Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-06-11 s err► ti DES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CU44ISSION SAY, JUNE 11, 1991 I. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 12:25 p.m. Commission Members Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ron Gregory, Chairman X 10 1 Rick Holden X 11 0 Frank Urrutia X 9 2 Christopher VanVliet X 9 2 Wayne Connor, Alternate X 5 6 Staff Present: Phil Drell Steve Smith Jeff Winklepleck John kktL moth Pat Bedrosian Donna Bitter II. APPROVAL OF bU24L ZS: It was moved by Commissioner VanVliet, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to approve the minutes of the May 28, 1991 meeting as submitted. Motion carried 2-0-2, Commissioners Urrutia and Connor abstaining. III. It was moved by Holden, seconded by Oonnmissioner VanVliet, to approve the following cases by minute motion. Motion carried 4-0. A. Final Drawings 1. CASE NO.: 366 C APPLICANT (AND AMRESS): DR. JERRY MEINTS c/o COACRELLA VALLEY COUNSELING CENTER, 73-302 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of remodel (facelift and carport) of existing office building LOCATION: 73-302 Highway 111 ZONE: Cl S.P. Remodel plans approved by minute motion with the following conditions: 1) Peeler poles to be changed to 12" in size 2) Number of peeler poles over carport structure to be doubled and spaced to 2 feet on center over the garage area 3) Existing asphalt area in back of building upgraded to a level acceptable by staff Now MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Q144ISSION JUNE 11, 1991 2. CASE NO.: 1969 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIGNS BY MEL for T & M BASEBALL, 41-945 Boardwalk, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identification signage LOCATION: 73-885 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 S.P. Business identification signage approved by minute motion with the following conditions: 1) Colors to be changed to burgundy and ivory 2) Letter size to be changed to 10" 3. CASE NO.. 1970 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): IMPERIAL SIGN 00. for CREATIVE KITCHENS UNLIMITED, 46-120 Calhoun Street, Indio, CA 92201 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identification sign LOCATION: 74-214 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 S.P. Commission directed applicant to avoid stretching out the sign to 24 feet if aesthetically possible. 4. CASE NO.: 1971 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALMS LADS GOLF COURSE, 74-945 Sheryl Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGRT: Approval of monument entry sign LOCATION: 74-945 Sheryl Avenue ZON1E: R-1 5. CASE NO.: CUP 13-80 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DOMINICK MANCUSO'S TRATORIA, 73-250 E1 Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260 2 ' "�✓' 'err+' MINUTES ARC HITECR RAL REVIEW M4IISSION JUNE 11, 1991 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised plans for patio enclosure LOCATION: 73-250 El Paseo ZONE: PR-5 Approval granted on revised plans for the patio enclosure, by minute motion, based on the following conditions: 1) Lattice to match on the north and west side of the building 2) Provide some type of design at the end of the structure 3) Working drawings to show details on fire wall B. Preliminaris Plans: 1. CASE NO.: PP 91-5 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): URRUTIA ARCHITECTS for G.T.E., 73-550 Allessandro Drive, Suite No. 1, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PRU7ECT/APPRO1VAL SOUGHT: Preliminary nary approval of plan for G.T.E. switching building LOCATION: 600 feet east of Monterey, 1200 feet north of Gerald Ford ZONE: PR-5 IV. CASES: A. Preliminary Cases: 1. CASE NO.: PP 90-13 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DSL SERVICE CO., 3501 Jamboree Road, Suite 5000, North Tower, Newport Beach, CA 92658-6030 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised preliminary landscape plans LOCATION: Fred Waring and Highway 111 ZONE: P.C. (3) S.P. Steve Smith presented the revised plans for the center. Chairman Gregory noted that there were changes made on the building pads, showing where Pads D and E were now tilted. He informed commission that as changes occur, the plan has been brought back to the omnission for comments. 