Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-10-22 err' MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 #f###f#f#####f#########fff#f#####f##f#f######f#f#f#####f###f#ff###f####f#f# I. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 12:20 p.m. Commission Members Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ron Gregory, Chairman X 18 2 Rick Holden X 18 2 Frank Urrutia X 16 4 Chris Van Vliet X 17 3 Kirby Warner X 3 0 Wayne Connor, Alternate X 13 7 Staff Present: Phil Drell Steve Smith Jeff Winkiepleck Daisy Garcia Donna Bitter II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Urrutia, to approve the minutes of the October 8, 1991 meeting as submitted. Motion carried 5-0-1, Chairman Gregory abstaining. III. It was moved by Commissioner Warner, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the following cases by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0. A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO.: 2062 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PAUL FREILER, 74-040 Highway 111 , Unit F, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Business identification sign LOCATION: 74-040 Highway Ill ZONE: C-1 The case was continued at the applicant's request. MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 2. CASE NO.: 368 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): STUDIO FIVE ARCHITECTS & DESIGN for LUCKY STORES, 31511-A Camino Capistrano, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised landscaping plan for outdoor storage area LOCATION: E1 Paseo and Lupine Avenue ZONE: C-1 S.P. Commission approved the revised landscaping plans with the following conditions: 1) Replace proposed ligustrum, as it did not fit with the rest of the plant material . 2) Palm Springs Gold to be placed along the wall with the baccaris, a similar material , being used along the curb. 3) Extend landscaping to the corner of Lupine Avenue and El Paseo 3. CASE NO.: 2037 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : BEST SIGNS for 40'S AGAIN, 2600 Cherokee Way, Palm Springs, CA 92264 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of two business identification signs LOCATION: 72-990 El Paseo ZONE: PC-3 Staff reported that the proposed signs would be illuminated with existing flood lights on the building. The signs would be placed at the same location of the previous signs. 4. CASE NO.: 370 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY, Post Office Box 6411 , Artesia, CA 90702-3411 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of soil remediation equipment enclosure 2 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 LOCATION: Southwest corner of Highway III and Portola ZONE: C-1 Commission approved the enclosure with the following conditions: 1 ) Fifteen gallon green hopseed placed 42" on center around the fence to provide screening of the equipment. 2) Enclosure surrounded with six foot high redwood fence. 3) Automatic irrigation system to be provided. 5. CASE NO.: APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : DOLAN CONSTRUCTION CO. , INC. for McDONALDS, 75-101 Sego Lane, Suite B, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of extension to existing playland with additional toy LOCATION: 72-755 Highway III ZONE: P.0 (3) 6. CASE NO.: 2064 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): IMPERIAL SIGN INC. for HISTORICAL MODELS & BOOKS, 46-120 Calhoun Street, Indio, CA 92201 NATURE OF PRODUCTS/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Business identification sign LOCATION: 74-040 Highway III , Unit F, Building C ZONE: The case was continued at the applicant's request. 7. CASE NO.: APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): BON APPETIT, Post Office Box 1797, Palm Desert, CA 92261 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business signage on existing awning LOCATION: 73-640 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 3 14r MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO.: PP 91-11 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JAMES SATTLEY, 4-1625 Eclectic Street, Suite G-1 , Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of elevations for 13 unit single story apartment project LOCATION: East side of San Rafael between San Gorgonio and Catalina Way ZONE: R-2 S.O. Commission approved preliminary elevation plans only subject to the applicant providing detailed carport and landscaping plans. 