1993 07 13 PC'i H.a E�
182 - 1992
EA
rl
1 T Y 0 F
uinW
Ten Carat Decade
Wily a/ cTa cquirenla
I L !� I e�11111 A11111111' illlllll
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers
78-105 Calle Estado
La Quinta, California
July 13, 1993
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. MAY BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT COMNIISSION MEETING
Beginning Resolution 93-029
Beginning Minute Motion 93-035
CALL TO ORDER - Flag Salute
ROLL CALL
Election of Chair and Vice Chair
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Itern ............... PLOT PLAN 93-498
Applicant .......... Stonington Properties
Locration ........... North side of Highway II I approximately 700 feet east of
Washington Street within the I I1 La Quinta Center.
Request ............ Approval of a plot plan application to allow construction of
a 7,000 square foot retail pad building.
Action ............. Minute Motion 93-
PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for citizens to address the Planning Commission on matters
relating to City planning and zoning which are not Agenda items. When addressing the
Planning Commission, please state your name and address.
PC/AGENDA 1
]BUSINESS SESSION
1. Item ............... SIGN APPLICATION 93-215 - LAGUNA DE LA PAZ
Applicant .......... Roger Snellenberger (Roger Snellenberger & Associates)
Location ........... Northwest corner of Washington Street and Eisenhower Drive
(±1,600 feet north of Eisenhower Drive).
Request ............ Sign adjustment to allow a permanent wall sign on
Washington Street, north of Eisenhower Drive.
Action ............. Minute Motion 93-
CONSENT CALENDAR
Aproval of the Minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting held June 22,
1 !3.
OTHER
ADJOURNMENT
STUDY SESSION
MONDAY, July 12, 1993
4:00 P.M.
1. All Agenda items.
(The Study Session will be held at the old City Hall)
PC/AGENDA 2
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California
June 22, 1993 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. The meeting was called to order at 7:02 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows who led
the flag salute.
II. ROLL CALL
A. Chairwoman Barrows requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Mosher,
Ellson, Marrs, and Chairwoman Barrows.
B. Commissioners Marrs/Ellson moved and seconded a motion to excuse
Commissioner Adolph. Unanimously approved.
B. Staff Present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, Principal Planner Stan Sawa,
Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer.
C. Chairwoman Barrows stated that Commissioner Mosher would be retiring at the
conclusion of this Planning Commission meeting and presented him with a plaque
to thank him for his contribution to the Planning Commission. In addition,
Commissioner Ellson moved and Commissioner Marrs seconded the motion to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 93-025 commending Commissioner
Mosher for his service to the Planning Commission.
III. PUBIAC HEARINGS
A. Tentative Tract 2.5363, Extension #2; a request of Santa Rosa Developers for
approval of a second extension of time.
1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in
the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
PC6-22 1
Planning Commission Minutes
June 22, 1993
2. There being no questions of Staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the public
hearing. No one wished to address the Commission regarding the matter
and the public hearing was closed and opened for Commission discussion.
3. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Ellson/Mosher to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 93-026
approving a second one year extension of time for Tentative Tract 25363.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Mosher,
Ellson, Marrs, & Chairwoman
Barrows. NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioners Adolph.
ABSTAINING: None.
B. Plot Plan 93-497; a request of Morite of California (Red Robin) for approval of
a plot plan application to allow the construction and operation of a restaurant with
outdoor seating.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the
Staff report, a. copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development
Department.
2. Commissioner Ellson asked Staff to clarify where the door on the north
elevation went and what it is for. The applicant stated it was an
emergency fire entrance. Commissioner Ellson asked where the trash
enclosure would be relocated to. Staff showed the location on the map.
3. There being r.o further questions of Staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened
the public hearing. Mr. Michael Allen, representing Morite of California,
gave a background of the project and stated they had no objections to the
Conditions of Approval recommended by Staff.
4. Commissioner Ellson stated she felt additional landscaping was needed on
the walls of the north and east elevations. Mr. Allen stated they felt the
landscaping on the plans was adequate. Staff stated that the Design
Review Board had required that a trellis be added to the east elevation and
that more trees be provided.
