I' 26123 APPLICANP (AI�ID ADDRF�S): SUNRISE DESERT PARTIVERS, 42-600 Cook Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURL OF PROJEGT/APPROVAL SOZK�IT: Approval of maintenance building IA('ATI�T: Countxy Club Drive Zd�iE: PR-5 Steve Smith presented proposed maintenance facility noting that the applicant had asked for preliminazy l�nd.scaping approval; hawever, riow was asking that the landscaping not be reviewed at this time. Catmissianer Urrutia's concern was the landscapi.ng around the poc�l and parking area. He was also concerned with what could be seen from the street. Camtissioner Holden rioted that comnission was looking at a tilt-up industrial building being located near the pool area and adjacent Y�omes adding that what w�ould save this buildu-ig w�uld be the landscaping and catmission was riaw being asked to ignore the landscaping at this time. 6 , - °wr� �rrr� �I'FS AR(��TFX,'ZURAL REVI�T ��SSI(�i FE�EtLg1RY 12, 1991 Carmissioner Urrutia felt that ccmmission needed to see how the landscaping will be integrated in this design. He felt that the primary concern was the landscapirx� near the adjacent hanes. Applicant, Al1an Levine, discussed the variations in the heights of the building as well as the finish and parkirig area. Action• It was moved by Catm.issioner VanVliet, sec�ded by Camtissioner McGYea, to grant preliminazy appraval an the maintenance builduzg only. Landscapirig plan to be sul�mitted for approval. Nbtion carried 5-0. 3. CASE 1�A.' PP 91-1 APPLICANP (AND ADDRF�.S): MLA INVESTMENTS, 40-840 Thunderbird Road, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 I�17.[JRE OF PROJE7C,'T/AP'PRC7�TAL �: Prel�minazy approval of mixed use carmercial proj ect IACATIO[�i: 2.1 acres southeast of R.B. Fta�niture Z�IE• G1 Architect, Charles Martin, presented revised plans. Catm.issioner Urrutia was concerned with the lack of sun protection provided on the large glass areas and felt that the dark green color of the building sh�ould be toned daari. Action• It was moved by Cannissioner McCrea, seconded by Calmissioner Van Vliet, to grant preliminary approval of the building only subject to adequate solar protection pravided and color to be changed to a rust color acceptable to cannission. Landscaping plan continued with direction given to the applicant to address the following c�ncerns: 1) Additional vertical trees along the Magnesia Channel 2) Additional shade trees along front of building on Highway 111 side of building 3) Trees in parking lot area must canform to the city's list on the Master Tree Parki.ng Lot Plan Nbtion carried 5-0. 7 , . `�r �►' N�[TI�'S ARQ�TF7CIURAi, REVIEW ��SSIOI�I r�� 1a, 1991 v. z�s �m To �c�,• 1. CASE I�U.' PP 89-21 APPLICANP (AI�ID AD�DRF�S): ROGER BROOKS for PIZZA HUT, 80100 E. 22 North, Building 100, Wichita, KarLsas 67226 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SQ��: PI'eli mi nar�r approval Of architectural plans LOCATI�i: Pad #2, La Posada Develognent ZONE- Catmission questioned the space over the pizza hut tawer. Staff noted that the recessed area was where the restroans were located. C:hairman Gregory felt that the large tawer's only use was for signage and thought it should be changed in color or material to make it more logical. Ca�missioner Urrutia did rwt think that the tawer served the pur�ose the applicant was looking for, and that the entrance looked lopsided. Action: It was maved by CaYm.issioner VanVliet, seconded by Cannissioner McGYea, to grant prel�misiaxy approval of the architectural plans with the condition that the recessed area belaw the sign tawer be changed in color to brown to match the base of the columns. Nbtion carried 5-0. VI. The meeti.ng adjourned at 3:00 p.m. TEPI-�i SMI ASSOCIATE PLANNER SS/db 8