HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-06-27 f
PRIM DESER'P OCK IISSION
nESDAY - JUNE 27, 1989
12:00 P.M. AHIINMSTRATIVE SERVICES CONFn2E[4E ROOM
73-510 FM) WARDU DRIVE
I. The meeting was called to order at 12:00 pm.
Ccnimission Members Current Meeting Year to Date
Present Absent Present Absent
Ron Gregory, Chairman X 12 0
Mazy Drury X 11 1
Russell McCrea X 11 1
Rick Holden X 12 0
Steve Sullivan X 10 2
Others Present: Phil Drell
Steve Smith
Phil Joy
Pat Bedrosian
FYankie Riddle
It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Holden to approve
the minutes of the June 13, 1989, meeting as submitted. Carried 4-0.
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
Ccnndssioner Holden informed commission and staff that the Tae Kwon-Do
Center sign reflects yellow when lighted during the evening hours and that
commission had previously denied the yellow sign. Staff will look into
this matter.
Commissioner Drury asked what the status was on the items of concern
commission had listed at the last meeting. Mr. Smith indicated that he
would speak with Mr. Bedrosian.
III. Moved by 0 - -rr,Pr Sullivan, seconded by Drury to approve
the following cases by minute motion. Carried 4-0.
1. CASE NO: PP 89-7
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JAMES LANDON/CHARLES MARTIN, 40-840
Thunderbird Lane, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of working
drawings for a four plex with landscaping.
f
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL OCM4ISSICN
JUNE 27, 1989
LOCATION: South of Shadow Mountain Drive, 400 ft west of Portola
ZCNE: R-3
2. CASE ND: SF 89-1
APPLICANT (AND Ate): ANGEL H. VIERA, 7348 Van Alden Ave.,
Reseda, CA 91335.
NATURE OF PROJECT APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a two-story, 23'
high single family home.
LOCATION: 73-121 Santa Rosa Way.
ZONE: R-2 (7)
Commission continued this case until revised plans have been
submitted for commissions review.
IV. CASES:
A. Final Drawings:
1. CASE NO: 1590 SA
APPLICANT (AND AMRESS): WESTERN MUTUAL ESCROW SERVICES, 44-227
Monterey Ave., Palm Desert, CA 92260.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of an illuminated
business identification sign.
LOCATICN: West side of Monterey Avenue between Fred Waring Drive
and Sonora Drive
ZONE: O.P.
Mr. Smith stated that the proposal is for internally illuminated can
signs. Commissioner Sullivan asked where the signs were located.
Mr. Smith noted that the signs would hang between the arches on the
Monterey side of the building. Commissioner Sullivan felt that
internally illuminated signs were not compatible with the existing
signs in the area. Commission felt that alternative ways to
illuminate signage should be used.
2
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL 00TIESSIM
JUNE 27, 1989
Commissioner Holden also noted that the signage should relate more to
the buildings architecture.
Commissioner Drury felt that a sign program for the whole building
should be done instead of one tenant at a time. Mr. Dune noted that
they are working with the tenants to establish a sign program.
Commissioner Drury felt that the signage would look more professional
mounted on the fascia of the building instead of hanging from the
parapet.
Mr. Dune noted that Mr. O'Rourke, his client, is adamant about having
internally illuminated signage.
It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Ccmmissioner Sullivan
to deny this case based on the following reasons: 1) Internally
illuminated can signs would not be compatible with existing signage
in the area; 2) The proposed signs do not relate well to the building
architecture; 3) The sign program for the building has not been
submitted and as a result this cabinet sign, if approved would likely
became the standard for the rest of the building; and 4) That signs
hanging between the arches are inappropriate. Carried 4-0.
2. CASE NO: PP 88-10
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CHARLES MARTIN, 40-840 Thundbird Road,
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270; RAY LACERTE, 72-880 Fred Waring Dr., #14,
Palm Desert, Ca 92260.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SQL : Final approval of a 19,263
square foot office complex with preliminary approval of landscape.
LOCATION: Southwest of Fred Waring Dr. and San Luis Drive
7CNE: O.P.
Commissioner Drury asked what changes were made on the site plan.
