Loading...
2000 06 13 PCPlanning Commission Agendas are now Available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-quinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California June 13, 2000 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2000-037 Beginning Minute Motion 2000-01 1 CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes of the regular meeting on May 23, 2000 B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. 1yl I PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Item ................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-678 Applicant .......... Michael Shovlin (Washington Plaza Associates) Location ........... 46-100 Washington Street, within One Eleven La QuintE Shopping Center. Request ............ Approval of development plans for a one story 4,64E square foot bank building on 0.73 acres Action ............... Resolution 2000- B. Item .................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-647, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant.......... Century -Crowell Communities Location........... To be constructed along Cantebury & Riviera, in PGA Wesi Request............ Approval of architectural plans for two new design option, - to be added to Plan 3 and 4 of the Tournament collection Action .............. Resolution 2000- C. Item ................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-386, GENERAL PLAN 2000-065, SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-046 AND TRACT MAF 29436 Applicant .......... Mainiero Smith and Associates Location ............ On the north side of Eisenhower Dr., east of Coachella Dr Request .....11 Recommend certification of a Mitigated NegativE Declaration of Environmental Impact; 2) Recommend approval of a General Plan Text Amendment tc require a Corridor Master Plan for traffic signals to allovn spacing less than 1,200 feet; 3) Recommend approval of a Specific Plan for Eisenhowei Corridor Master Plan of traffic signals; and 4) Recommend approval to subdivide 75.86 acres into 16E residential lots and other amenity lots. Action ............... Resolution 2000- , Resolution 2000- , Resolution 2000- BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item .................. SIGN APPLICATION 2000-502 Applicant.......... Fuller's Sign and Design (Bruce Fuller) Location........... Southeast corner of Dune Palms Road and Highway 111 Request............ Approval of a sign program for Dune Palms Center (Lapis Energy - SP 96-028) Action .............. Resolution 2000- V11. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Commission report on the City Council meeting of June 7, 2000 IX. ADJOURNMENT D(' /7T n-m7,m 7, MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA May 23, 2000 CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Abels to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Robert Tyler, Steve Robbins, and Chairman Kirk. C. Staff present: City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di loroo, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Planning Consultant Nicole Criste, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. IL PL'BLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of May 9, 2000. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 6, Item #1 be amended to delete the word "continued" in the fourth line; Page 6, Item #7, change to read: "Commissioner Tyler stated that the other half of Aliso Del Rey tract to the north, has lots that run north and south, and asked why the lots in this tract are running east and west instead. Also, why don't the streets of this tract connect with the project to the north?"; Page 7, Item #10, be amended to read: "Commissioner Tyler stated that Century - Crowell has always stated that they knew the potential of Aliso Del Rey II becoming a reality. This Commission has previously heard open discussion that this was likely to happen. In public testimony concerning Aliso Del Rey I, and also at subsequent public hearings regarding the Eucalyptus trees along the northern boundary of that tract, there was public comment given regarding a concern for heavy traffic on Dune Palms Road because of the schools, and a need expressed to have a second access onto Westward Ho Drive. Looking at this tract layout, it is probably the worst example of a tract layout he has seen while serving CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 on this Commission - especially since both tracts involved are being done concurrently by the same developer. For example, Lots 12, 18, and 24 each abut four lots across their northern lot line and Lots 13, 19 and 25 each abut three lots across their northern lot line. This violates common sense and good planning practice, and he cannot understand why the Commission is even considering it. Knowing that Aliso Del Rey II was likely to happen, it should have been integrated into the overall design of Aliso Del Rey from the very beginning. This is a high visibility project, right across from La Quinta High School and will only add to existing traffic problems. He has a problem supporting this project."; Page 8, Item #14, add the word private at the end of the first line; Page 8, Item #15, delete the fourth word "the". There being no further changes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to approve the minutes as amended. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Tentative Tract Map 28409, Extension #2; a request of Charles B. Murphy and Lynn R. Kunkle for a recommendation of approval of a second one year time extension for a previously approved subdivision of 9.15 acres into 19 custom single family and other common or private street lots. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if this was the last extension. Staff stated they had one more. Commissioner Tyler asked why Condition #40 had been lined out. Staff stated that it was a recommendation of the Public Works Department. Staff proceeded to go over the changes to the Conditions of Approval. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if anyone would like to address the Commission on this project. 4. There being no public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened it for Commission discussion. CAMy Documents\WPI)OCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 2 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 5. Commissioner Tyler noted the condition of the deteriorated sign on the project site and asked that it be replaced with a new one. 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-030 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28409 Extension #2 as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Commissioner Butler excused himself from the meeting due to a possible conflict of interest and left the dias. B. Site Development Permit 99-648 Amendment #1; a request of Century - Crowell Communities for approval of a new two-story prototype residence for use in Tract 27529-Aliso Del Rey located on the west side of Dune Palms Road south of Desert Stream Drive. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the Public Hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if it would be appropriate to add a condition that would prohibit the bonus room from being built. Staff stated it could be added. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Marty Butler representing Century -Crowell Communities, stated she concurred with staff's recommendation. 4. There being no questions of the applicant, Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. Jim Brenneis, 79-365 Desert Stream Drive, asked staff to verify the level of the pads as he thought they would be lower than where they are currently graded to. They appear to be three feet higher than he thought. In regard to the two-story homes, he asked for verification as to where they would be located. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 3 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 5. Mr. Gordon West, 79-285 Desert Stream, stated he was told the grade for this development would be lower than their homes and now the dirt is piled up higher than their grade level. If this is to be the pad elevation the existing homes will not be able to see the mountains as the homes are larger than what was originally proposed for this tract. This tract was approved for one story homes and now this is the third or fourth time Century -Crowell have come back requesting changes. They are tired of having to continually attend meetings to defend themselves against Century's request. 6. Mr. Sean Huber, 79-375 Desert Stream Drive, stated he has been before the Commission on numerous times regarding this project objecting to numerous items. Each time they were assured there would be no more than a three foot variation lower than there homes and they would be single story homes to not disturb their views. He also agreed with what had been previously stated. At what point is it enough and the City can require them to stick to their plans. 7. Mr. Tom Mulkahey, 79-350 Desert Rock Court, stated they had been through the same issue when Century built behind the original Topez tract and they ended up with a two foot addition on top of their wall because no one caught the elevation change. No one was responsible for this mistake and now he looks at this wall and his neighbor looks down into his yard. Another issue he brought up to the City Council is one exit/entrance which is gated. He was told there would be another exit/entrance on the Westward Ho Drive side and now he is hearing they are going to build cul-de-sacs. This means the second exit/entrance will not be built. He reviewed the Environmental Impact Report and there is no consideration given to the fact that two schools are being constructed on Dune Palms Road. The faculty parking and student drop off is located on Dune Palms Road. All these issues add to the traffic and congestion and should have been taken care of. We live here and Century does not. 8. Chairman Kirk asked staff to address some of the concerns raised. Staff displayed the map and showed where the two story homes had been plotted. 9. Commissioner Tyler asked if the applicant was a legally bound to follow the map. Staff stated they would have to come back and ask for the change before they could make any changes. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 4 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 10. Senior Engineer Steve Speer went over the map approval process in regard to grading/elevations to assure the tract map is graded as approved. Chairman Kirk asked if staff would notify those who spoke in regard to verifying the pad elevations. 11. Commissioner Tyler asked if the applicant was requesting the loft option for use in Aliso Del Rey II. Ms. Marty Butler, representing Century -Crowell Communities, stated that would be their intent, but they are only responding to the market demand for larger homes. 12. There being no further public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened it for Commission discussion. 13. Commissioner Robbins stated he understands the existing homeowners' concerns as they have gone through the approval process and thought they had an acceptable project and now it has come back for a change. He asked if the two story units that actually back up to the existing units could be changed to one story units so the two story units would have no impact on the existing homes. The applicant concurred with the suggestion. 14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-031 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 99-648, Amendment #1, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as amended. a. Condition #3: A bonus room option in the garage shall not be allowed. b. Condition #4: Two story houses shall not be constructed adjacent to the existing subdivision to the north. C. Condition #7: No bonus rooms on two story units. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. C. Tentative Tract Map 29568 and Site Development Permit 2000-670 ; a request of Century -Crowell Communities for recommendation of an approval to subdivide 8.48 acres into two multi -family lots and four lettered lots, and approval to construct three prototype residential plans CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\pc5-23-20.wpd 5 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 ranging in size from 1,803 to 2,400 square feet within Specific Plan 83- 001, located south of 501h Avenue, west of Washington Street, at the southern terminus of Avenida Los Verdes, within Duna La Quinta. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the Public Hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manger Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted a condition that was added by Public Works. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained the condition was to require the applicant to dedicate Lot "D" on Parcel Map 19730 for use as Washington Street right-of-way. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Abels asked staff to identify what channel was referred to on the plans. Staff stated the channel is the golf course fairway. Commissioner Abels asked staff to confirm there will be a pool at the end of Lot 20. Staff stated that was true. 3. Commissioner Robbins asked about the keystone retaining wall system. Staff stated the retaining wall system would be used from Washington Street adjacent to the apartment complex, continuing around and adjacent to the City -owned retention basin, and runs the entire length of the south side of the tract and is not on the storm water, or north side. The HOA will be responsible for maintaining it. 4. Commissioner Tyler asked how the emergency access gate would operate. Staff stated the grade elevation exists and the developer will have to match the elevation of the flood control dike and the elevation of the street. 5. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Margo Williams, Mainiero Smith, engineers representing Century -Crowell Communities, stated she concurred with staff's recommendations. On Page 2 of the staff report, there needs to be a clarification that there are 22 units for a total of 40 units. With respect to Condition #33 regarding the elevations, they are constrained by the dike and will minimize the impact of the elevation differential with landscaping. C:AMy I)ocurients\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 6 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 6. Commissioner Tyler asked for clarification on the number of units to be constructed. Ms. Williams stated there should be a total of 40 units. Staff recommended the deletion of Conditions #25 and #33 as they do not apply to this tract. Ms. Williams asked about Condition #62 being deleted. 7. There being no further questions of the applicant, Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. 8. There being no further public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened it for Commission discussion. 9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-032 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 29586, as amended: a. Condition #1: remove the word "conditional". b. Condition #9.A.1.: Applicant shall dedicate Lot "D" on Parcel Map 19730 for use as Washington Street right-of- way C. Condition #9.C.: reword regarding the cul-de-sac bulb d. Condition #25: delete e. Condition #33: delete f. Condition #51.B.1.: reword regarding the cul-de-sac bulb g. Condition #60: delete, "and turning movements of traffic" ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-033 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2000-670, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. Chairman Kirk recessed the meeting at 7:53 p.m. and reconvened at 8:00 p.m. Commissioner Butler rejoined the meeting. Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 D. Environmental Assessment 2000-394, Specific Plan 2000-042, and Conditional Use Permit 2000-048; a request of the La Quinta Arts Foundation for a recommendation to certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, approval of design guidelines and development standards to guide future development, and allow a visual performing arts education facility. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the Public Hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste informed the Commission of the proposed changes to the Specific Plan Conditions of Approval: Condition #57 be modified to read, "On Sundays and Holidays, the weekday hours of operation shall apply. For the five major events on the Festival grounds annually, breakdown shall be allowed until 10:00 p.m." Condition #67 modified to read, "Alternatively 100 parallel parking spaces may be provided along the rear access road by widening the road to a 36-foot width minimum." Condition #68 be amended to delete the words "Site Development Permit" and "Grading" used instead. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler questioned Condition #54.13. as to whether or not it included the berming. Staff stated it did. 3. Commissioner Robbins asked if the proposed parking lots would be paved. Staff stated the general parking and artists parking lots are decomposed granite (DG). Only the VIP parking and driveways are paved. The others serve as retention basins and are proposed in the Specific Plan as DG. 4. Commissioner Butler asked if DG complies with the PM 10 requirements. Staff stated it is clarified in the Specific Plan as to how it will be maintained to meet the PM 10 requirements. 5. Commissioner Abels asked what the circulation plan was to get into the Festival grounds. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste explained the circulation plan on the exhibit. The adjoining gates would be used for unloading. 6. Commissioner Robbins asked why a temporary turnaround was indicated on the Conceptual Site Plan, but is not shown on the landscaping plan. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 8 Planning; Commission Meeting May 23., 2000 7. Chairman Kirk commended staff on the staff report. He questioned the parking and circulation plan contained in the Specific Plan. He noted the guests and artists parking are addressed, and asked if the employees, or volunteers were included in the parking calculations. Staff stated they were included in the count. 8. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Kay Wolff, President of the Board of Directors for the Arts Foundation, asked if Father Barker could speak first. Father Jack Barker, St. Francis of Assisi Church, stated that on behalf of the 8,000 members of his church, they are delighted to have the Arts Foundation as their potential neighbors. They have been looking for years to have a good neighbor and are happy to have them as it will help their parking problems. In terms of the development of the City, he would like to remind everyone that we have a vision of the cultural environment for this City that are contained in the City documents. As a spiritual leader in the City he has a concern for the quality of life in our community. If we only built houses, gas stations, and banks it will be boring. We have to build those things that will sustain the spiritual, educational, and artistic inner person. Obviously there are many details that need to be worked out as he would not want a concert at 1:00 a.m. in the morning either. Ms. Kay Wolff thanked staff for their time studying their project and their help preparing the necessary documents. She asked the Board Members, employees and scholarship recipients to indicate their presence in support of the project. She went on to give the history and mission of Foundation. 9. Ms. Susan Francis, Executive Director, stated she was representing the Board Members, employees, volunteers and students served by the Foundation. She went on to state how they have outgrown their Festival and office facilities. They have tried to keep the Church informed as well as holding meetings throughout the Valley to keep people informed of their progress. Through these meetings, changes were made to the site plan to address the concerns of the neighbors. The Foundation's programs and services are good for the community and she went on to described those programs and services. Ms. Francis introduced Mike Smith and Steve Soboda, Warner Engineering, engineers for the project, Frank Delany, attorney for the Arts Foundation, Ron Gregory, landscape architect, and Eldon Lee with Korve Engineering. C:\My I)ocurients\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 9 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 10. Mr. Frank Delany, attorney for the applicant, stated they have reviewed the staff report and generally agree with most of the Conditions as recommended. Condition #62 by reason of changes to Condition #54, is now acceptable. The changes made by staff regarding the hours of operation, are acceptable with one modification; the exception for major events, which would not be subject to the time limitations as required by the Zoning Code. They would request this apply to the five major events on Page 3, as well as the five medium events, for a total of 10 events. Condition #64, they are requesting the Specific Plan be modified to permit them to use either DG, or grassed turf depending on their choice. Condition #68 is acceptable. Condition #67, with the clarification made by staff, adding the additional 100 spaces by widening the access, they believe this Condition can be deleted. Condition #27, in regard to the retention basin, needs to be clarified. As the Commission knows, the retention basins were designed so the parking lots would not be visible from the street. This condition requires them to be visible and they believe this is inappropriate and ask that it be deleted. Condition #34 in regard to providing a ten foot sidewalk; they would request this condition be modified to require them to provide a six foot wide meandering sidewalk. The opportunity for a bike path to the south is eliminated because of the residential development, Laguna de la Paz, and to the north because of the church. 11. Ms. Nicole Criste responded in regard to Condition #67 by stating staff would disagree with the applicant's request because the condition now provides alternatives either in redesign of the parking lots to provide additional parking spaces, or in parallel parking along the rear driveway by increasing the width of the road. Staff would still support the condition as amended. 12. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that in regard to the applicant's request for a six foot meandering sidewalk, staff would request that it be 8-feet, which would be a change to Condition #34. In regard to Condition #27, it is staff's decision they remain in place. Even though they may be redundant, they do serve a purpose. Commissioner Robbins questioned whether or not the upper retention basin would meet the criteria . 13. There being no questions of the applicant, Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 10 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 14. Mr. Robert Ready, 48-241 Calle Floristas, submitted a letter of opposition and a petition containing 200 signatures objecting to the Foundation's use of the property. The Commission is aware of the findings required to approve the applications. The applicant intends to use the property as its corporate headquarters as shown by the applications and signs that have been on the property for more than a year. Such a use is not consistent with General Plan or Zoning Code. The application does not comply with CEQA. The informational requirements of CEQA have not been met. For example, alternative sites have not even been mentioned, even though there are numerous such sites in the City. A full EIR should be prepared. The project is inconsistent with the surrounding already developed neighborhoods. The proposed use is commercial with a massive infrastructure, including an enormous parking lot consisting of 1624 parking spaces. The Festival grounds provide for 380 sales display pads. In short, what we have is the imposition of a tent city, a parking lot as large as WalMart, and commercial structures all used for commercial activity placed on Low Density Residential land. Surely, this commercial use is not compatible with the existing quiet residential neighborhoods of Laguna de la Paz and Lake La Quinta. The Specific Plan does not rise to even the minimum thresholds of matters to be included in the plan. It does not provide the text or diagrams which specify in detail the description, location and extent of the uses of the land within the area covered by the Plan. This Plan represents the applicant's wish list. Among other deficiencies, the applicant has not provided for sufficient parking for the level of activity anticipated. The applicant has stated they have a reciprocal agreement with St. Francis of Assissi Church for shared parking. However, if this were to occur, the Church would be in violation of its own current use permits which would render them subject to revocation. He cannot believe this is the intention of the religious authorities at St. Francis of Assisi. The Specific Plan required findings cannot be met for the very reasons that the Conditional Use Permit findings cannot be met. The predominate use in the area provide the yardstick for determining compatibility with neighboring uses. The applicant's property is a tiny island in the midst of a sea of Low Density Residential property and its commercial uses are not compatible with the neighborhood, nor is the property suitable for commercial activities. They are entitled to a fair hearing and expect that the evidence presented will be impartially reviewed and an equitable decision rendered by this CAM}, L)ocurrents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 11 Planning; Commission Meeting May 23., 2000 tribunal. As the Commission is aware, any violation of the Zoning Code is a public nuisance and must be taken into consideration in their deliberations. The nuisances that the applicant's uses represent are fully covered in his written submittal. 15. Ms. Helen Reddy, 48-241 Calle Floristas, stated a transaction is classified as commercial based on the nature of the conduct in light of the totality of the surrounding circumstances. The exchange of money for services, even by a nonprofit organization is quintessential commercial transaction. The interpretation that the applicant's proposed commercial operation is permissible under Table 9-1 Museum or Gallery Use, means that commercial operations on the scale proposed are permissible in residential areas. This is obviously inconsistent with and violates the General Plan. A Zoning Ordinance that is not consistent with the General Plan is invalid when it is originally passed. A cursory review of the applicant's submittal and staff's recommended Conditions of Approval will show that the project is consistent neither with the General Plan, nor Zoning Code. The Commission should not recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed uses on Low Density Residential land which abuts an already developed residential community. This project should be placed in the Village. As the City Attorney stated to her and her husband, at a meeting on April 121h, attended by Mr. Herman, unless a Conditional Use Permit is approved, there is no need to even consider the question of a Specific Plan. The Commission should not do that here at this meeting. However, one comment is required on staff's Conditions of Approval, Condition #54. This is a blatant attempt at rezoning under the guise of Conditions of Approval for a Specific Plan. This is spot zoning at its worse. 