2. CASE NO.: 2038 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : URRUTIA ARCHITECTS for AMERICAN SAVINGS, 73-550 Alessandro Drive, Suite E, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of exterior remodel , landscaping and sign relocation LOCATION: 72-625 Highway III ZONE: PC-3 Commission approved plans as submitted. Commissioner Urrutia abstained from vote. 3. CASE NO.: PP 91-10 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): HOLDEN & JOHNSON ARCHITECTS for ROM DE GUZMAN, 44-267 Monterey Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260 MATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of plans for a 3055 square foot professional office building LOCATION: 73-636 Alessandro ZONE: R-3 4 *taw lwxpo� MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 Staff noted that the case would be brought before the planning commission for approval of the second story, variance request and conditional use permit. Chairman Gregory wanted to see the west elevation broken up with additional landscaping. Commissioner Holden has spoken with the owners of the adjacent Wise Athletic Club asking for their approval to add the landscaping along this wall . Commission approved the plans as submitted. Commissioner Holden abstained. IV. CASES: 1. CASE NO.: 1996 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): OLIPHANT & LIZZA DEVELOPMENT GROUP for SUPER BLOCK, 75-140 St. Charles Place, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised sign program for back of buildings LOCATION: Northeast corner of Highway III and Portola Avenue ZONE: C-1 S.P. Mr. Drell reported that the approved redwood signs for the back of the building did not hang properly in the arches, and therefore the applicant was asking to replace the signs in the arches with halo lit, black, reverse channel letters. The redwood signs would still be placed at the balcony areas. Commissioner Urrutia felt the proposed signs were a much better solution. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Warner, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the revised sign program as submitted. Motion carried 5-0-1 , Chairman Gregory abstaining. 2. CASE NO.: 1990 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): IMPERIAL SIGN COMPANY, INC. for THE GATHERING PLACE, 46-120 Calhoun Street, Indio, CA 92201 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Reconsideration of revised business identification signage LOCATION: 73-405 Highway III ZONE: C-1 S.P. 5 *`.r MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 The applicant, Jim Engle, noted that the owner of The Gathering Place was asking for a revised business identification sign reading "Bible Book Store" in 10" letters with "The Gathering Place" in 5" letters. Commission preferred an ivory background, however the applicant noted that the owner was asking to use the existing white plex. Commissioner Warner felt that this particular sign fit in better with what is existing on both sides of the business, however he had a problem with the style of the revised sign. Mr. Engle stated that the owner was willing to change the style to a smaller print. Chairman Gregory felt that the sign needed to be toned down to be acceptable. Commissioner Urrutia noted that when the applicant lessened the size of the letters the entire sign would come in from the ends. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Warner, seconded by Commissioner Van Viiet , to approve the revised signage with the following conditions: 1) Maximum 10" helvetica medium letters 2) Boldness to be toned down 3) Dark blue letters on existing white background 4) Stretch out "The Gathering Place" to fill in the blankness Motion carried 6-0. 3. CASE NO.: PP 90-24 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): AVANT GARDENS, INC. for ROBIN PLAZA, 984 W. Foothill Blvd. , Suite C, Upland, CA 91786 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of landscaping plan LOCATION: Southeast corner of E1 Paseo and Sage ZONE: C-1 Phil Drell presented the revised landscaping plans with comments from Eric Johnson. Commission discussed these comments in detail . 6 urn "4sl' MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1"1 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to approve the landscape plan with the following conditions: 1) Penstemon eatoni changed to Dietes veg. 2) Acacian farnesiana changed to Acacian smallii . Motion carried 6-0. 4. 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 PROJECTIAPPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of sign program LOCATION: Fred Waring Drive and Highway III ZONE: P.C. (3) S.P. Steve Smith reported that Mr. Ritter of DSL Service Co. , Mr. Livingood of Federal Signs and Kevin Stong, architect for Mervyn's were present to request signage for Mervyn's and Ross Dress for Less. He noted that additionally the applicant had included free standing signs and they were withdrawing that request at this time. Mr. Smith added that the applicant was requesting establishment of the inline tenant signs as well . Mr. Smith presented the proposed colors of green, two shades of blue and white noting that the center was limited to three colors. Commissioner Holden was concerned with future tenants proposing its own shades of blue for their particular signage. Commissioners Urrutia and Warner agreed adding that the sign program would get too complicated without the commission selecting the exact colors. Mr. Smith felt that if commission could establish a minimum top and bottom border, the remaining businesses could work within this established program. Mr . Smith reported that commission's decision would be a recommendation to city council as they specifically wanted final approval on the sign program for the center. Commissioner Warner asked about the red color normally used by Circuit City. The applicant replied that he had not had enough contact with Circuit City at this point to know what they would want. 7 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 Chairman Gregory asked what the smaller tenant signs would be. Staff reported that they were asking for reverse channel letters that would be opaque. The proposed height of these letters would be a maximum of 20". Commissioner Warner noted that the way the sign program is being proposed, the criteria would be a maximum letter size, the color of the sign and a minimum border at the top and bottom. This would mean that the signs could come in at different type styles and letter size. Mr. Smith concurred. Commissioner Urrutia did not have a problem with the height of the Ross and Mervyn's signs, being above the 20' prescribed in the ordinance, as it was appropriate with the size of the building. His concern was with the size of the Mervyn's sign because of the brilliance of the color, the block letter style (more surface area per letter) and it's proportion on the fascia. The Ross "R", while it is 54" tall is 3'9" wide; the Mervyn's "R" is proposed at 48" in height and has a width of 5115". The Ross "S" is 54" high and has a width of 3'711; while the Mervyn's "S" is proposed at 48" in height and has a width of 4'611. Chairman Gregory noted commission's concerns on the brightness of the neon. Commissioner Warner noted that the light intensity needed to be kept consistent, as they did not want one sign to be brighter than the rest. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve green, blue and white as the three allowable colors for the center. Applicant to identify the one shade of blue to be used. Motion carried 5-0-1 , Chairman Gregory abstaining. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the following criteria for allowable size: 1) Ross Dress for Less: Commission approved 54" letters as submitted. Sign to be a maximum of 20 feet long overall , returns to be painted same color as letter face, and white neon tubing throughout with the intensity limited to 4500. 2) Mervyn's: Letters to be reduced in height by 6" (48" to 4211) and proportionally length reduced. Two inch (211) white border approved. Returns to be painted same color as letter face and white neon tubing throughout with the intensity limited to 4500. Motion carried 5-0-1 , Chairman Gregory abstaining. 8 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the inline tenant signs as submitted with the same criteria as noted above. Tenant allowed one square foot of signage per linear foot. Minimum border for top and bottom to be 12". Motion carried 5-0-1 , Chairman Gregory abstaining. B. Preliminary Plans: 1. CASE NO.: CUP 91-4 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CALIFORNIA PIZZA KITCHENS c/o MR. FRED FERN, 73-001 E1 Paseo, Suite 205, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of rear elevation addition and outdoor dining area LOCATION: Northwest corner of El Paseo and Ocotillo Drive ZONE: C-1 Phil Drell presented the elevations for the proposed addition noting that when the applicant received approval for the restaurant it included an expansion for storage and an outdoor patio. The applicant was now requesting an additional pop-out extending to the sidewalk on the north elevation. Mr. Drell suggested additional details to keep the addition from looking like a back door. The applicant asked for commission's comments on a future proposed yellow awning. Commissioner Holden noted that they would have to see what the continuation was. The applicant noted that the adjacent business had not been before commission as yet. Chairman Gregory advised the applicant to avoid a real vivid yellow color as commission would like to see a more subdue yellow than presented. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the addition as submitted. Motion carried 6-0. 9 NOW MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 V. MISCELLANEOUS: Phil Drell noted the memorandum from the public works department regarding the landscaping installed at the Super Block building. The memo stated that what was installed was not the same as the approved plan. He also presented the responses to this memo from Ron Gregory. Chairman Gregory asked staff if this procedure would now be normal as he had never seen a project return to commission with a list of items of concern once the plants were installed. Commissioner Holden felt that something along the line of this memo should be done. Mr. Drell felt that staff always has to make a judgement on what changes are made during installation. Commissioner Urrutia felt that if the commission goes through the process of approving something, there should be something done to make sure this approval is carried out. He