Mr. Martin noted that the parking layout has changed and all the
compact parking spaces were changed to full size parking spaces. The
wall between the Chazan building and this project will be eliminated.
It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner
Sullivan to approve this case subject to the condition that final
landscaping plans be submitted and approved by commission prior to
the issuance of building permits. Carried 4-0.
3
NW, AS190
NnIXYTES
ARCHITECTURAL OO MISSION
JUNE 27, 1989
3. CASE NO: PP 87-32
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MIRALESTE INVESTMEgTS, P.O. Box 3234,
Palm Desert, CA 92261.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised final
drawings for office building.
LOCATION: Highway 111 at Cabrillo
7.ONE• C-1, S.P.
Commission outlined changes in the plans: Deletion of the mitered
corner in the glass, sign by the window, and colored concrete
stepped base at mitered glass. Addresses will be individual numbers
mounted on the building. The handicapped parking problem will be
discusses with the building and safety department.
Applicant indicated that the landscape berm in the back was added.
He also noted that the colored concrete stepped base was deleted
because the landscaping would cover it when it grows. Chairman
Gregory asked how wide the planters were by the pavement. Applicant
stated that the planters were 24". Chairman Gregory reviewed
landscape plans and after further discussion felt that the landscape
plans should be revised to show better quantity and quality of
landscaping. Applicant can install the colored stepped base if he so
chooses.
Commissioner Drury felt that the landscaping should be more
appropriate with the building architecture.
Commissioner Holden indicated that they have deleted the unique
architectural designs of the building, which were submitted and
approved and also granted a variance on. Mr. Drell noted that the
variance was not based on the architecture of the building, and that
commission needed to decide whether they felt the buildings
architecture is acceptable as it is being proposed now.
It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Chairman Gregory to
grant final approval subject to the condition that building permits
are not to be issued until final approval has been granted on the
landscape plans. Carried 2-2 (Commissioners Sullivan and Holden
opposed). Motion died from lack of approval.
4
ARCHIITE7AJRAL CU24:ESSIC N
JUNE 27, 1989
It was moved by Commissioner Sullivan, seconded by Commissioner
Drury to continue this case to the next meeting subject to a revised
landscape plan being submitted. Carried 4-0.
4. CASE NO: PP 87-24
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): OLIPHANT/LIZZA, 77-900 Avenue of the
States, Palm Desert, CAA 92260; IMPERIAL SIGN, 46-120 Calhoun, Indio,
CA 92201.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SQUGHP: Sign program for DAR Eye Clinic
building.
LOCATICN: Southwest corner Fred Waring/Monterey Avenue
ZCNE: C-1
Mr. Smith advised ccnmission that this sign was located in the same
area as the Western Mutual Escrow proposed sign. Staff had the same
concerns relative to the appropriateness of internally illuminated
signs. The conmission felt that the sign program was incompatible
with the building and inconsistent with the professional office use.
Mark Ross, Imperial Signs, indicated that he had an alternative
proposal in mind that he could submitted to the commission for
consideration.
It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Sullivan
to continue this case to the next meeting to allow for the new
submittal. Carried 4-0.
5. CASE NO: 347 C
APPLICAM (AND ADDRESS): MIDORI RESTAURANT, 73-759 Highway 111,
Palm Desert, CA 92260.
NATURE OF PROJBCP/APPROVAL SC[XW: Final approval of facade remodel
for a restaurant.
IACATICN: 73-759 Highway 111
ZC NE• C-1
Mr. Drell indicated that the previously approved awnings had the
condition that the sign on the parapet was to be removed. The
5
• *4400,
Novi
YaNUTPES
ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION
JUNE 27, 1989
current proposal is for a tiled mansard that will cover the parapet
and be in combination with the existing awnings. Tile of mansard to
be burgundy flashed and the awnings to be the same color and
lettering that was approved.
Commissioner Sullivan indicated that this proposal was submitted
before and denied and that the applicant is trying again for
approval.
Commission felt that placing a mansard on the parapet would look
inappropriate on the building.
It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Sullivan
to deny this case. Carried 4-0.