5. Chairwoman Barrows stated she felt the trash enclosure should be
screened. Staff clarified that they were required to screen the enclosure
on three sides and that the landscaping berm will help to hide it as well.
PC6-22 2
Planning Commission Minutes
June 22, 1993
6. Commissioner Ellson asked if a separate restroom would be provided for
the employees. Mr. Allen stated the architect was designing a restroom
in the kitchen for the employees.
7. Commissioner Ellson suggested that a window be added to the office. In
addition she requested that a one foot overhang be added to all of the
elevations to cover the windows. This could be done by adding eaves or
recessing the windows more. Mr. Allen asked if Staff would allow them
to encroach into the setback area in order to add the one foot. Staff stated
they had no objections.
8. There being no further discussion, Chairwoman Barrows closed the public
hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion.
9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Marrs/Ellson to adopt Minute Motion 93-031 approving
Plot PIan 93-497 for the Red Robin restaurant. Unanimously
Chairwoman Barrows withdrew from the meeting due to a possible conflict of interest. Vice
Chairman Mosher assumed the chairing of the meeting.
C. Parcel Map 27727 (Amendment #1) and Tentative Tract 27728 (Amendment #1);
a request of Winchester Asset Management (for La Quinta Golf Properties) for
an amendment to allow relocation of the maintenance building lot, expansion of
the clubhouse lot, and relocation of a road and three single family lots.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the
Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development
Department.
2. Commissioner Marrs asked Staff what type of contamination could be
obtained from asphalt. Staff explained the problem.
3. 'There being no further questions of Staff, Vice Chairman Mosher opened
the public hearing. There being no one wishing to address the
Commission, Chairman Mosher closed the public hearing and opened the
matter for Commission discussion.
4. Commissioner Ellson asked if the maintenance yard after the reduction in
size would be adequate to handle the needs of the development. The
applicant stated it would.
PC6-22 3
Planning Commission Minutes
June 22, 1993
5. Commissioner Marrs asked if the building would remain recessed. Mr.
Bryant stated that the move would allow them to hide the building even
more.
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Ellson/Marrs to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
93-027 recommending to the City Council approval of an amendment to
Parcel Map 27727 to allow the creation of a 4 parcel subdivision on ±200
acres site, subject to the attached conditions.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Ellson,
Marrs, & Vice Chairman Mosher.
NOES: None. ABSENT:
Commissioner Adolph.
ABSTAINING: Chairwoman
Barrows.
7. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Ellson/Marrs to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 93-028 recommending to the City
Council approval of an amendment to Tentative Tract 27728 to allow the
creation of a 65 lot subdivision on a 50.8 acre site.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Ellson,
Marrs, & Vice Chairman Mosher.
NOES: None. ABSENT:
Commissioner Adolph.
ABSTAINING: Chairwoman
Barrows.
Chairwoman Barrows returned to the meeting and assumed the Chair.
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
V. BUSINESS SESSION:
A. Plot Plan 93-501; a request of Winchester Asset Management (for La Quinta Golf
Propert yes) for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for a golf
clubhouse.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the
Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development
Department.
PC6-22 4
Planning Commission Minutes
June 22, 1993
2. Commissioner Marrs asked Staff what the material the stone work on the
facade consisted of. Mr. Craig Bryant, representing the applicant, stated
it was primarily native rock.
3. Commissioner Ellson stated the project would look more southwestern
with beige tones to blend in with the environment. Mr. Bryant stated they
felt they had blended with the surroundings as the majority of the rocks
are granite or grey in color.
4. Commissione:r Mosher stated his approval of the project and especially the
amount of overhangs.
5. Chairwoman Barrows asked if the clubhouse was below grade. Mr.
Bryant stated it was right at grade. She further asked if the cart barn area
would be faced in the natural rock. Mr. Bryant stated it would.
6. Commissioner Ellson asked why the woman's facilities in the clubhouse
was such a small percentage as compared to the mens. Mr. Bryant
explained it was due to the small percentage of woman who play golf.