16. Ms. Barbara Barba, 48,806 Andorra Street, Indio, stated she was in support of the proposed project and an active member of the Arts Foundation and went on to explained how she has been involved in the Foundation's programs. Cultural needs will only continue if the building plans are approved. The La Quinta Arts Festival brings revenue to the City. Those who disagree with this building plan should read the permitted uses for this particular area established ten years before the residential area to the south was even proposed. She then read the uses listed on Table 4-1 Permitted Uses for the project site. If she were a resident to the south, she would rather have the Arts Foundation than some of the uses listed on the permitted list. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 12 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 17. Ms. April Newberry, 48-103 Vista Cielo, stated she was a resident of Laguna de la Paz and when they bought their property they were told this site was, and still is zoned for Low Density Residential housing. Any commercial development of this land is not consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code. They are against the proposed commercial development by the Arts Foundation as it would have a severe detrimental effect to their residential development and quality of life at Laguna de la Paz. 18. Mr. Christine Curry, 48-131 Vista Cielo, stated she was in support of the Arts Foundation. This project will be a major asset to the City. Its programs reach out to all ages and interests. It is a model studied by other communities. It sponsors one of the highest ranked art Festivals in the country. 19. Mr. Carl Soderberg, 48-509 Via Encanto, stated he moved to La Quinta a year and a half ago to enjoy a quiet life span. He has nothing against the Art Foundation, but they have many other choices for a location and if you look up and down Washington Street and see the traffic, like they do, you will see there is too much going on. The Foundation has to look at other choices and do their job. 20. Mr. Richard Ainsworth, 73-043 Somera, Palm Desert, stated the Arts Foundation has long supported his effort to pursue a career in graphic design through scholarships. He knows the Foundation is a vital part of the community and the schools by promoting education in the arts which is sometimes overlooked. He thinks it is great that they are trying to expand their facilities to further promote their programs. 21. Mr. Richard Mayer, 48-118 Vista Cielo, stated he is speaking in opposition to the project, but is an enthusiast for the Arts Foundation. His concern is the traffic that will be generated. The staff report states Washington Street is three lanes in each direction, but in reality is only two lanes. The staff reports also states that the exits from the parking areas are limited. The only way out of the site is to go south down Washington Street. Then if you want to go east, you will have to get into the left turn pocket and compete with the U-turn. To him this is not right. His biggest problem is the traffic it will bring. The Foundation has a tremendous idea; it is just in the wrong location. C':`,My Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 13 Planning; Commission Meeting May 212000 22. Ms. Kathryn Hull, 77-260 Calle Chillon, stated this is an exciting concept and she sees nothing wrong with a commercial project on a commercial street as Washington Street which makes it easy to get in and out. Three years ago the City held workshops to identify what was needed in the City and a cultural/performing facility was needed. It is not just one group that needs this type of facility, but the entire Valley. It would be a great gateway opening to the City and would make a statement that this City believes in more than businesses and buildings, it believes in a wonderfully balanced, cultural developed life for its citizens. 23. Mr. Larry Newberry, 48-103 Vista Cielo, stated that as a homeowner within 500 feet of the proposed project, he rises in opposition, based on the fact that even though the La Quinta Arts Foundation is a nonprofit organization providing these wonderful services, it charges for most of these services. This, in his opinion, makes it a commercial operation and therefore, is inconsistent with the General Plan and the zoning regulations. This project will have a detrimental effect on the adjoining residents due to the increase in noise, lighting, traffic congestion, and pollution. As stated in Ms. Kay Wolff's letter to the City they indicated they will not only provide services, but will seek to promote other organizations to use the facility. This will only increase the problems for the adjoining neighbors. The applicant's applications asked for release from at least 14 Municipal Code and Zoning issues in order to operate this facility. The Environmental Impact Report, Item #8.A.-Storm and water runoff from the Santa Rosa Mountains into the Catch Basins, states the water to be retained in the parking lots will be contaminated by oils, gasoline, and other chemicals leaked by the vehicles in the parking lot over a period of time. These hazardous materials can potentially percolate into the soil below the parking lot and eventually contaminate the ground water. As resident of Laguna de la Paz they have a multi -acre lake that is fed from ground wells adjacent to the property and they do all their irrigation and watering from these. He is concerned about the chemical levels that will be spread through out the 393 homes at the complex. 24. Ms. Deborah Godley 77-211 Calle Sonora, stated she does not have an affiliation with the Foundation, but has worked with them. She had no intention of speaking until she read an article in the paper from a resident of Laguna de la Paz that was likening the Arts Festival to a giant collection of porta potties. She lives in La Quinta and attends the Arts Festival and in her opinion, this is a C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 14 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 case of "nimby", or not in my backyard. It seems strange that such a wonderful entity as the Arts Foundation, with such educational goals, should be likened to a swap meet. One of the things that attracted her to La Quinta was the diversity in the people that live here. The Foundation does reach out to people who otherwise would have no exposure to the arts. 25. Mr. Ken Von Schnabl, 48-567 Via Amistad, stated the reason he is against this project is because of the lighting, traffic, and noise. What will happen when this project is started with as much traffic as there is now on Washington Street. The Church now has traffic coming in from all directions and there is only one exit. To add this traffic, to what they are proposing, how will the parking be handled. 26. Mr. Fred Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, stated he was privileged to lead the City to incorporation and served as it's first Mayor. He remembers what they discussed at that time should be the image of the City. The goal was to make it the cultural and art center of this Valley. When this City was first started it was all zoned residential. No one could expect to see this continue as the City is growing so fast. You cannot count on vacant land next to you remaining residential and it is ludicrous to accuse the Arts Foundation as proposing a commercial venture. The Arts Foundation is not a WalMart, Thrifty Drug Store, etc., but a nonprofit organization that serves this community. Every organization is going to raise money. The Church raises money. Does that make them a commercial enterprise? The traffic on Washington Street is there whether the Festival is held in the Village, or Washington Street. The traffic will not have to go as far as it use to, and most people will benefit from this new location. He is proud of this organization and how it has developed. It is self serving of those opposing this project. 27. Ms. Susan Clark, 51-220 Avenida Carranza, stated she has been living in La Quinta since the early 1980's and understands property values as her husband is a contractor. She is a school teacher at Adams Elementary School and wants to bring art to her students as she experienced it in her youth. She understands the time and effort to teach the basics due to the amount of time she spends on them. During the first two years of teaching at Adams CAM), Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 15 Planning; Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 School, she had the privilege of having a La Quinta Arts Foundation docent visit her fifth grade classroom to teach art once a week for five weeks. You cannot image the impatience of a fifth grader waiting for the docents to come. These students understand when someone outside their circle of parents and teachers care about them and what they know. The art docents care and they realize that a child without an appreciation of the arts has not had a complete education. This is an exposure that most of them would never have if it wasn't for the Foundation. Don't make an idle of your home and forget the ideals they have because of some perceived threat to their property. 28. Mr. Joseph Ferguson, 48-239 Calle Floristas, stated he and his wife bought their new home in Laguna de la Paz ten years ago, and at that time they inquired into the zoning of this property and were told it was zoned Low Density Residential. Now ten years later, from their backyard patio, they will see a berm with trucks, and maybe semi -tractor trailers, which will be parked in their employee parking lot during the run of a particular event. These trucks together with the construction of a visible major outdoor arena, violates the Low Density Residential zoning promised when they purchased their home. If this project is allowed to go forward, won't this be a great view from their property; dust, noise, lights, and generators. The applicant's have asked to change this either by zone change or conditional use permit. It is almost as though Laguna de la Paz does not count. He has nothing against the Foundation, but they have chosen the wrong location and the Commission must not allow them to proceed. A change in the zoning, or use, is not fair to the residents of Laguna de la Paz. They were there first. 29. There being no further public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened it for Commission discussion. 30. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste addressed the question of the temporary turn -around by stating the Specific Plan shows the temporary turn -around as temporary until the design and construction of the Foundation building, because when the Foundation building and its associated parking lot are designed it will provide the turn -around for people who are blocked by the first set of gates. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 16 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 31. Commissioner Tyler stated he has heard over and over again how important a role the Arts Foundation has played in the City's evolution over the last 18 years and the very important role it continues to play and wishes to play in the future. Both sides would agree to this. The facts are that the land was donated at this location and so that is where it is. Secondly, he keeps hearing the complaint that the project is commercial, yet no one is complaining that right across the street is a commercially zoned area. So the commercial flavor already exists. Third, is that at a recent Council meeting, on a much less important issue to the community, the Planning Commission was accused of a rush to judgement in denying a request after listening to an hour of testimony and then debating it for five minutes. He does not agree with this statement, but it was the perception that someone in the community has. Tonight we have been given massive amounts of material that needs to be understood and with the importance of this issue, the Commission needs time to assimilate this information before making a decision and he does not think there is time at this meeting to accomplish this. It is important that they make the right decision based on all the information they have and more has been received at this meeting. He would therefore like to suggest a continuance to the first meeting in June. 32. Commissioner Abels stated he has lived in La Quinta for 32 years and he has seen a lot of development. Traffic has gotten heavier and will continue to get heavier as the years go by and we will have to learn to live with it. This project has been a long time coming to La Quinta. It is such a worthwhile project that it will make La Quinta the envy of the art world and not only locally, but nationally. The Foundation is to be commended as they have prepared a thorough application and it is unfortunate that there are those in the community who do not want it next door. The proposed berming and landscaping on the south side will help alleviate the problems. He agrees with the parking plan. In regard to the traffic, the Bob Hope Classic and other events have the same problems and police have been brought in to control traffic. It may be an inconvenience, but how many times a year will this occur. It may be a commercial development, but not in the true sense. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.Nrpd 17 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 33. Commissioner Robbins stated he concurs with what has been stated and trusts that most of the opposition is in regard to the zoning and trusts that the City Attorney has reviewed the applications and the Commission, in fact, is in compliance with zoning and the General Plan. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the basic basis under the City's Zoning Code that this project is before them is that they may have museums or galleries displaying sculptures, artwork or crafts, including school for the above, on 20 acres or more under a conditional use permit in a Very Low Density Residential or Low Density Residential area; in fact, any residential area of the City's community. It is the Planning Commission's job to make a determination that this project meets the definition in the Zoning Code. If the Planning Commission believes it will fit, then it will follow the General Plan and Zoning Code. Commissioner Robbins stated he too lives in the shadow of the Indian Wells Tennis Stadium and when it was under review he heard how bad the noise and lights would be and now he can actually say he has not heard anything and the lights were off at a reasonable hours and were not an issue. Based on this, he does not believe this project will be as detrimental as has been stated. The property behind his house is vacant and he would rather have a project such as this than a housing project. 