3 vftw ARQIITECIURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUTE 11, 1991 Commissioner Connor felt that the commission could not approve the plan without seeing the entire project. Chairman Gregory noted that the changes were minimal in terms of the architecture. Commissioner Holden did not agree. Commissioner Urrutia felt that at this point, the comaission could not tell what the architecture would eventually look like. Staff noted that the case was before the commission for information purposes only, and no commission action was required. Commissioner Urrutia noted his concerns on how the architecture will integrate between Pad C and D because of the tilting of Pad D. Commission would need to see how this will change the original architectural plans. He added that the enhanced paving was not shown on the revised plans, and ccmmission felt that it should remain. Chairman Gregory replied that the enhanced pavement was brought up by city council and was not asked for by the applicant originally. Staff asked commission about the possibility of combining Pads E and F to allow additional parking for Pad D. Cc mmmissioner Urrutia was concerned with losing the individuality of the buildings if these two buildings were combined. He would prefer individual buildings along Highway 111 with more open spaces. He felt that the space is much more valuable between the buildings than in the parking area. Commissioner Urrutia added that the spacing around Pad E was more acceptable on the original plan. Commissioner Urrutia asked about continuing the covered walkway from Pad D to the end of Pad E. He felt the covered walk areas were a nice element, tieing everything together. Commissioner Holden was concerned with the turning of Pad D. The following concerns were noted by the commission on the revised plans: 1) Detailed drawings are needed on how the archway will be integrated between Pad C and Pad D because of the tilting of Pad D. 2) The enhanced paving was deleted off the revised plans, and commission felt that the paving should remain. 3) Commission asked that the trellis walkway be extended from Pad D to the end of Pad E. 4) Commussion concerned about losing the individuality of the buildings if Pads E and F are combined to allow additional parking for Pad D. 2. CASE NO.: 367 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT/CITY OF PALM DESERT, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 4 f4 NAT ES ARCIIITE CTURAL REVIEW M IISSION JUNE 11, 1991 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architectural plans only for the Santa Rosa Mountains Scenic Area Visitors Center LOCATION: 51-500 Highway 74/6.88 acre parcel fronting on the east side of Highway 74 at the southerly city limits ZONE: PR-5 John Wohlmuth reported on the conditions surrounding the proposed site. David Crandall, architect with the firm of Mosokowsky and Lindsey, was present. The building is to be placed along the southerly C.V.W.D. dike and will serve as an information station as well as an educational center on activities throughout the Santa Rosa Mountains. Mr. Crandall reported that the visitors center would primarily have information on the Santa Rosa Mountain scenic area. It will not be a destination stop. The bureau expects a maximum of 60 people per day, and will be open from dawn to dusk, 7 days a week. The area will be secured to keep people from parking in the parking lot after hours. The prime display area opens out to the north with a terrace over looking the Coachella valley. Commissioner Urrutia asked about the roof material to be used. Mr. Crandall replied that the material would be a built-up composition used for the roof. Commissioner Urrutia was concerned with this type of roof. As proposed, he felt there would be a maintenance problem, noting that the wind blows in this area and would blow the rocks off the roof. Visibly this would be a problem. Action: It was moved by Cc missicner Holden, seconded by Conmissioner VanVliet, to grant preliminary approval on the architectural plans only. Motion carried 3-1, Cc missioner Urrutia voting No, stating that he felt the roofing material would cause problems in the future. 3. CASE No.: CUP 89-15 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ARMEVIAN APOSTOLIC CHURCH c/o KENT ATTRIDGE, 74-923 Hovley Lane, Suite 100, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SQ]QRT: Preliminary approval of revised architectural plans for church LOCATION: South side of Hovley Lane between Monterey and Portola ZONE; PR-5 5 MINUrES ARalITECIURAL REVIEW CCF-MSSIO N JU E 11, 1991 Staff noted that the revised plans showed a change from a flat roof to a pitched roof. Action: It was moved by Commissioner VanVliet, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to approve the revised plans as submitted. Motion carried 4-0-1, Chairman Gregory abstaining. 