B. Preliminary Plans:
1. CASE NO: PP 89-12
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GEORGE =SOVAS, P.O. Box 5132, Orange,
CA 92667.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of
architectural plans for a commercial building.
LOCATION: 73-918 Highway 111
ZONE: C-1
Commission asked why the first east driveway was not an
ingress/egress entrance. The east driveway design is to direct
drivers to the second entrance and if no parking is available they
can exit on the frontage road and either park or cone back up to the
entrance/exit driveway again. All dead-end lanes have been
eliminated from the parking lot.
Commissioner Drury asked if the material on either side of the doors
was terra cotta tile and if awnings were being used. Mr. Metsovas
indicated that it was tile and that awnings are being proposed.
Commissioner Drury also asked if there were openings behind the
shutters that are shown on the towers. Mr. Metsovas stated that
it was solid wall behind the shutters. Commissioner Drury asked what
type and where the signage would be located on the building. Mr.
6
r.r *00,.
ARCHITECTURAL CU44ISSION
JUNE 27, 1989
Metsovas indicated that the signs would be mounted on the building
fascia and that all signs would be the same colors.
Commissioner Sullivan suggested that the towers be placed at the
opposite ends, breezeway end, of each building and be open bell tower
in design and have lights inside for evening hours. Also, at the
opposite end of the towers on each building should be uniform to each
other.
Commission Sullivan asked what the door on the Alessandro would be
used for. Mr. Metsovas indicated that this door would be used for
deliveries and a fire exit. Commissioner Sullivan asked why tile was
being proposed around the back door. Mr. Metsovas indicated that it
was just for decoration and to eliminate the commissions concern
about it resembling a back-door.
It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Sullivan
to grant preliminary approval on the building architecture subject
to the towers being located on the breezeway end of each building
and be open bell tower in design and illuminated on the inside, and
that the east end of building 2 be treated so that it is uniform with
the remainder of the rest of the roof line. Final plans should
reflect the type and location of the signs. Landscape plans should
be submitted for preliminary approval. Also, building permits shall
not be issued until landscape plans have been given final approval.
Carried 3-1 (Commissioner Holden opposed).
2. CASE NO: PP 89-16
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): KAM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., 45-801
Club Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of
elevation and landscape plans for a 8,513 square feet industrial
building.
LOCATION: 42-502 Melanie Place
ZONE: S.I.
Mr. Drell stated that some councilmembers were concerned about the
excessive use of turf being used where it is not necessary.
Commission felt that something other than painted block wood
coverings for mechanical wells should be used. Screening of roof
mounted equipment should be painted metal.
Commissioner Holden suggested that the screening be maintenance free.
7
N
M[INCT ES
ARCIiITEGZURAL CESSION
JUNE 27, 1989
Commission asked if the Property Owners Association had approved this
project. Applicant indicated that the project has not been approved
by the association.
It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Drury
to grant preliminary approval subject to wall material substitution
to slump block, decorative or stucco block material, and pending
approval from the Property Owners Association. Detailed drawing
showing the screening of the roof mounted equipment, revised plans on
building architecture, and preliminary plans on landscaping should be
submitted for approval prior to working drawings being done. Carried
3-1 (Commissioner Drury opposed).
3. CASE NO: PP 89-19
APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): OLIPHANT/LIZZA, 77-900 Avenue of the
States, Palm Desert, CA 92260.
NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of building
elevations for retail/office complex. (No landscape plans. )
LOCATION: Northeast corner of Highway 111 and Portola Avenue
ZONE: C-1, O.P.
Frontage road has been vacated and Portola will be widened and a
turn lane will be located on Highway 111.
Commissioner Drury asked if there would be traffic controls on
Alessandro or just stop signs. Stop signs will be the only traffic
controls on Alessandro. She also asked what type of signage program
was being proposed. The applicant indicated that they are working
with the tenants to establish a signage program for the building.
It was moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner Holden
to grant preliminary approval on this case subject to the condition
that more definition on the building architecture be reflected on
the working drawings. Carried 3-0-1 (Chairman Gregory abstained).
V. MISC ELLANBOUS:
VI. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting adj at 2:35 p.m.
16ZEc-
StbOL- Smith, Associate Planner
/fr
8