34. Commissioner Abels stated that if a housing project were approved for this site the traffic would be greater on a daily basis than what will be created by this project. 35. Chairman Kirk asked staff how the traffic of a residential project would compare to this project. Mr. Eldon Lee, engineer for the project, stated the projection for a weekday event, or the amphitheater, which is probably the highest load, is outborne traffic. When the traffic is over there would probably be 680 vehicles per hour, which is a small percentage of the overall traffic on Washington Street which is 19,000 vehicles a day. When they run the models on the traffic for these events it improves the signal operation level on Washington Street and 481h Avenue because of the amount of time to make the left turn and the amount of traffic moving south. You lessen the delays for the southbound traffic. Overall if you had a development on this site you would require the exit to be at signal Avenue 48 which would increase the traffic noise to Laguna de la Paz. Chairman Kirk (,':\My [)ocuments\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 18 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 asked if the egress/ingress was originally considered at 481h Avenue. Mr. Lee stated yes, and they moved the egress/ingress for this project down site in reference to satisfying the complaints of the Laguna de la Paz residents. 36. Commissioner Butler asked if the comfort level for the Mitigated Negative Declaration is supported by independent parties who makes these studies. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated all studies prepared for this project were prepared by third party firms that were contracted by the Foundation. Our analysis for the EA Addendum was impartial, based on the analysis found in those studies, and all studies were current studies. 37. Commissioner Tyler stated he is for the project, but there are problems that needed to be worked out in regard to the details. 38. Commissioner Robbins stated he would be against grassing any of the parking areas as we need to look toward more efficient use of water. 39. Chairman Kirk stated he too would object to using grass in the parking lots. He is in support of the project. It is a great design that is well designed and conceptualized. He thanked the Foundation for reaching out to the neighboring communities. He agrees that the egress/ingress would normally be placed at 481h Avenue, but due to the impact it would have on the adjoining residents, it has been moved to the north. 40. Commissioner Abels stated he thinks the issues should be ironed out and not continue the project. 41. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Tyler to continue the project to June 13, 2000. The motion died for lack of a second. 42. Chairman Kirk stated there are some conditions that have been suggested and asked staff to comment on the sidewalk width (Condition #34). Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated they would agree to an eight foot sidewalk. In regard to the fencing around the retention basin, the assumption is that even though it is not seen from Washington Street, there are other access pads where you can view the retention basins. Staff can work with some CAM), Documents\WPI)OCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 19 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 language to satisfy the Sheriff's Department concerns. Staff does try to keep the retention basins from being fence as they are less of a nuisance. The intent of the condition is "no fencing". 43. Commissioner Robbins stated his concern was not with the fencing issue, but that it not be visible from Washington Street. Mr. Mike Smith, Warner Engineering, stated their concern over the condition was that the parking lots are the retention basins and they are required to disguise the parking lots from Washington Street and therefore, could not comply with the condition. They are not proposing fencing but are proposing the berming behind the sidewalk to shield the parking lot from the street. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste suggested deleting the first sentence of the condition, so the issue of visibility would be eliminated and the fencing issue would remain. 44. Commissioner Tyler asked to review the hours of operation. The staff report refers to the construction hours that have been established for the community and he thinks they are totally inappropriate. The construction hours prohibit any construction activity on Sundays or holidays and also Saturdays 8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m., and depending upon the time of year, Monday through Friday, from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. or 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. This seems to be inconsistent with the ending hours of the events that are expected and could put a hardship on the artist who intends to go from event to event and needs to pick up and move on to the next event. If there is a time limit where they cannot do that after 5:00 p.m. and the event ends at 10:00 p.m., it could be a problem. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated the time restrictions do not apply to the five major events, nor do they apply to the activities at the amphitheater. The condition is specifically geared to the Festival grounds activities because of its adjacencies to sensitive receptors to the south. Commissioner Tyler asked which condition applies. Staff stated Condition #57 states the hours of operation and clarification needs to be added to the conditional use permit. The amendment to the condition would be that on Sundays and holidays, the facility would be able to operate under the weekday rules for construction. Discussion followed regarding hours of operation. Following discussion a recommendation was made to add a sentence to Condition #57 that stated "breakdown is allowable for public health and safety under emergency conditions. C:`,My Documents\WPI)OCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 20 Planning; Commission Meeting May 23.2000 45. Chairman Kirk stated he concurred with the applicant that this condition should apply to the conditional use permit as well. 46. Commissioner Tyler stated he was concerned about the berms as the staff report states the Festival grounds are already three feet above the level of Laguna de la Paz and then you add berms which are seven and a half feet which could reach 10 feet in height. It may keep the noise level down, but people on top of the berms can look into their yards. The Laguna de la Paz wall is six feet above their ground level and then it appears the homes have a setback and then another wall. On the Foundation grounds you have a seven and a half foot berm on top of a three foot high elevation difference of ten and a half feet which invades the privacy of those living in Laguna de la Paz. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated Exhibit 6 in the Specific Plan shows three graphics and the central figure shows the property line at the top of the wall is 65.5 feet and the top of the berm is 73 feet. The berm does not occur on the top of the raised land of the Festival ground. 47. Commissioner Butler stated that currently there is blow sand against the property line wall, and if you do not put a retaining wall on top of the berm, the wind will blow the sand right into the residents. Staff noted it would all be landscaped. 48. Commissioner Tyler asked if the berms had to be that high. Staff stated they did for noise and visual impacts. 49. Mr. Ron Gregory, landscape architect, stated it is not their intention to create a berm that would impede the view of the residents of Laguna de la Paz. He would suggest, even though they have the berms at the levels that are appropriate, when the shaping occurs, they can modify the berms to some degree to address the concerns of the homeowners. The same thing would apply to planting. It is not their intention to plant large materials and obliterate views which are desirable, but rather block those views that are not desirable. With the reduced grade where parking would occur, plus the berm adjacent to it, between the parking and the wall, all of the trucks would be screened. 50. Commissioner Tyler stated that in the staff report, it states the artist parking lot spaces are smaller than usual and yet the artists usually have vans, RV's, etc. which would require larger spaces C:\My Documents\WPD0CS\pc5-23-20.wpd 21 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 than usual. Mr. Mike Smith, Warner Engineer, stated the volunteers would be parking the vehicles which would allow them to be parked closer than normal. The spaces will not be marked. 51. Chairman Kirk asked if they had any concerns about how much parking there is in the back area. Do they concur with staff's recommendation, or would they like to reduce it. Mr. Smith stated they concur with staff's recommendation. 52. Commissioner Tyler stated that if the street is widened to 36 feet and then someone parks an eight foot RV on either side, you narrow the useful part of that street down to 20 feet. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated the Fire Department requires a 20 foot clearance, but with a 36 foot wide curb to curb street with parking on both sides, they should have the clearance. 53. Commissioner Tyler expressed his concern about the lighting plan for the parking lot adjacent to Washington Street, but would agree with staff's recommendation for the bollard lighting. Condition #38 should be corrected to require what the applicant will be using. Condition #40, 41, and 42 should be straightened out and tell what the requirements are for the turning movements on those two access points. 54. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-034 recommending to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2000-394. 55. Commissioner Tyler asked if the City Attorney had read the material submitted by Mr. Ready, and whether or not it had any bearing on their decision. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated she had not had the opportunity to read the material. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 56. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-035 recommending approval of Specific Plan 2000-042, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as amended. CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\pc5-23-20.wpd 22 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 a. Condition #7: Delete reference to a left turn lane. b. Condition #27: delete the first sentence. C. Condition #34: 8 foot sidewalk bikepath d. Condition #38: modify to the street standards that apply to the project. e. Renumber #40, #41, and #42 f. Condition #54: the text under Section 1.2.2, Page 1 of the Specific Plan shall be deleted and the following inserted: Uses Permitted with Approval of a Minor Use Permit. Festival Grounds Events for 50 or more persons not listed in Section 2.1. Banners in excess of those specifically described in this Specific Plan. Other uses as permitted in Section 9.40, Residential Development Standards of the La Quinta Zoning Ordinance. Uses Permitted with a Conditional Use Permit. Educational facilities and classrooms. Art galleries, Administrative Offices, Amphitheatre, Other uses as permitted in Section 9.40, Residential Development Standards of the La Quinta Zoning Ordinance. Uses Requiring a Site Development Permit. Delete Festival Grounds. Foundation Building, Parking Lots (except General Parking Lot), Amphitheatre, Sculpture garden, Box office building, Headquarters events building, Restroom buildings, Native American Memorial, Permanent Signage. g. Add Condition 54A.: The Specific Plan shall be amended to allow for the events listed in Section 2.1, without the submittal of Minor Use Permit applications. In addition the following shall be added to Section 2.1: The Foundation shall, within ten days of the beginning of each quarter each year, submit a list of the events which occurred in the previous quarter, and those which are planned in that quarter to the Community Development Department, to ensure compliance with the events lists in this Section. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 23 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 h. Add Condition: All relevant text in the Specific Plan shall be amended to allow, with the approval of the Specific Plan, the following: 1. Rough grading 2. Perimeter landscaping 3. Construction of the general parking dot and installation of parking lot lighting. 4. Festival Grounds No Site Development Permit shall be required. All plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer and Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the initiation of any activity on the site. i. Condition #57: Modified to state the facility would be allowed to operate on Sundays and Holidays under the workday hours. For the five major and five medium events on the Festival grounds actually "break down" shall be allowed until 10:00 p.m. Breakdown activities shall be allowed outside of construction hours for the public health and safety under emergency conditions. Also applies to the five major and five medium events as well. j. Condition #65: to require bollard or low lighting. k. Condition #67: Add an alternative allowing for the construction of 100 parallell parking spaces and widening of the rear drive to 36 foot minimum. I. Condition #68: Remove "Site Development Permit" and add "grading" M. Add Condition: Prior to the issuance of any grading permit on the project site, the applicant shall submit a written parking agreement to the Community Development Department. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 57. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-036 recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2000-048, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as amended. a. Condition #3: Modified to state the facility would be allowed to operate on Sundays and Holidays under the workday hours. For the five major and five medium events on the Festival grounds actually "break down" shall be C:\My I)ocuments\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 24 Planning Commission Meeting May 23, 2000 allowed until 10:00 p.m. Breakdown activities shall be allowed outside of construction hours for the public health and safety under emergency conditions. Also applies to the five major and medium events as well. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the Council meeting of May 16, 2000. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held June 13, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:07 P.M. on May 23, 2000. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc5-23-20.wpd 25 PH #A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JUNE 13, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-678 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: MICHAEL SHOVLIN (WASHINGTON PLAZA ASSOC.) LOCATION: 46-100 WASHINGTON STREET, WITHIN ONE ELEVEN -LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER (APPROXIMATELY 250 FEET NORTH OF HIGHWAY 1 1 1) REQUEST: ARCHITECT: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES: BACKGROUND: APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A ONE STORY 4,649 SQUARE FOOT BANK BUILDING ON 0.73 ACRES STOFFREGEN/FULLER AND ASSOCIATES RONALD GREGORY AND ASSOCIATES CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WITH A NONRESIDENTIAL OVERLAY) AND SPECIFIC PLAN 89-014 (AMENDMENT #2) NORTH: CR / ARCO GAS STATION SOUTH: CR / EXISTING PARKING LOT AND AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BUILDING EAST: CR / EXISTING PARKING LOT WEST: CC / VACANT (ACROSS WASHINGTON STREET) Building Pad "G-1" is part of the One Eleven -La Quinta Shopping Center, a 60-acre commercial center located on the north side of Highway 111 between Washington Street and Adams Street (Attachment 1). This pad site was approved for a commercial building of approximately 6,800 square feet under Specific Plan 89-014. Currently, major anchor tenants of this center are Stater Brothers and Wal-mart. Design characteristics include plaster walls, decorative tile, plaster and stone pier accents, and various styles of parapets, with and without masonry tile. Specific Plan 89-014 encourages setback variations for freestanding pad sites. A Sign Program is included within the Specific Plan. SR PC SDP 2000-678 Bank -41 Project Request The subject pad is located to the south of the existing ARCO gas station and shopping center entry drive, and approximately 100 feet north of the existing 8,000 square foot Automobile Club of Southern California building. The site is surrounded on the east and south sides by an existing parking lot (70 + spaces) and landscape improvements along Washington Street, with a minimum setback of 30 feet from Washington Street (Attachment 2). The pad is currently turfed for dust control purposes. The proposed one story commercial building (4,649 square feet) will have a flat roof with parapet heights of 16 feet, 18.5 feet and 22 feet. A decorative cornice treatment (rust color) to match existing buildings in the shopping center is proposed. An arched entrance (23'6" high) is proposed at the southeast corner of the building, with 8-inch diameter wood post outriggers at 12' height. On the west elevation is an additional "pop -out" stucco feature extending 22' above the main roof line. Outriggers are proposed around the top. A covered arcade will wrap around all elevations and will be supported by heavy squared stucco piers, with one exception, at the northwest corner where the building will be stepped back from Washington Street. Fixed pane windows are proposed with metal frames. The window panels on the north and east building elevations are inset six inches and flush on the other elevations. A conceptual landscaping plan with a plant pallette has been submitted. The existing Sonoran Palo Verde trees along the west perimeter will be removed, while those next to the parking lot will be retained. Plant materials will include some of those used in the existing center along with others compatible in growth patterns, water needs, and appearance. Colored concrete is proposed for pedestrian sidewalks. A trash enclosure is proposed in the parking area to the southeast of the building site. No new parking spaces are proposed. The building signs are internally illuminated, individual channel letters in 24 inch height and 11 foot 5 inch length placed on each of the four elevations, including a fifth sign placed on the fascia of the corner entry. Each sign totals 23 square feet. The sign reads "1 IT BANK". Brown is the primary color for the signs except for a white "S". Once the letters are lit at night, the sign colors reverse. Public Notice - This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on June 1, 2000, and all property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the Zoning Ordinance. Any written correspondence received will be handed out to the Planning Commission at the meeting. Public Agency Review - The applicant's request was sent to responsible public agencies on May 4, 2000, and any applicable comments received have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. SR PC SDP 2000-678 Bank -41 Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC)Action On June 7, 2000, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee met to evaluate the development plans for First Bank. The Committee, on a 2-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 2000-012, recommending to the Planning Commission approval of the preliminary plans of the applicant, subject to conditions. A copy of the draft Minutes from the meeting is attached (Attachment 3). The recommended conditions of the ALRC have been incorporated into the attached Conditions of Approval. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to recommend approval of this project can be made, as noted in the attached Resolution pursuant to Sections 9.210.010 (Site Development Permit) and 9.160.090 (Signs) of the Zoning Ordinance. A brief description is provided: Finding 4 - The proposed design of the commercial bank building is architecturally compatible with the existing commercial buildings in that colors, materials and design features emulate features that are used in the shopping center (i.e., tiers, parapets, etc.). The building is in scale with other freestanding buildings along Washington Street and Highway 1 1 1. Additionally, the building square footage is less than that allowed by the Specific Plan. The west building elevation "pop out" design feature does not appear integral to the overall building design. Its design more closely assumes a Southwest architectural style due to its massing, rounded corners and outriggers. Whereas, the remainder of the building is representative of the Mediterranean style with the entry arch, arcade, and decorative cornice. The proposed building design would be better served if this element was redesigned, or eliminated. The stepped walls, adjacent to Highway 1 1 1, have no design detail. Therefore, staff recommends additional design articulation. (Condition No. 17). Finding 7 - The Sign Program for the shopping center requires internally illuminated, individual channel lettering signs (24" high) for minor tenants, but allows use of corporate signs for regional tenants having more than five outlets (Attachment 4, Excerpt from Sign Program). Under the request by the applicant, Helvetica style lettering in brown and white Plexiglas is used in compliance with the overall terms of the Sign Program. The proposed variation from the Sign Program and Zoning Ordinance standards occurs when more than one sign per elevation is proposed. The Sign Program only permits one sign per building side. Five signs are proposed and therefore, one sign needs to be deleted. Condition No.18 is recommended to ensure the number and placement of signs for this building complies with existing requirements. SR PC SDP 2000-678 Bank -41 RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, approving Site Development Permit 2000-678, subject to the attached findings and conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. June 7, 2000 ALRC Minutes (Excerpt) 4. One Eleven -La Quinta Sign Program (Excerpt) 5. Large Plans (Commission only) 7pared Submitted by: Greg` ou ' , Associate Planner Christine di lorio, Planning Manager SR PC SDP 2000-678 Bank -41 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING IN ONE ELEVEN -LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-678 APPLICANT: MICHAEL SHOVLIN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 131h day of June, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Michael Shovlin for Washington Plaza Associates to approve the construction plans for a 4,649 square foot commercial office building at 46-100 Washington Street, within One Eleven -La Quinta more particularly described as: APN: 604-050-034 (Portion) WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee, on June 7, 2000, at a regular meeting, adopted Minute Motion 2000-012, recommending approval of the architectural and landscaping plans for the new building, subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Site Development Permit pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code: 1 . Consistency with the General Plan - The General Plan designates the project area as Regional Commercial (with a Non -Residential Overlay). The proposed bank facility is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the use's design, low height, scale, and mass are compatible with the Regional Commercial (CR) designation. The proposed commercial building is consistent with the commercial designation of the property. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code and Specific Plan 89-014 - The proposed commercial building is designed to comply with the Zoning Code requirements and SP 89-014, including but not limited to the 30 foot setback from Washington Street, height limits, parking, and lot coverage. The proposed building is smaller than allowed by Specific Plan 89-014. 3. Compliance with CEQA- This application is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3c, of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act in that it is for a structure not exceeding '10,000 Reso PC SDP 2000-678 - 41 Resolution 2000- _ Site Development Permit 2000-678 June 13, 2000 square feet in an urban area where all necessary public services and facilities are available and existing parking supports the new use. 4. Architectural Design - With the minor recommended changes to the west building facade, the design of the project, including but not limited -to the Mediterranean architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with the surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city in that the building uses styles, colors, and materials matching those used in the center. The proposed exterior accents match existing buiildings within the shopping center as required by Specific Plan 89-014. 5. Site Design - The site design of the project is compliance with the overall design layout of Specific Plan 89-014 for pedestrian circulation, screening of equipment and trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city in that the site design complies with applicable site design requirements and is designed to be compatible with the center and surrounding neighborhood. The existing parking lot can support this new building and the other surrounding commercial shops and restaurants. 6. Landscape Design - Project landscaping, including but not limited -to the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials has been designed so as to provide relief, complement building elements, providing a harmonious transition between adjacent land uses. The proposed landscaping ensures lower maintenance and water usage. The proposed landscaping plans, as conditioned, comply with Section 9.60.300 (1)(4) of the Zoning Code. 7. Sign Program - With recommended changes, this building will have four, internally illuminated building identification signs consistent with the intent of the Sign Ordinance and be in harmony and visually related to the proposed building and surrounding shopping center tenants pursuant to the One Eleven -La Quinta Shopping Center Sign Program. Since First Bank is a corporate use, letter style and color can match other buildings owned by the applicant which are brown and white. Reso PC SDP 2000-678 - 41 Resolution 2000- _ Site Development Permit 2000-678 June 13, 2000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2000-678 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions attached hereto; PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of June, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California Reso PC SDP 2000-678 - 41 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-678 - FIRST BANK JUNE 13, 2000 GENERAL 1. The applicant and property owner agree to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Community Development Department • Building and Safety Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. GRADING 3. During on -site grading, the applicant shall control dust by watering the site pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 6.16, LQMC. LANDSCAPING 4. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setback areas shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The plans shall be reviewed and approved by CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for final approval to the City. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit final landscape plans to the Community Development Department for approval. A:\CondSDP 678Bank.wpd Page 1 of 3 5. Specimen trees shall have minimum caliper size of 2-inches measured six inches from the ground level. 6. Parkway earthen mounding shall be retained. FEES AND DEPOSITS 7. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 8. This development shall be subject to the provisions of the Development Impact Fee Program in effect at the time of building permit issuance. FIRE DEPARTMENT Conditions are subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve (12) months. Final conditions will be addressed when architectural building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding the meaning of the Fire Department conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. 9. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 1,875 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6" x 4" x 2 %Z x 2 % ") located not less than 25' or more than 165' from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travel ways. 10. All buildings shall be accessible by an approved all-weather roadway extending to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story. 11. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be located to the front within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building. 12. System plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for review, along with a plan/inspection fee. The approved plans, with Fire Department job card must be at the job site for all inspections. 13. Install a supervised water flow fire alarm system as required by the UBC/Riverside County Fire Department and National Fire Protection Association Standard 72. 1:\CondSDP 678Bank.wpd Page 2 of 3 14. Install Knox Key Lock boxes, Models 4400, 3200, or 1300, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval of mounting location/position and operating standards. Special forms are available from this office for the ordering of the Key Switch, this form must be authorized and signed by this office for the correctly coded system to be purchased. MISCELLANEOUS 15. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 16. Prior to issuance of building permits, a final exterior lighting plan shall be submitted to the Building Department including specific details of the fixtures for security lighting. Sconce light fixtures shall be used on the outside of the building matching the existing shopping center. 17. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following revisions shall be made to the building plans, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director: A. On the west facing elevation of the building, the 22 foot high parapet shall be redesigned to emulate the project's Mediterranean architectural style, and horizontal stucco banding shall be added to the piers flanking the utility room. B. Articulated building design shall be added to the northwest corner of the building. C. The pedestrian sidewalk on the east side of the building shall be extended north to connect with the existing curbing along the entrance driveway into the shopping center. D. Trash enclosure gates shall not swing into parking aisles. E. Roof parapets shall be finished with stucco on all exterior surfaces. 18. A maximum of four building identification signs (one per elevation) shall be allowed for this project. A:\(*ondSDP 67813ank.wpd Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENTS i-i ., Attachment 1 w b a Attachment 2 . _ HCl. :11: 7 7-3 +Fw TRA 44 ONCLOSUFM �. o Attachment 3 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA June 7, 2000 10:00 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Lands,96ping Committee was called to order at 10:06 a.m. by Planning Manarr Christine di lorio who led the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Bill7' bbitt and Frank Reynolds. It was moved and seconded by Committ Members Reynolds/Bobbitt to excuse Committee Member Cunningha . Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Planning Mary ger Christine di lorio, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner, Greg Trousdell and Leslie Mouriquand, and Executive Secretary Be#y Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None,% III. CONFIRMATION OF T4 AGENDA: A. Committee Member Bobbitt asked that the Agenda be reorganized to take Item #B first as he would have to abstain to Agenda Item #A due to a conflict of interest and therefore, they would not have a quorum. Unanimgiasly approved. IV. CONSENT pALENDAR: A. Planning Manager Christine di lorio asked if there were any changes to 1{e Minutes of May 3, 2000. There being no changes, it was moved and /seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Reynolds to approve the Minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2000-678; a request of Michael Shovlin, r' Washington Plaza Associates for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for a 4,649 square foot building for First Bank to be constructed within One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center, north of Highway 111. x L11I CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC 6-7.wpd 1 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes June 7, 2000 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Reynolds asked where staff recommended the sign on the west side be located if the proposed design feature was removed. Staff stated the Planing Commission would make that recommendation, but it could be placed on the right side of the west facing fascia. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the framing on the windows was the same as the other buildings in the shopping center. Staff stated it was. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff where they were proposing the ground mounted mechanical equipment be located. Staff stated on the south side with a wall around it. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the back of the entry arch and raised parapet would be seen from the street. Staff stated only a portion could be seen until you reached the signal traveling south. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the applicant could finish the top band to match the front so it would appear to be finished on both sides of the arched parapet. Staff stated they could be conditioned to do so. Committee Member Bobbitt stated his concern was to make sure all the details are attended to as it is one of the entrances to La Quinta. He also asked how this project would impact the traffic currently entering the gas station/center on the west side. Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated they had met with Public Works staff and they did not have any additional conditions regarding circulation for this project. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked how many employees the applicant intended on having. Mr. Donald Rich, the applicant, stated they would have 8-10 initially. 5. Committee Member Reynolds stated the parking will have to overlap between the uses. Staff stated the basic use has a minimal number of users at any one time. 6. Mr. Donald Rich, Desert Cities Development, stated they disagree with staff's recommendation to eliminate the raised element on the west elevation as the A/C equipment is to be hidden there. It would be their preference to not encroach into the landscaping plan with the mechanical equipment. They have no objection to finishing the southeast facing parapet on both sides and can add L." CAMy Documents\WPDOCSW,RC 6-7.wpd 2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes June 7, 2000 the stucco band. In regard to adding of windows on the west elevation, they would prefer to add landscaping or some other detail as those rooms are for the restrooms, employee lounge and mechanical equipment room. They are proposing large trees to hide the area. Mr. Rich stated they would have no objection to revising this design element. Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated the objection to the detail is that it appears to be an added feature for a sign instead of making it an integral part of the building. Mr. Rich stated they would like to resubmit a different design for the west elevation as they prefer to keep the mechanical equipment on the roof. 7. Committee Member Reynolds stated he preferred the mechanical equipment remain on the roof as well, but the parapet should be redesigned. 8. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that in regard to the west elevation wall, if the flat wall contains restrooms they could add screen with vines, or some other treatment. Staff stated a condition could be added requiring the applicant to add articulation on the west elevation. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that in regard to the square parapet on the west elevation, this element tends to be Southwest instead of matching the rest of the Center. Staff recommended changing Condition #3A to have them redesign the 22 foot high west elevation parapet element. Condition #3.C. be modified to have the applicant provide articulation on the west elevation; Condition #3.D. deleted. Add Condition #3.H. requiring the rear of the arch parapet on the rear elevation to be finished to match the front. 9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion 2000-012 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2000-678, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval of the Conditions, as submitted. Unanimously approved. Committee Member Bobbitt excused himself due to a possible conflict of interest and let the room-. A. Site\D"celODment Permit 99-647, Amendment #1; a request of Century - Crowell Cbyrinunities for approval of architectural plans for two new design options fm,Pians 3 and 4 of the Tournament Collection to be constructed along Canterbury and Riviera in PGA West. L +'_t CAM), Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC 6-7.wpd 3 Attachment 4 ONE ELEVEN -LA QUINTA PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM 14 v ,, 41, Z:' SI L C� \ TEN T DI ; X� aa. \\4yy 401 MUL rlt� TEMAhtDITTO? PLAZA NOTE: CRITERIA IS SAME AS FOR "MINOR TENANT SIGNS (PRIMARY)" ON PAGE 22 EXCEPT LETTER SIZE IS 24" AND SIGN AREA FOR EACH SIGN IS ONE S.F. PER LINEAR FOOT OF LEASE AREA WIDTH UP TO MAXIMUM OF 50 S.F. PER EXTERIOR FRONTAGE TO STREET OR PARKING AREA. DEVIATIONS REQUIRE CITY APPROVAL. ONE SIGN PER BUILDING SIDE PER TENANT WILL BE ALLOWED UNDER THIS SIGN PROGRAM. SERVICE STATION PRICE SIGNS - ONE SIGN PER STATION, DETAILSSUBJECT TO CITY AND OTHER AGENCY APPROVALS. PHASE 1 PAD SIGNS (LOCATION) TYPICAL ONE ELEVEN -LA QUINTA PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM 75% d w "AREA A" NET SIGN AREA 04 -� Q RE C" S$SO Eta. 75% Ea C b "AREA B" `l rNET S1GN AREArt Leasehold Width L Leasehold Width jw (Varies) (Varies) Lease Line --j� Lease Line .� MINOR TENANT SIGNS (PRIMARY PURPOSE: MAJOR IDENTIFICATION QUANTITY: ONE PER LEASE AREA FRONTAGE. CORNER END SPACES MAY SPLIT ALLOWABLE FRONTAGE SIGN AREA AMONG TWO SIGNS. 0- S10P✓75 Td 6e, NET SIGN AREA A: AS DEFINED ABOVE, NOT TO EXCEED 50 S.F. MAX." 12AT'� � l�C� ��hlrw (INCLUDING TENANT LC hna 2-5 Q�� oh fir,&► (�Vt� )Y�- ;A4,-,D . NET SIGN AREA B: AS DEFINED ABOVE (TOWER LOCATIONS), NOT TO EXCEED 50 S.F. MAX." - INCLUDING TENANT LOGO LETTER STYLE: HELVETICA LIGHT OR AS APPROVED BY CITY AND DEVELOPER.' COLORS: WHITE/RED/BLUE/GREEN/YELLOW OR AS APPROVED BY DEVELOPER.' MATERIAL: PLEXIGLAS FACE, MATTE BLACK PAINTED ALUMINUM CAN. INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED INDIVIDUAL LETTERS. Z U 5 of cc>p,( o K NET SIGN AREA C (ADDRESS): LETTER STYLE: 6" HELVETICA LIGHT . COLORS: "FRAZEE", CZ-588OW MATERIAL: DIECUT FACED LETTERS NATIONAL OR REGIONAL TENANTS WITH MORE THAN 5 OUTLETS WILL BE ALLOWED TO USE THEIR STANDARD SIGN, NO TWO ADJACENT SEPERATE TENANT SIGNS SHALL BE THE SAME COLOR WITHOUT CITY APPROVAL. ONE COLOR ONLY PER SIGN OTHER THAN LOGO UNLESS APPROVED BY CITY. 7-44V,56 f3-GiVS ti11 y � Gom Yvi toy AwKzvAA T,it-it 4 4 Qum& MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GREG TROUSDELL, ASSOCIATE PLANNE VIA: CHRISTINE DI IORIO, PLANNING MANAGER%) DATE: JUNE 9, 2000 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-678 On June 9, 2000, the Community Development Department received a revised drawing of the west building elevation for First Bank in response to comments by the ALRC on June 7. Enclosed is a reduced copy of the exhibit. MemoPC 6-13 - 41 0 0 10 fl C� �I �I i Ii n S i I� } 0 f©j PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JUNE 13, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-647 AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG CANTERBURY AND RIVIERA, IN PGA WEST (SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002) REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR TWO NEW DESIGN OPTIONS TO BE ADDED TO PLANS 3 AND 4 OF THE TOURNAMENT COLLECTION ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 83062922), PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002, WHICH WAS CERTIFIED ON MAY 15, 1984. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) - 2 TO 4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE ZONING DESIGNATION: SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAL 1 (SPR) - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES: NORTH: GOLF COURSE, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND WATERCOURSE SOUTH: GOLF COURSE, SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAL, AND WATERCOURSE EAST: GOLF COURSE AND SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAL WEST: GOLF COURSE, WATERCOURSE, AND OPEN SPACE Currently, the Applicant has approved four prototypes (the Tournament Collection), each with two facade options, for construction within PGA West. The Applicant is requesting to add two facade design alternatives to Plans 3 and 4 for a total of four facade options each. The two proposed alternate options for each plan feature side loading garages. The units may also be built in other areas of PGA West should the applicant purchase additional property. This review is for architectural design compatibility with other units within PGA West. The floor plans for the proposed design options are generally the same as the original plans, except that the two proposed design options for Plan 3 have 2,525 square feet of liveable space, where the original Plan 3 has 2,418 square feet. The two prcposed design options for Plan 4 have 2,879 square feet of liveable space, while the original Plan 4 has 2,809 square feet. Both plans are one-story, with each a maximum height of 18 feet, excluding the chimney projections. The roof heights vary due to the different roof planes and sizes. Both plans are laid out with a side entry and side loading 2-car garages (484 and 446 sq. ft.), with front loading golf cart storage (88 and 82 sq. ft.). A Mediterranean architectural style is proposed for the new design options, utilizing the same plaster wall finish and colors, and concrete and/or clay tile roofing as found in the original units. The primary difference between the original designs and the proposed options lies with the changes to the front elevations by turning the garages to side entry. The side -loading garages provide for enhanced architectural detailing by allowing for more windows, arches, decorative vents, and trims along the front, as well as additional roof area and lines visible from the street. The typical front yard landscaping plan will be the same as approved for SDP 99-647. Front yards are to include a minimum of two shade trees, palm trees and numerous shrubs highlighted by lawn. A varied plant palette is proposed. Vines and ground cover are used to complement the landscaping design. The community pool facility will feature a pool, spa, and a restroom/maintenance building. The Landscaping for the community pool is compatible with other pool P: \perptSD P99-647Am d#1 Centu ry6-13-00. wpd facilities within PGA West. Existing Unit Description As of January 1, 2000, approximately 2,044 residential building permits have been issued in PGA West for various developers. The size of the constructed and approved units varies from 1,290 to 4,830 square feet, excluding custom-built houses. Houses are primarily one-story with some two-story units. PGA West offers a blend of Spanish/Mediterranean- style architecture with houses having clay or concrete tile roofing, exterior plaster walls and plaster or wood fascias. Other features used include, but are not limited to, arches, shutters, stucco window and door surrounds, and earth tone exterior colors. Public Notice: This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 31, 2000, as well as mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. No comments have been received. Any comments received will be handed out at the meeting. Public Agency Review: The Applicant's request was sent to responsible agencies on May 15, 2000, and any applicable comments received have been incorporated into the staff report and conditions of approval. on • The City's Architecture and Landscape Review Committee was not able to provide a recommendation for the proposed new design options for Plans 3 and 4 due to the lack of a quorum. MANDATORY FINDINGS As required by Section 9.60.300 (Compatibility Review) of the Zoning Ordinance, the Committee is required to review and comment on the following architectural findings: 1 . The architectural and other design elements of the new residential units will be compatible and not detrimental to the other existing units in PGA West. 2. The proposed detached single family residential condominiums will be compatible to existing dwellings with respect to architectural materials such as roof material, window treatment, and garage door style, colors, and roof lines. Response to Item Numbers 1 and 2: Plans 1 through 4 were previously approved for SDP 99-647, and are under construction along Tanglewood Drive. The two proposed design options incorporate many of the same architectural features while introducing side loading garages, a feature found in other existing units within PGA West. The PAperptSDP99-647Amd#1 Century6-13-OO.wpd proposed units are the same general architectural style, colors, and materials, as other units in PGA West. The units utilize similar architectural features such as tile roofs, exterior plaster, fixed pane windows, arches, and gated side enteries, etc. The new unit plans will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 3. At least one specimen tree (i.e., a minimum 24"-box size with 1.5" to 2" caliper, as measured 6-inches from the finished pad elevation, and measuring a minimum of 10 feet tall from the top of box) shall be provided in the front yard or street side yard. The proposed landscaping plan does not indicate the sizes of proposed trees, but will be conditioned to provide a minimum 24" box size tree (1.5" to 2" caliper) with the yard completely landscaped. 4. The single family dwelling units proposed within a partially developed subdivision shall not deviate by more than ten percent from the square footage of the original units by the original developer which have either been approved or constructed. The two proposed alternate unit plans have 2,525 and 2,879 square feet, which is within the range (1,290 to 4,830 sq. ft.) for existing units within PGA West. 5. Residential units with identical or similar front elevations shall not be placed on adjacent lots or directly across the street from one another. f7T�� WRJ 11•C-J� The precise plan for the proposed project indicates that no units with identical front elevations will be located adjacent to each other, or across the street. The proposed community pool facility will be across the street from Units 1 through 11, and existing detached single family units will be across the street from Units 12 through 17. Approve Site Development Permit 99-647 Amendment #1 , subject to the foillowing conditions: 1. Final front yard and pool facility landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of the PAperptSDP99-647Amd#1 Century6-13-OO.wpd first building permit for these units. The plans shall provide for, and indicate, 24" box trees sizes with 1.5" to 2" caliper as measured from 6-inches from the finished pad elevation, and measuring 10 feet tall from the top of box as per Section 9.60.300 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Garage doors shall be constructed of composite or metal material and be sectional roll -up style if located less than 25' from the front property line pursuant to the requirements of SP 83-002. Lites are optional. 3. Entry gates and perimeter walls shall be decorative matching other PGA West houses. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Application portfolio Prepared by: Leslie Mouriquand, Associate Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planning Manager PAperptSDP99-647Amd#1 Century6-13-OO.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-647 AMENDMENT #1 PROVIDING COMPATIBILITY APPROVAL OF TWO DESIGN ALTERNATIVES FOR PLANS 3 AND 4 FEATURING SIDE - LOADING GARAGES AND A COMMON POOL FACILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION IN A PORTION OF TRACT 24317-1 ON CANTERBURY AND RIVIERA, IN PGA WEST CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-647 AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13th day of June, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Century -Crowell Communities to approve architectural and landscape plans for two new design alternatives for previously approved Plans 3 and 4 featuring side - loading garages and a common pool facility to be constructed along Canterbury and Riviera, west of PGA Boulevard, and south of 54`h Avenue, more particularly described as: Lot 3 of Tract 24317-1 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit amendment has been determined to be exempt from California Environmental Quality Act requirements under Section 15303, Class 3 (A) of the Guidelines For Implementation; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Site Development Permit amendment: 1. The proposed side -loading garages are of a compatible architectural design, colors, and materials to the existing units in PGA West and to the previously approved prototype unit plans for SDP 99-647. The design alternatives provide for enhanced architectural features such as tile roofs, exterior plaster, recessed windows, popout window and door surrounds, decorative attic vents, and wood fascias. The design alternatives are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and the previously approved unit plans for SDP 99-647. 2. The proposed front yard landscaping plans will provide a minimum of one 24 inch box size tree in the front yard area. All units will have at least one additional tree and other shrubs and groundcover. 3. No two story residences are proposed, nor are there any existing in the tract. P:\peresSDP99-647Century. wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Site Development Permit 98-647 Amendment #1 Century -Crowell Communities June 13, 2000 4. Masonry walls are proposed between units and will be compatible with existing walls in PGA West. 5. The size range of the existing residences is 1,290 to 4,830 square feet:. The proposed units with side -loading garages vary from 2,525 square feet and 2,879 square feet, and are in compliance with compatibility review requirements. 6. The final plot plan will ensure compliance with the requirement that identical, or similar, front elevations shall not be placed on adjacent lots or directly across the street from one another. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 99-647 Amendment #1 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of June, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PAperesSDP99-647Century. wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-647 AMENDMENT #1 CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES JUNE 13, 2000 GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. This approval is for two design alternatives for Plans 3 and 4 featuring side - loading garages, and 2,525 and 2,879 square feet of liveable space. 2. Final front yard and pool facility landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of the first building permit for these units. The plans shall provide for, and indicate, 24" box tree sizes with 1.5" to 2" caliper as measured from 6-inches from the finish pad elevation, and measuring 10 feet tall from the top of box as per Section 9.60.300 of the ;Zoning Ordinance. 3. Garage doors shall be constructed of composite or metal material and be sectional roll -up style if located less than 25' from the front property line pursuant to the requirements of SP 83-002. Lites are optional. 4. Entry gates and perimeter walls shall be decorative matching other PGA West houses. 5. Air conditioning mechanical equipment shall not be installed in the five foot side yard setbacks. 6. Lawn areas shall be either hybrid Bermuda (summer) or hybrid Bermuda/Rye (winter) depending on the season planted. All trees shall be double staked to prevent wind damage. 7. Fire place caps shall be of a variety and decorative. FIRE MARSHALL CONDITIONS: 8. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD Standard W-33 shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 gpm for a 2 hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of streets directly in line with fire hydrants. 9. Blue retro-reflective pavement markers shall be mounted on private streets, public streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. Prior to installation, placement of markers must be approved by the Riverside County Fire Department. 10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant/developer shall furnish one blue line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans must be signed by a registered Civil Engineer and the local water company. 11. All Buildings shall be accessible by an approved all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story. 12. If public use type buildings are to be constructed, additional fire protection may be required. Fire flows and hydrant locations will be stipulated when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Department. PALESLIE\pccoaSDP2000-679.wpd area�� 0 PROJECT SITE 1► x�av CASE MAP CASE No. SDP 2000-679 CENTURY-CROWELL ORTH SCALE: CANTERBURY AND RIVIERA, PGA WEST PH #( STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: J U N E 13, 2000 CASE: NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-386 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-065 SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-046 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29436 REQUEST: 1. RECOMMEND CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; 2. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT TO REQUIRE A CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS TO ALLOW SPACING LESS THAN 1200 FEET 3. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF EISENHOWER CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS (SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-046) 4. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29436 TO SUBDIVIDE 75.86 ACRES INTO 169 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND OTHER AMENITY LOTS APPLICANT: MAINIERO SMITH AND ASSOCIATES PROPERTY OWNERS: U.S. HOMES CORPORATION LOCATION: NORTH OF EISENHOWER DRIVE, EAST OF COACHELLA DRIVE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) (LDR) AND OPEN SPACE (OS) SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES: NORTH: CITY OF INDIAN WELLS, SANTA ROSA MOUNTAINS SOUTH : LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) Il i The proposed Tentative Tract Map 29436 is located north of Eisenhower Drive, east of Coachella Drive on 159.55 acres of vacant lands consisting of 75.86 acres flat lands where development is proposed to occur and 83.69 acres of open space. The entire property ownership consists of eight parcels (A.P.N.'S: 623-310-008, 623- 310-009, 631-311-001, 631-311-003, 631-312-001, 631-312-020 643-090-025, and 643-090-004) in both the jurisdictions of La Quinta and Indian Wells totaling 190.51 acres. Staff recommends Planning Commission continue this item to June 27, 2000 as the project issues and information relating to the Environmental Assessment require the EA to be amended. Prepared by: re Baker, MCP Principal Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio Planning Manager BI #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JUNE 13, 2000 CASE NO.: SIGN APPLICATION 2000-502 REQUEST: APPROVAL OF SIGN PROGRAM FOR DUNE PALMS CENTER (LAPIS ENERGY; SP 96-028) LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DUNE PALMS ROAD/HIGHWAY 111 APPLICANT: FULLER'S SIGN AND DESIGN (BRUCE FULLER) PROPERTY OWNERS; PARCELS 1, 4 - SKYLINE PACIFIC PROPERTIES PARCEL 2 - RICHARD BURGER, TRUSTEE PARCEL 3 - JULIAN SAUNDERS BACKGROUND: On February 4, 1997, the La Quinta City Council approved Site Development Permit 96-590, one of four applications filed by Lapis Energy Organization for the referenced site. This approval was granted based on conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission. Subsequently, revisions to the site layout, building design and additional building area for Allstate Self Storage were also approved. Currently, the fueling station building has been completed but remains unoccupied and with no tenant identified, while the Allstate Self Storage facility is nearing completion. Parcel 2, located between Allstate and the fueling station, is approved for a lubrication shop and an auto service facility; however, no proposal for development of this parcel has been presented to the City. SIGN PROGRAM PROPOSAL: The sign program as proposed requests conceptual approval of the following elements: 1. One freestanding center identification monument sign (Attachment 1). This sign's location and ultimate design will be determined later, when it is submitted for sign permit review. The applicant states that this sign is intended to be adequate for Allstate Self Storage, and no wall -mounted or other signs are currently proposed for that use. In addition, only Parcel 2 is currently included in the monument sign, as the fueling station is anticipated to have a monument pricing board to serve that purpose. The dimensions of the sign meet the regulations set forth in Chapter 9.160 (Signs) of the Zoning Code. The sign is approximately 5 feet in height, and is just under 50 square feet in sign face area. Colors and location of the sign will be reviewed at sign permit review for consistency with the approved specific plan provisions. 2. Wall -mounted signs for Parcel 2, automotive retail site. The applicant proposes two wall -mounted signs for the lubrication shop (Attachment 2), and four such signs for the two auto service facility buildings (Attachment 3). It is important to note that these previously approved elevations may have to be modified at a later date if a potential tenant requires revisions due to a corporate or other design situation. Therefore, these signs can only be reviewed with an emphasis on their location on the building and orientation to the site as currently configured. The specific design of all signs will be regulated by the sign prcgram standards, which are addressed in Item 3 below. ANALNSIS: 1. The sign criteria proposed under the program primarily address the conditions which apply to sign design, location and installation (see Attachment 4). These criteria are consistent with the City sign code; however, staff recommends some minor changes to certain criteria due to uncertainties associated with future tenants. A. Sign criteria C.4 and D.9 - These limit sign face colors to red, blue, yellow, white or corporate colors. Staff recommends that a solid white background be required instead, and allow logo, text and corporate colors on a planning review basis. B. Sign criteria C.9 - This requires that the sign length may not exceed 75% of the store entrance. Staff recommends this be revised to 75% of the lineal feet of store frontage, as the reference to store entrance is unclear. Also, sign size should have an aggregate area limitation of 50 square feet, consistent with the sign code. The standard proposed does not reflect any limitation. 2. The proposed monument sign is intended to be located adjacent to the entrance to Allstate Storage along Dune Palms. The code allows one monument sign per street frontage, which would support a second sign at Highway 1 1 1, which could accommodate the necessary gas station tenant signing. At this time, the applicant has only proposed the one sign for Allstate, but there is a provision in criteria D.10 for a second monument sign at the Dune Palms/Highway 111 intersection. The ultimate design of all monument and building mounted signs will be reviewed by staff for consistency with the existing buildings and the approved sign program. No signs are proposed for the gas station as their design/location will be tenant -driven. 3. The southerly auto retail building is shown with two signs each, on it's west and north elevations (refer to Attachment 3). The sign code allows 2 signs per building, but does not permit them to be on the same elevation. As the specific plan approved for this site does not address signing, the applicant needs to remove two of the signs from this building, and either relocate them to the second northerly building or eliminate them. raUNO,R" • Sign Application 2000-502 is consistent with the purpose and intent of Chapter 9.160, in that the number and location of signs proposed with said Application are consistent with said Chapter. • Sign Application 2000-502 is consistent with and visually related to all signs incorporated under said Application, as colors, sign design criteria and location have been considered in the sign criteria and demonstrated to allow unique sign options while maintaining basic uniformity among the proposed signs. • Sign Application 2000-502 is consistent with and visually related to the buildings proposed in Specific Plan 96-028, through incorporation of colors and materials common to said buildings. • Sign Application 2000-502 is consistent with and visually related to surrounding development. Presently there are no existing or approved signs in the vicinity of Specific Phan 96-028. Adopt Minute Motion No. , approving Sign Application 2000-502, subject to compliance with the following requirements: 1. Amend sign criteria C.4 and D.9, to require a solid white background be required, and allow logo, text and corporate colors on a planning review basis. 2. Amend sign criteria C.9 to require that the sign length may not exceed 75% of the lineal feet of store frontage. In addition, sign size shall have an aggregate area limitation of 50 square feet. 3. The auto retail buildings as currently approved for Parcel 2 of PM 28422 shall be permitted two building mounted signs per building, with no more than one sign to be placed on any elevation. Prepared by: Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner Attachments: Submitted by: ;F Christine di lorio, Plan ing Manager 1. Proposed center identification monument sign 2. Proposed signs for lubrication shop - Parcel 2 3. Proposed signs for auto retail use - Parcel 2 4. Proposed sign criteria for SP 96-028 (4 pages) 120„ 1DUNE PALMS,, 60" -ho � v to Fu tune Auto Si is 134--1343 SIGN EXTERIOR SIGN TO BE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED TO MATCH BUILDING BACKGROUND TO BE OPAQUE STUCCO TEXTURE EXHIBIT A 50 SOFT. SIDE VIEW ATTACHMENT #1 b PROJECT: DUNE PALMS CENTER HIGHWAY 111 & DUNE PALMS RD. LA QUINTA, CA SIGN CRITERIA THIS CRITERIA HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING CONTINUITY WITH ALL NEW SIGNS FOR THIS LOCATION. A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. ALL PERMITS FOR NEW SIGNS AND THEIR INSTALLATION SHALL BE OBTAINED BY DUNE PALM CTR. OR ITS REPRESENTATIVE, ALONG WITH THE SUBMITTAL OF DRAWING TO THE LA QUINTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS. 2. DUNE PALMS CTR. OR ITS REPRESENTATIVE SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FULFILLMENT OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS SET FORTH IN THIS EXHIBIT. B. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS 1. NO AUDIBLE, FLASHING OR ANIMATED SIGNS WILL BE PERMITTED. 2. NO PROJECTIONS ABOVE OR BELOW NEW SIGN PANELS WILL BE PERMITTED. EACH NEW SIGN MUST BE WITHIN DIMENSIONED LIMITS AS INDICATED. 3. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF DUNE PALMS CTR. TO VERIFY ALL CONDUIT LOCATIONS AND SERVICES PRIOR TO FABRICATION FOR NEW SIGNS. 4. ALL NEW SIGNS AND THEIR INSTALLATION MUST COMPLY WITH ALL LOCAL BUILDING AND ELECTRICAL CODES AND BEAR AN U.L. LABEL IN AN INCONSPICUOUS LOCATION. 5. NO EXPOSED RACEWAYS, CROSSOVERS, CONDUCTORS, TRANSFORMERS• ETC. SHALL BE PERMITTED FOR NEW SIGNS. 6. DUNE PALMS CTR. SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL SIGNS. 7. ALL NEW SIGNS ARE TO BE INSTALLED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE PROJECT SIGN CONTRACTOR OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE. 8. SIGN CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR ANY DAMAGE CAUSED BY HIS WORK. (1) ATTACHMENT #4 PAGE 1 OF 4 C. CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS- WALL SIGNS/CHANNEL LETTERS 1. NO LABELS WILL BE PERMITTED ON THE EXPOSED SURFACE OF NEW SIGNS, EXCEPT THOSE REQUIRED BY LOCAL ORDINANCE WHICH SHALL BE PLACED IN AN INCONSPICUOUS LOCATION. 2. DESIGN, LAYOUT AND MATERIALS FOR DUNE PALMS CTR. SHALL CONFORM IN ALL RESPECTS WITH THIS CRITERIA. 3. ALL PENETRATIONS OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE REQUIRED FOR NEW INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE SEALED IN A WATERTIGHT CONDITION AND SHALL BE PATCHED TO MATCH ADJACENT FINISH. 4. THE FACE OF SIGN TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF 1/8 THICK ACRYLIC FACES WITH GOLD TRIM CAP. SIGNS TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF 22 GAUGE SHEET METAL, PAINTED TAN. FACE COLOR: RED, BLUE, YELLOW, WHITE OR CORP. COLORS, SUBJECT TO PLANNING REVIEW. 5. INTERNAL ILLUMINATION OF SIGNS TO BE NEON WITH 30 MA. TRANSFORMERS 6. ALL NEW SIGNS ARE TO HAVE SERVICE ACCESS TO LAMPS, BALLASTS AND WIRING. 7. SIGN CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL FIELD CONDITIONS BEFORE INSTALLING NEW SIGNS. 8. NO LOGO SHALL BE LARGER THAN 40 TALLER D 4- LONGER THAN THE CHANNEL LETTERS USED IN SIGN. NO LOGOS SIGN MAY BE INSTALLED ON CANOPY, EXCEPT AS REQUIRED BY STATE AND LOCAL LAW. 9. LETTER HEIGHT TO BE 18" MAXIMUM AND 12" MINIMUM. SIGN LENGTH NOT TO EXCEED 75% OF STORE ENTRANCE. SIGN SIZE TO BE CALCULATED ON 1 SQ. FT. OF SIGN AREA PER 1 LINEAR FT. OF BUILDING FRONTAGE. (SEE PROVIDED EXHIBIT) 10. ALL WALL SIGNS IN AUTO SERVICE CENTER SHALL BE INSTALLED AS SHOWN IN ATTACHED DRAWING. D. CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS -MONUMENT SIGNS 1. ALL NEW FASTENINGS ARE TO BE CONCEALED AND BE OF GALVANIZED, STAINLESS OR ALUMINUM METALS. 2. NO LABELS WILL BE PERMITTED ON THE EXPOSED SURFACE OF NEW SIGNS, EXCEPT THOSE REQUIRED BY LOCAL ORDINANCE WHICH SHALL BE PLACED IN AN INCONSPICUOUS LOCATION. 3. DESIGN, LAYOUT AND MATERIALS FOR COMPLEX SIGNS SHALL CONFORM IN ALL RESPECTS WITH THIS CRITERIA. 4. THE OVERALL HEIGHT OF THE MONUMENT SIGN SHALL BE 8'-0-. 5. THE FACE OF THE MONUMENT SIGN SHALL BE 3/16-. S-100 POLYCARBONATE PLASTIC AND THE HOUSING SHALL BE 22 GAUGE SHEET METAL. 6. ALL NEW SIGNS ARE TO HAVE SERVICE ACCESS TO LAMPS, BALLAST AND WIRING. (2) PAGE 2 4F 4 7. SIGN CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL FIELD CONDITIONS BEFORE MANUFACTURING NEW SIGNS. 8. INTERNAL ILLUMINATION OF THE MONUMENT SIGN IS TO BE FLUORESCENT. 9. COLOR FOR ALL SIGNS: RED, BLUE, YELLOW, WHITE OR CORP. COLORS, SUBJECT TO PLANNING REVIEW. 10. PARCELS HAVING FRONTAGE ON TWO STREETS SHALL BE ALLOWED ONE SINGLE FACE MONUMENT SIGN FACING THE INTERSECTION, NOT TO EXCEED 50 SQ.FT. E. OTHER CRITERIA/REQUIREMENTS 1. AUTO SERVICE CENTER IS ALLOWED 1/3 OF SIGN AREA ON MONUMENT SIGN AS PER EXHIBIT A. ALL TENANT SIGNS SHALL COMPLY WITH THIS SIGN CRITERIA. 2. GAS STATION/MINI-MART SIGNAGE SUBJECT TO THIS SIGN CRITERIA AND IS SUBJECT TO SEPARATE REVIEW BY CITY PLANNING DEPT. FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE REQUIRED BY STATE AND GOVERNMENTAL LAW. (3) PAGE .3 OF 4 F. PROHIBITED SIGNS 1. FLASHING, MOVING, PULSATING OR INTERMITTENTLY LIGHTED SIGNS, IWLUDING SEARCHLIGHTS, EXCEPT PUBLIC SERVICE SIGHS SUCK AS THOSE DISPLAYING TIME AND TEMPERATURE- 2. NEM SIGNS WHICH CONFLICT WITH ANY TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE DOE TO COLOR, WORDING, DESIGN, LOCATION OR ILLUNINATION, OR WITH THE SAM EFFICIENT FLOW OF VEHICULAR OR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC' 3., ANIMi1LS OR HUMAN BEINGS, LIVE OR SIMULATZD UTILISED AS SIGNS- 4., LODDSpBA3t8RS, OR SIGNS WHICH EMIT SOUND, ODOR OR VISIBLE MATTER. 5. MBCWWICAL MOVEMENT SIGHS, INCLUDING p,LECTRONIC READERBOARDS• 6. ROOF SIGNS AND PROJECTING SIGNS. 7 IMW NTENSITY OP LIGHT-ICH CONSTITUTE A NUISANCE OR HAZARD DUE To THEIR NO EXPOSED NEON SIGNA= PERMITTED. S. BILLBOARDS OR ADVERTISING STRUCTURES, INCLUDING ANY OFF — SITE SIGNS INSTALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADVERTISING A PROJECTS SUBJECT OR BUSINESS UNRELATED TO THE PREMISES UPON WHICH THE SIGN IS LOCATED. S AND THOSE OF SIMILAR 9. NA U� WHICH ARENOTPEIWANENTLY ATTACHEING A —FRAME D TO THE BUILDING OR GROUND. 10. SIGNS ON ANY PUBLIC PROPERTY OR PROJECTING WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF MAY, EXCEPT POLITICAL SIGNS AND THOSE REQUIRED BY L`N. THIS SECTION SHALL NOT PROHIBIT THE PLACSME0'1' OF ADVERTISING ON pULBIC SERVICE ITEMS INCLUDING TRASH RECEPTACLES, BICYCI.B RACKSo BUS Sp BENCRESs S WITS N THELIC RIGHT OF WAY AS REQUIR0 T SBMTERS AND TEZ.B�ON By THE CITY. (4) PAGE 4 OF 4