was glad to see the follow-up being carried out. Chairman Gregory asked what should happen if during installation the plants are not available that were on the original plan. Commissioner Holden asked who would be making these decisions on such changes. Commissioner Holden agreed with the review of the plan. He did not understand why commission should review the plan if they can't see something to review the finished plan. Mr. Drell felt that when there is a thought that the approved plan has been deviated, the changes would need to be brought back to this commission for review. Commissioner Warner felt the commission needed to be more specific and this review process would be the best way. Commissioner Holden felt that as-built plans should be provided for review if changes are made. Commission appointed Commissioners Connor, Van Vliet and Urrutia to walk the particular site and report back to commission at the next meeting. Commissioner Connor asked for a copy of the original approved plan along with a copy of Mr. Gregory's responses. Commissioner Holden asked if all projects will be reviewed in this manner in the future. Commissioner Van Vliet questioned the policy for a typical sign-off inspection through the city. Mr. Drell explained the inspection process, however noted that landscaping plans are changed quite a bit during installation. Commissioner Holden felt that when staff feels uncomfortable with changes being made, the changes should then be submitted to the commission for approval . Commissioner Warner agreed. 10 MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 VI. The following cases were added to the agenda by a unanimous vote of the commission. 1. CASE NO.: VAR 91-3 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): FOXX DEVELOPMENT CORP. for ESCADA, 74- 818 Velie Way, Suite 12, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of signage on approved awning LOCATION: 73-811 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 Phil Drell presented plans for the proposed signage on the previously approved awning. Letter size was proposed at 10" with clear returns. The applicant, Jim Foxx, noted that the sign would project through the face of the awning 3/4 of an inch. He added that this would be the only signage on the building. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Warner, to approve the signage on the front awning as submitted. Motion carried 6-0. Mr. Foxx also presented plans for proposed awning for the back of the building to be the same shade as the building. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Warner, to grant preliminary approval to the rear awning design with 8" letters subject to the actual color being submitted for final approval . Motion carried 6-0. 2. CASE NO.: PP 91-9 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): AVIS RENT-A-CAR, 3400 Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Revised preliminary plans LOCATION: 74-881 Hovley Lane ZONE: S. I . Steve Smith presented revised preliminary plans showing the off- 11 *1W Moo, MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL. REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 white building color. He noted that the landscaping plans had been revised and approved by Eric Johnson. Commission stated that the applicant had met their requirements and could proceed with working drawings. 3. CASE NO.: PP 89-21 _APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PIZZA HUT, 208 So. Maize Road, Wichita, Kansas 67209-3110 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of patio trellis LOCATION: Southeast corner of La Posada Regional Center ZONE: PC-3 Steve Smith presented faxed plans on proposed outdoor dining patio and trellis. Commission requested that an actual plan be submitted by the applicant with a detailed landscaping plan. VII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Mr. Ray Diaz brought before the commission the city council 's concerns on the previous approval of lights at the Embassy Suites Hotel . No member of commission recalled being contacted by any member of the city council concerning this matter. Commissioner Holden stated that the commission approved the subject lighting as submitted because they liked the appearance. Commissioner Urrutia added that the lights were approved unanimously. Mr. Diaz reported that city council requested that the commission develop specific criteria on this type of lighting, noting that they asked for direction that they might adopt on lighting requirements. Commissioner Holden replied that their criteria has been that the lights be non-blinking, white lights. He added that the commission approved lighting on an individual bases that were tastefully done and aesthetically acceptable. Mr. Diaz will take these guidelines to city council at its November 14, 1991 meeting. 12 *0W MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 1991 VIII. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 3: 15 p.m. SIEVE SMITH ASSOCIATE PLANNER SS/db 13