The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1984-01-10 . � �rr+F ;, . MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION TUESDAY - JANUARY 10, 1984 2:00 P.M. ADMINISTRATION CONFERENCE ROOM 73-510 FRED 'WARING DRIVE � * * * � * * * * � * � * * � � � * * � * * * * � � � * * * * � � � * � � � * � * * * * I. The meeting was called to order at 2:03 p.m. after a one hour study session. Members Present: Al Cook Rick Holden Bernie Leung Charlie Martin Members Absent: Ron Gregory Staff Present: Steve Smith Linda Russell Moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Leung, to approve the minutes for the meeting of December 27, 1983, as submitted. Carried unanimously 4-0. II. Moved by Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve the following cases by minutes motion. l. CASE NO: 213 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HIROKO'S, 73-896 El Paseo, Palm Desert, California 92260; Portals, 83-741 Hopi, Indio, California 92201. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning with signs at retail store. LOCATION: North side of El Paseo, west of Portola. ZONE: C-1, S.P. 2. CASE NO: 214 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALM DESERT COMMUNITY CHURCH, 47-321 Highway 74, Palm Desert, California 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of plans for a 450 square foot chapel. LOCATION: West side of Highway 74. ZONE: R-1, S.P. 3. CASE NO: 256 MF APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SILVER SPUR ASSOCIATES, Larry Spicer, President, 47-200 Mariposa Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260. NATURE OF PROIECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architectural plans for 40 dwellings. LOCA1'ION: South end of Ironwood Country Club. ZONE: PR-7 - 1 - , � � MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 10, 1984 4. CASE NO: 886 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HEATH AND COMPANY, 3225 Lacy St., Los Angeles, Ca., 90031, Attention: Vince Barrios; E.F. HUTTON AND CO., 74-075 El Paseo, Palm Desert, Ca., 92260. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of signs for new business. LOCATION: Palms to Pines West Phase II, east part of Coast Federal Savings building. ZONE: PC (3) S.P. III. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 212 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SOMETHING FABULOUS, 73-660 El Paseo, Palm Desert, California, 92260; Portals, 83-741 Hopi, Indio, California, 92201. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning of retail business. LOCATION: North side of El Paseo, west of Portola. ZONE: C-1, S.P. Mr. Smith highlighted the salient points from the staff report. The concerns of the commission expressed during the study session were as follows: 1. The proposed tubelighting. 2. The lack of brass sleeves over the upright support posts. 3. The lack of vertical members to prevent wind sway. MR. MARK BEATTY, of Portals, was present on behalf of the applicant and advised that his client wished to delete the lights from the proposal; brass sleeves will be provided and he was prepared to frame the awning and valance in a manner which will prevent wind sway. Moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Martin, to approve the plans subject to the following conditions: - 1. The valance be adequately framed (using vertical members) to prevent wind sway. 2. There shall be no tube-lighting on the proposed awning or valance. 3. The upright support posts be encased in brass sleeves. The motion carried unanimously 4-0. 2. CASE NO: 211 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CARL MARTIN'S, 73-890 El Paseo, Palm Desert, California, 92260; Portals, 83-74! Hopi, Indio, California, 92201. - 2 - _ �,r✓ `"�,;. MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 10, 1984 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning at retail business. LOCATION: North side of El Paseo, west of Portola. ZONE: C-1, S.P. Mr. Smith highlighted the salient points from the staff report. Concerns expressed by the commission during study session were as follows: 1. The possibility that the awning would lay on the tile roof and the tile would show through. 2. The wind sway problems on the awning. MR. MARK BEATTY, of Portals, represented the applicant and stated that the awing would be installed on a rigid frame which would not permit the fabric to rest on the tile. Vertical members would be provided to tie the unit together and prevent wind sway. Moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Martin, to approve the plans subject to the following conditions: 1. A rigid frame to be provided to prevent the awning from resting directly on the tile roof. 2. Vertical frame members to be provided to tie the unit together and prevent wind sway. Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Holden voting Nay). 3. CASE NO: 182 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): EGS METRO AND C.G. DUNHAM COMPANY, 73-241 Highway 111, Suite lA, Palm Desert, California 92260. NATURE OF PROIECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of plans for an addition to an existing commercial facility. LOCATION: North side of El Paseo at the rear of Jensen's Market, west of Larkspur Lane. ZONE: C-1, S.P. Chairman Martin delineated the concern of the commission that the final plans did not reflect a similar architecture with that of the preliminary plans. In fact, a different architect had prepared the plans. MR. ROBERT RICCIARDI and MR. SANDY BAUM, were present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Ricciardi stated that the applicant had changed architects and due to some problems with the sight (i.e. the rear driveway and lot slope) the plans had to be changed with the basic concept the same. A final landscape plan wi11 be available shortly. Moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Leung, to approve the final plans subject to the following conditions: 1. That a color board of material samples and a landscape plan be reviewed and approved by the commission prior to issuance of building permit. - 3 - r � � MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 10, 1984 Motion carried unanimously 4-0. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: 209 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): H.B. FOOD SERVICES, INCORPORATED, 17-821 East 17th Street, Suite 295, Tustin, California 92680. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary architectural plan approval of a 6438 square foot restaurant. LOCATION: North side of Frontage Road, between Portola and San Luis Rey. ZONE: C-1, S.P. Mr. Smith highlighted the salient points from the staff report and indicated that the essentialform of the proposed building had remained although the colors had been toned down considerably to compliment the desert environment and a revised landscape plan was provided. The commissioners outlined their concerns which centered primarily on the wing walls on the roof screen element and color thereof, and the front wall sign. MR. BOB HORNACEK, architect, stated that the intent of the building was to provide a roadside identity and felt that the color changes from the previous submission went a long way to improving the building. After considerable discussion, commission and applicant agreed to address the concerns expressed by adding the following conditions: 3. The wing walls shall be the colors as presented but shall provide relief (i.e. expansion joints, texture change, etc.) between the two colors. 4. That the top awning, under the proposed sign, be deleted. 5. That, with the removal of the awning, the applicant study the possibility of moving the sign down and lowering the screen wall height in this section. Moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve the plans subject to conditions. Carried unanimously 4-0. IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS: CASE NO: 59 C APPLICANT: LANDMARK LAND CO; Bernard Leung, architect, 73-960 E1 Paseo, Suite ��1, Palm Desert, Ca 92260 NATURE OF PROJECI'/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Revisions to approved plans for commercial building. LOCATION: 74-333 Palm Desert Drive South ZONE: C-1, S.P. - 4 - _ �rr � MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION JANUARY 10, 1984 Mr. Leung explained to the commission that he is the consulting architect and his clients had just recently acquired this partially completed building. They wish to revise the approved plans and alter the front and rear elevations. No additional floor area will be created. The commission reviewed the proposed revisions and felt they would not be an improvement to the plans as approved. Commission outlined various concerns as follows: 1. The row of tile along the top. 2. Lack of desert type of architecture. 3. Problems with building proportions. MR. GARY KEARNEY, Landmark Land Co. was present and provided the commission with background information. Moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Holden, the plan was continued to allow the applicant and architect to restudy the proposed revisions and resubmit same to the commission. Carried 2-0-2 (Commissioners Leung and Martin Abstained). V. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m. S E SMITH, Associate P anner /lr - 5 -