Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-07-24 MINUTES PRIM DESERT ARCHITECIURAL COMMISSION ZUESDAY, JULY 24, 1990 I. The meeting was called to order at 12:30 p.m. Cc mission Members Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ron Gregory, Chairman X 12 2 Rick Holden X 14 0 Russell McCrea X 13 1 Mary Drury X 9 5 Frank Urrutia X 12 2 Wayne Connor X 13 1 Others Present: Steve Smith Pat Bedrosian Phil Drell Brent Conley Phil Joy Tonya Monroe It was moved by Ccninissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to approve the minutes of the July 10, 1990 meeting as amended. Carried 6- 0. II. ORAL CCM143NICATIONS: None. III. Moved by Co missicneer McCrea, seconded by 0mudssioner Drury, to approve the following cases by minute motion. Carried 5-0 (CYmn;ss nmr Connor left at 1:02 p.m. ) A. Final Drawirxgs: 1. CASE NO: 1788 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): GO WEST (Puffer Aurora), 73-375 El Paseo, Suite H, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identification sign LOCATION: 73-375 El Paseo, Suite H ZONE: Cl S.P. 2. CASE NO. 1787 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALMS TO PINES CANVAS for UPPER CRUST, Pinyon Pines, Box 69, Mountain Center, CA 92361 Y �gr4IN nES ARCfIITECIURAL REVIEW OOMIISSION JULY 24F 1990 NATURE OF PRa7ECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of awning and sign program LOCATION: 73-580 El Paseo ZONE: Cl S.P. 3. CASE NO: PP 90-2 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SMJ DEVELOPMENT, 40-464 Periwinkle Court, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOLKW: Final approval of plans for a 7,200 square foot phase of a 30,000 square foot office complex LOCATION: Caroline Court ZONE: S.I. 4. CASE NO: CUP 90-4 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WEBOD PACIFIC (The Pueblos), 73-020 E1 Paseo, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final working drawings LOCATION: 73-695 Santa Rosa Way ZONE: R2 S.O. 5. CASE NO.: 1791 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WALL SYSTEMS PLUS (formerly Atelier), 73-865 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGRT: Business identification sign LOCATION: 73-865 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Commission specified that the background color was to match the adjoining businesses (i.e. the off-white color at 99 Cent Video). 2 +... 1444101 NIINUPFS ARQitTECIURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JULY 24, 1990 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: 358 C APPLICANT (AND ABURESS): LYON'S c/o FISCHER ARCHITECTURE, 888 Research Drive, Suite 100, Palm Springs, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECP/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval for commercial store front remodel LOCATION: 73-190 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 IV. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: 1750 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SPORTS FEVER, 73-360 Highway 111 #4, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of sign installation LOCATION: 73-360 Highway 111 ZONE: Cl S.P. Mr. Smith noted that both the applicant and representative were present. Staff reccmmended approval of the sign, subject to deletion of the lower line, which he felt made the sign a menu sign and indicated the red color was unacceptable. Ms. Shirley W. Cubbison informed commission that she had been utilizing the proposed identification for five years. Her representative, Mark Ross from Imperial Signs, stated that the sign would blend in the sign next door at Un Gallery. Commissioner Urrutia explained to the applicant that when a new sign was requested it was subject to any criteria in affect at that time and it was commission's policy that no sign menus be allowed. 3 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION JULY 24, 1990 Ms. Cubbison noted that it was in the ordinance that if the wording was part of her dba it could be incorporated into her sign. She distributed a copy of her dba proof of publication, dated June 25, 1990. Commission reiterated its policy relative to the cluttered appearance created by allowing menu signs and indicated its opposition to the proposed red color. Staff recommended approval of the sign subject to the deletion of the lower line of copy. Staff also indicated that the applicant could appeal the camLission's decision to city council. Action: Moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by C muissioner McCrea, approving Case No. 1750 SA subject to deletion of the lower line of copy. Carried 5-0. 2. CASE NO: 359 C APPLICANT (AMID ADDRESS): ROD MURPHY, G.J. MURPHY CONSTRUCTION, 72-764 Arboleda, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Archway addition to rear LOCATICN: El Paseo/Jensen's Center ZONE• C-1 Mr. Drell outlined the salient points of the staff report and indicated that the proposed archway was for decorative purposes. Commission oamiented on the fact that the entryways invited entrance to a courtyard that provided no access to the building. The applicant informed camtission that he would be returning with plans for a gazebo (i.e. similar to Cedar Creek's open pyramid) for the other entryway; he felt having two different elements would avoid the look of one long facade. Cc mLissioner Drury felt it would be beneficial to review both entryways simultaneously. Cc m mission concurred. The applicant indicated that was acceptable and requested some direction from the commission. Commission commented on the proportion, suggested use of stucco or possibly brick to distinguish between the entryways, and felt the height should be restudied and perhaps "stepped up". 4 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CU4IISSICN JULY 24, 1990 Action: Moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea, continuing Case No. 359 C to allow commission to review both entryways simultaneously. Carried 5-0. 