3. CASE NO.: TT 24603 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): UP DEVELOPMENT CORP., 1925 Palomar Oaks Way, Suite 203, Carlsbad, CA 92008; MR. DAVID NARZ c/o JASCORP, 79-811 Country Club Drive #A, Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SQUGRT: Preliminary approval of architectural plans only for single family housing tract LOCATION: South side of Hovley Lane, 330 feet east of Monterey ZONE: PR-5 Jeff Winklepleck presented preliminary plans. Commissioner Holden rued his concerns with the lack of sun protection on the east and west elevations. Commissioner Urrutia directed staff to discuss the commissions concerns regarding the shading with landscaping on the rear yards. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to grant preliminary approval on the architectural plans only with the condition that the applicant address the east and west orientations to provide sun protection with the use of either landscaping or trellis work. Motion carried 5-0. 4. CASE ND.: PP/CUP 89-3 AMEOMa4T APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CCJSACK RADAKER DEVELOPMENT, INC., 41- 995 Boardwalk, Suite F-1, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGRT: Amendment to precise plan for a 70,291 square foot office/restaurant complex LOCATION: Southeast corner of El Paseo and Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Phil Drell reported that the architecture was now a contemporary, southwestern two-story building. Commissioner VanVliet ccnumted that the existing building looked good. Commissioner Urrutia asked about the blockage of the existing frontage road. Mr. Drell indicated that the frontage road would be vacated and Highway 111 6 Saw 1"001 MINUTES ARC[iITECPURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 11, 1991 would be widened. He also outlined the discussions with Cal Trans on the entrance to the project. Commissioner Holden discussed the possibility of moving the entrance dawn towards Panorama Drive. Commission agreed that more of the existing features should be pulled into the new building. Ccmmissioner Urrutia suggested using the same type heavy door in the new buildings. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to grant preliminary approval on the architectural plans directing the applicant to use more of the existing features in the new buildings. Motion carried 4-0-1, Chairman Gregory abstaining. . 5. CASE NO.: TT 24287 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): T.R.A. ARCIHITECTS, 1900 E. Tahquitz Canyon, Palm Springs, CA 92263 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Reconsideration for preliminary approval of revised landscape plans LOCATION: Deep Canyon Road, north of Fred Waring Drive ZONE: PR-5 Phil Drell presented the revised landscape plans noting the changes made by the public works landscaping staff. Mr. Drell added that the sidewalk needed to be widened out to 8 feet. Commission noted that the applicant was now heading in the right directions with these revised plans. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to continue the landscape plans, as the applicant is revising the plans per the changes made by Eric Johnson. Sidewalk to be widened out to 8 feet. Notion carried 5-0. V. The following cases were added to the agenda by a unanimous vote of the commission. 1. CASE NO.: 358 C APPLICANT (AMID ADDRESS): LYON'S c/o FISC1-MR ARCHITECTURE, 888 Research Drive, Suite 100, Palm Springs, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOIXW: Approval of final working drawings for commercial store front remodel LOCATION: 73-190 El Paseo 7 SNW M]ITUf ES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OCWISSION JUTE 11, 1991 ZONE: C-1 Phil Drell presented the final working drawings for approval. Action: It was moved by Cc missioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to approve final working drawings as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. 2. CASE NO.: 365 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): TONY ROMAS c/o BILL DUNN, 17801 Skypark Circle, Suite K, Irvine, CA 92714 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUCW: Approval of revised plans for exterior changes and minor expansion LOCATION: 73-155 Highway 111 ZONE: C1 S.P. Steve Smith presented the faxed pages of the revised plans. Ccinnission was concerned that what the applicant was presenting was not attractive enough. They asked that more articulation and effort be put into the building. Commission directed the applicant and staff on suggested changes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to approve the revised plans on file with staff. Motion carried 5-0. VI. The meeting adjourned at 2:45 p.m. STEVE SMITH ASSOCIATE PLANNER SS/db 8