Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-10-11 MENU ES PALM DESERT ARCRITECIURAL CESSION TiESDAY - OCrOBER 11, 1988 12:00 P.M. Q K42-4ITY SERVICES CONFERENCE RCCM 73-510 FFM WARDG DPM I. The meeting was called to order at 12:00 pm. Commission Members Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ron Gregory, Chairman x 17 2 Mary Drury x 18 1 Russell McCrea x 14 5 Rick Holden x 16 3 Steve Sullivan x 18 1 Others Present: Steve Smith Catherine Sass Phil Drell Ken Weller Ray Diaz Frankie Riddle It was moved by Ccmmissioner Sullivan, seconded by Commissioner Holden to approve the minutes of September 27, 1988, as submitted. Carried 5-0. II. Moved by CJonmissioner Drury, seconded by McCrea to approve the following cases by minute motion. Carried 5-0. 1. CASE NO: PP 88-3 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): TRA, INC., 1900 E. McCallum, Suite B-4, Palm Springs, CA 92262. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final Approval of working drawings for 15,450 square foot retail building. LOCATION: Southwest corner of El Paseo and Sage. ZONE: C-1 Commission directed the applicant to revise the elevation plans to reflect changes in grade. Staff can approve the revisions if it is felt they are correct. 2. CASE NO: 1492 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): D & A SHADE CO. (For Knitting Heaven), P.O. Box 417, Palm Springs, CA 92263. MUgUIES ARCHITECIURAL OCMMISSION OCTOBER 11, 1988 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a canvas awning with signage. LOCATION: 72-990 El Paseo. ZONE: C-1 3. CASE NO: 1494 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDPESS): D & A SHADE 00. (For Bambini), P.O. Box 417, Palm Springs, CA 92263. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGIN: Approval of a canvas awning with signage. LOCATION: 73-880 E1 Paseo. 7.ONE: C-1 III. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 1493 SA APPLICANT (AMID ADDRESS): D & A SHADE CO. (For Mama Ginas), P.O. Box 417, Palm Springs, CA 92263. NATURE OF PROJWr/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a canvas shade device over existing patio. LOCATION: 73-705 El Paseo. ZONE: C-1 Ms. Sass outlined the proposed request. The curtains are shown as drawn back, but they might actually be hanging down; the trees on the patio area are to be removed; a clear plastic window is proposed for the front, and when looking in from the outer area you will be looking into a red seating area. The ccnmission was concerned about the following items: color design, landscape, fire code, expansion of business, parking, etc. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to deny this case for the above reasons. Carried 5-0. 2 ..r o doe 14ENUPES ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION OCTOBER 11, 1988 2. CASE NO: 1491 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LUCKY STORES, INC., 6565 Knott Avenue, Buena Park, CA 90622; COAST SIGN DISPLAY, INC., 1345 S. Allec Street, Anaheim, CA 92805. NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of center identification sign. LOCATION: Lucky Center at Highway 111 and San Pablo. ZONE: C-1 (S.P. ) Mr. Smith indicated that a center identification sign is being proposed. The size of the sign meets code requirement and the proposed color is red with a white background. The proposed sign is a pole sign, which the commission does not typically approve. The applicant stated that the land that was dedicated to the city has made it necessary that the proposed sign height be as it is so that it can be seen over the cars. The sign has to be set back on the Lucky's property. The commission was not concerned about the color, but was concerned about the design of the sign, excessive information on the sign, and the use of a pole. Commissioner Drury asked why Lucky's was entitled to another sign. There is a lack of available space to install the sign. Mr. Diaz indicated that the sign could read "Lucky's El Paseo Square", which would advertise all of the shops. Commission was basically concerned about the following: Proposed pole sign, height, design, color and too much information on the sign. It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to deny this case for the above reasons. (Commission noted that the applicant can appeal to city council if they so choose. ) Carried 5-0. 3. CASE NO: 1495 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LUMINOUS NEON LIGHTING, P.O. Box 2066, Bell Gardens, CA 90201. 3 NIlNU ES ARC HITECIURAL OCrMMISSIC N OCTOBER 11, 1988 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGUr: Sign program approval for Jenny Craig Weight Loss Center. LOCATICN: 73-010 E1 Paseo (Columbia Center). ZONE: PC (3) Mr. Smith indicated that 3 signs are being proposed and the wording "Jenny Craig" on the existing awning in powder blue lettering. Staff was concerned about the blue lettering on a burgundy awning and other matters. Mr. Jim Wright indicated that a mistake was made on the awnings letter color; it will be changed to white. Commissioner Drury was concerned about all three signs being different colors. Mr. Smith indicated that all signs would be the same color (blue). Mr. Smith indicated that there will be signs in the following locations: Facing E1 Paseo - South, Highway 74 - East, Mesquite's - North. Commissioner Sullivan asked if the signage meet code requirements. Mr. Smith indicated that the signage did meet the code requirements. Commission was concerned about the size of the sign being placed on the narrow fascia. Commissioner Drury was concerned about the variety of the signs and the proposed installation of the signs. She felt that more compatibility between the sign and the building was needed. Mr. Smith suggested that all the signs could be a wall mounted. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Sullivan to continue this case for restudy. Carried 5-0. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP 88-15 APPLICANT (AMID ADDRESS): CAPRI INTERNATIONAL, 2495 Robertson Blvd., Beverly Hills, CA 90211; TRA, INC., 1900 E. McCallum Way, Suite B-4, Palm Springs, CA 92262. 4 DU NUTESS ARaUTE IURAL COMMISSION OCIUBER 11, 1988 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary Approval of elevations for commercial building. LOCATION: Southwest corner of E1 Paseo and Lupine. ZONE: C-1 Mr. Drell described the project. There will be a building addition on the street (Lupine) side of Tai Ping. This plan has received approval from the Property Owners Association. Cnudssioner Sullivan asked where the preliminary grading plans were. The applicant stated that the grading plans were being done. He indicated that the plans show the building as being flat when it's not. Commissioner Drury wanted to know what was happening with the Tai Ping addition. The applicant indicated that the driveway off of Lupine will be closed. The parking for the building will be in the back. Commissioner Holden noted that the over-hang of the building is about 5 feet. He also felt that the plans should show more of the transition between the new building and the existing building. Commissioner Drury felt that something creative could be done with the addition and that it should not be deleted. Commission indicated that with the existing (Tai Ping) building fronting onto E1 Paseo the landscaping should reflect that the front of the building fronts onto E1 Paseo and not the side of the building. It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea to grant conceptual approval of this case with the condition that preliminary plans be submitted defining the elevation changes to the grading plans and engineering plans, treatment of the Tai Ping building be restudied, and the site plan be revised creating a landscape transition between the two buildings. Carried 4-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstained). 2. CASE NO: CUP 88-8 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ALIBABA FARZANEH, 40-345 Sagewood Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260; DAVID FLETGM, 73-061 E1 Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260. 5 NII.NUTES ARCHITECIURAL COMMISSION OCPCOER 11, 1988 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary Approval for architectural changes to the building in connection with the new restaurant parking lot design and landscaping. LOCATICN: Southeast corner of Highway 74 and E1 Paseo. ZONE: C-1, PC-4 Mr. Drell indicated that the basic changes are glazing of the vertical openings, a permanent metal roof structure, which will be the color of the tile. Parking will be to the south, which at this time is in the conceptual stages. The parking lot will be used for employee parking or aver-flaw valet parking at lunch time. Commissioner Drury noted that there would not be access from one parking lot to the next and that all parking will have to be on the frontage road. Also, noted was that there is 4 to 5 feet of grade difference in the parking lots. Commissioner Holden was concerned with all the glass area on the north and west elevations, but this is more of a concern of the restaurant owner. He felt that solar protection for these windows was needed. It was also noted that there was no available roof space for the air conditioning units. Commissioner Sullivan felt that some of the alterations made to install the air conditioning units might change the building's elevation and the commission and should review this aspect. Mr. Fisher indicated that the air conditioning units were going to be placed on top of the roof, but due to the lack of space the units will be placed in an equipment well above the kitchen. The ducts will be installed in the kitchen area and the window area on the upstairs end building will not be windows. Commissioner Sullivan felt that there would be problems with tenants wanting to do something with the window areas to shield the sun. The applicant indicated that the windows are double glazed and would probably be tinted. The applicant also noted that the pyramid portion of the building would be insulated and the existing buildings architecture will be left as is. Commissioner Sullivan asked where the access to the restaurant was located. The access to the restaurant will be spiral stairs in the front of the building. He also asked if there would be additional signs other than what exists on the windows. Signage has not been taken into consideration as of yet. 6 NII1gU E.S ARCHITDCiURAL CU401ESSIONi OCTOBER 11, 1988 Conmissioner Holden felt that awnings would be requested later and would like to have this issue taken under consideration now instead of later. Also, felt that the concept of putting in facades to allow individuality is not working. NOM: chairman Gregory left the meeting. it was moved by Ccamissioner Drury, seconded by Ccmnissioner McCrea to grant conceptual approval of this case. 4-0. IV. MISCELLANEOUS: Co mdssioner Drury asked what was happening with Andreino's. Mr. Smith will look into this matter and report back to commission. V. ORAL Oa M)NICATIC NS: VI. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 2:15 p.m. S I t9PkN R. SMITH, As late Pl er /fr 7