3. CASE NO: 1789 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): DIVA'S HAIR SALON c/o SIGNS BY BULL, 83-480 Avenue 45 #15, Indio, CA 92201 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Awning with signage LOCATION: 73-200 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 Mr. Drell outlined the salient points of the staff report and noted that the applicant was absent due to illness. Commission indicated that the awning was acceptable, subject to size and height matching the awning to the west and the dome not extending below the door. Action: Moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, approving 1789 SA, subject to the condition that the awning's shape and height tie-in size wise with the awning to the west and the done not extend below the door. Carried 5-0. 4. CASE NO.• 1790 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIGNS BY BULL for WILLIAM ERNEST BROWN, 83-480 Avenue 45 #15, Indio, CA 92201 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT• Awning with signage LOCATION: 73-320 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 Mr. Drell outlined the salient points of the case, noting this was the same applicant as the previous case, who was absent. Staff recommended denial based on incompatibility with the building. 5 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CX74 ISSION JULY 24, 1990 Commissioner Drury commented that not all building architecture lent itself to installing an awning and this might be the case in this instance. Commission suggested the applicant restudy the design to tie-in with the facade and attempt to create a compatible design with the whole building and/or the Gold Shop to the east. Action: Moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Drury, denying Case No. 1790 SA. Carried 5-0. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO: PP 90-17 APPLICANT (AMID ADDRESS): FOXX & ASSOCIATES, 74-818 Velie Way, Suite 2, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary nary approval for 4,800 square foot office building LOCATICN: South side of Fred Waring, east of Monterey 7.CNE: O.P. Mr. Drell outlined salient points of the staff report and recommended preliminary approval. Commissioner Urrutia expressed concern regarding the lack of detail treatment for the blank wall on the east side, noting that landscaping alone would not alleviate the problem; the location of the trash bins was inappropriate; and the pitched roof was out of character due to the lack of setback and two- story height. He complimented the applicant on the stone treatment. Mr. Holden explained they were trying to obtain volume and indicated that he could incorporate the changes into the working drawings that would cane back before commission. Chairman Gregory felt the changes were too significant and indicated that since a landscape plan was needed, a continuance would be in order. Conmission concurred. 6 lampol_ MINUJTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CXP MISSICN DULY 241, 1990 Action: Moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea, continuing PP 90-17. Carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Holden abstained). 2. CASE NO: CUP 90-12 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HARRY LIOSIS, 1317 No. San Fernand Road #351, Burbank, CA 91504 INURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of plans for a 19,500 square foot office building LOCATICN: Northwest corner of Deep Canyon and Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Joy outlined the salient points of the staff report. Mr. Bernard Leung, representing the applicant, indicated that the plan submitted showed a 32' high building and noted that the plan would be scaled down proportionately. Commissioner Urrutia felt that eliminating the frontage road had merit because of the existing intersection problems. He had no problem with the concept and felt the radius was good. He expressed concern that the two-story building was too close to the highway and felt the fascia was overpowering. He suggested that the second floor be stepped back to relieve the two story affect, a lessening of the fascia impact, and provision of more "finger" planters in the parking area. Upon questioning by Chairman Gregory, staff explained that the plan would conform with the parking lot tree master plan, which calls for one tree for every three spaces. He noted that the height of the building should be the same as the setback to provide an aesthetic balance. He also requested that the applicant provide a more even distribution of the shade trees. Mr. Leung noted that if the second floor was stepped back five feet, that five feet could extend over the rear area without changing the building structurally. He indicated that the owner was hampered by realignment and signal control requirements. Mr. Henry Tasaka noted that vacating of the frontage road and realignment was still at the staff level. 7 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW C CD14ISSIC N JULY 24, 1990 Commissioner Holden felt the Deep Canyon side of the building was good with the varying setbacks. Commissioner Urrutia noted this would be a good opportunity to have a nice building at that location. He indicated that the second story could hang over the parking area. Action: Moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Drury, continuing CUP 90-12 to allow the applicant to incorporate the revisions. Carried 5-0. 3. CASE NO: TT 25711 APPLICANT (AMID ADDRESS): BIRTCHER DUNI HAM, 72-010 Varner Road, Thousand Palms, CA 92276 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Re-submittal of preliminary s house plan LOCATICN: West of Eldorado - 1/2 mile south of Country Club ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Joy outlined the salient points of the case, noting that the plan was revised per previous ccrm fission conditions. Commissioner Holden noted that some cosmetic changes had been made, but they did not aesthetically tie-in with the building. He indicated that solar protection had also not been addressed. Commissioner Urrutia stated that the applicant was to provide solar shade on the sides and rear, which had not been done. Commissioner Holden indicated that the revision helped, but was not enough. Action: Moved by Commissioner Drury, seconded by Commissioner McCrea, continuing Case No. TT 25711. Carried 5-0. V. The meeting was adjourned at 2:05 p.m. StEVE SMITH ASSOCIATE PLANNER SRS/tm 8