7. Chairwoman Barrows asked Mr. Bryant to clarify where the colors would
be used. Mr. Craig Pearson, architect for the project, clarified the colors
and location.
8. Chairwoman Barrows asked that the project substitute some of the shrubs
with Brittlebash encellia and include more around the cl'.ubhouse
landscaping. Mr. Bryant stated they wished to add accent color by
utilizing other plants. Discussion followed regarding replacing the Purple
Fountain Grass.
9. There being no further questions or comments, Commissioners
Mosher/Marrs moved to adopt Minute Motion 93-032 approving the
architectural and landscaping plans for the golf clubhouse for Plot Plan
93-501. Unanimously approved.
B. Sign Application 93-197; a request of Mr. Skip Berg, DGI Graphics for approval
of a deviation from the master sign program for the JFK sign program at Plaza
Tampico (Amendment #1).
1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in
the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
PC6-22 5
Planning Commission Minutes
June 22, 1993
2. Commissioner Ellson asked Staff to clarify the location of the existing
signs as well as the location and materials to be used on the new signs.
She then asked if the additional tenants will have signage. Staff stated
they probably would be. Discussion followed as to where those signs
could be located.
3. Commissioner Mosher asked if the monument sign would stay. Staff
stated it would.
4. Commissioner Ellson asked if there was a limit to the amount of signage.
Staff stated there was and it was based on the amount of frontage. She
further asked who the signage between the floors would identify. Staff
stated it could be either. First or second floor tenants.
5. Commissioner Ellson asked who retains ownership of the building. Staff
stated it was owned by a partnership.
6. There being ro further questions, Commissioners Mosher/Ellson moved
to adopt Minute Motion 93-033 approving Sign Application 93-197 with
the amendment of Condition #5. Unanimously approved.
C. Sign Application 93-215 - Laguna de la Paz; a request of Roger Snellenberger
(Roger Snellenberger & Associates) for a sign adjustment to allow a permanent
wall sign on Washington Street, north of Eisenhower Drive.
1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in
the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2. There being ro questions of Staff and as the applicant was not present,
Commissioners Ellson/Mosher moved to continue the matter to their next
meeting in order to allow the applicant to bring in a scale drawing with
a color board. Unanimously approved.
D. Plot Plan 92-460; a request of Shell Oil Company for approval of a one year
extension of time to allow construction and operation of a service station and car
wash.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the
Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development
Department.
PC6-22 6
Planning Commission Minutes
June 22, 1993
2. Chairwoman Barrows asked if Shell Oil would be asking for modifications
to their plan. Staff stated they probably would due to the approval ARCO
received.
3. There being no further discussion, Commissioners Marrs/Mosher moved
to adopt Minute Motion 93-034 approving an extension for Plot Plan 92-
460 as requested. Unanimously approved.
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR.
A. Commissioner Mosher asked that the Minutes be amended on page 5 to read,
"...stated the parking lLan exists throughout...". There being no further changes
or amendments, Commissioners Mosher/Ellson moved and seconded a motion to
approve the Minutes of June 8, 1993 as corrected. Unanimously approved.
VII. OTHER - None
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Ellson/Mosher to adjourn this regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on July
13, 1993, at 7:00 P.M. at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers. This meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:26 P.M., June 22, 1993.
PC6-22
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
DATE: JULY 13, 1993
CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN 93-498
APPLICANT: STONINGTON PROPERTIES
ARCHITECT: MARVICK-LANG, INC., ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING
REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A PLOT PLAN APPLICATION TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL PAD
BUILDING.
LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY III APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET
EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET WITHIN THE 111 LA QUINTA
CENTER.
ZONING: C-P-S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL)
]ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 93-266 HAS BEEN PREPARED IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THIS APPLICATION. THE INITIAL STUDY
INDICATES THAT NO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
WILL OCCUR WHICH CANNOT BE MITIGATED. THEREFORE A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED AND IS
RECOMMENDED FOR THIS PROJECT. ADDITIONALLY, IT
SHOULD BE NOTED THAT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
ORIGINAL SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THIS PROJECT A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT HAS BEEN
ADOPTED.
GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE
DESIGNATION: M/RC WITH A NONRESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (MIXED REGIONAL
COMMERCIAL WITH A NONRESIDENTIAL OVERLAY).
SURROUNDING
ZONING/
LAND USE: NORTH: C-P-S/VACANT LAND WITHIN THE 111 LA QUINTA
CENTER
SOUTH: C-P-S/COMMERCIAL USE
EAST: C-P-S/RECENTLY APPROVED RED ROBIN
RESTAURANT
WEST: C-P-S/RECENTLY APPROVED CARL'S JR.
RESTAURANT
TPCST.134 1
BACKGROUND:
General Description:
The subject property is a pad site (J-1) within the One Eleven La Quinta Center. This pad is
located just slightly to the east of the Albertsons supermarket near Highway 111. The pad is
located on the east side of the closest right-in/right-out only driveway near Washington Street.
Across the west side of the drive way is the recently approved Carl's Jr. site and to the east is
the Red Robin restaurant site.
Site Design:
The building is a rectangular structure laid out parallel to Highway 111. The building which
is tentatively shown split into five shops would have their front doors facing the north or onto
the parking lot. Along the east and south would be secondary private accesses. A trash
enclosure is shown within the parking area near the southeast corner of the building.
The building is setback 28-feet from the Highway 111 right-of-way as allowed by the approval
of the Specific Plan for the shopping center. The applicant is showing a slight encroachment
of approximately four feet for two small trellis structures over the rear doors. Along the west
side property line, adjacent to the driveway, the setback varies from a minimum of 11-feet and
a maximum of 17-feet near the northerly end.
Architectural Design:
The structure has been designed in a manner that is architecturally similar to the main shopping
center area. The building utilizes a tile roof, stucco walls, a small amount of wood trellis trim,
tile accent, and tower features similar to those used in the shopping center. Along the east and
south elevations of the buildings, the face of one of the tower structures would be faced with a
painted metal lattice which would support landscape vines. Around the glass areas an overhang
of approximately five feet is provided.
The height of the building varies from a maximum of 24.5± feet for the tower structure with
the main building being 19.5 ± feet high.
Signage:
The siignage has not been shown on the buildings. However, the approved sign program does
provide for signage on these types of structures. It would be appropriate to utilize the sign
program for these rental spaces.
Landscaping:
The applicant has submitted a conceptual landscaping plan showing a plant pallet which consists
of plants that are for the most part utilized throughout the shopping center.
PCST.134 2
Circulation/Parking:
The 7,000 square foot building requires 24 parking spaces. The site area contains 38 spaces
which exceeds the required parking. The circulation and parking have been designed to integrate
with the rest of the shopping center.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION:
The Design Review Board considered this request at their meeting of June 2, 1993. They took
action to recommend approval of this project, subject to the following conditions:
1. Along the south elevation, the small trellis structure shall be raised to meet the bottom
of the roof facia. Additionally, each trellis structure shall be widened by approximately
three feet (east to west).
2. A minimum three foot distance shall be maintained between the trellis along the south
side of the elevation and adjacent sidewalk. In order to do this the building may need
to be shifted to the north since the sidewalk is presently existing.
3. Provide a roof plan for Planning Commission review.
4. Signs for the building shall comply with the adopted sign program for the Center.
5. The perimeter landscaping shall be modified and designed to blend in with the new
landscaping. Should any retaining walls be necessary adjacent to the perimeter
landscaping, they shall be provided by the applicant as required by the Planning and
Development Director.
6. The Fountain Grass shall be eliminated from use for this project.
7. All exterior colors shall match those utilized within the shopping center.
RECOMMENDATION:
By Minute Motion 93- , staff recommends approval of this plot plan application subject to
the attached conditions.
Attachments:
1. Location and zoning map
2. Draft Conditions of Approval
3. Plan exhibits including but not limited to plot plan, floor plan, landscape plan, and
elevation plans.
PCST.134 3
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED
PLOT PLAN 93-498 - STONINGTON PROPERTIES
JULY 13, 1993
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT:
1. The development of this site shall be generally be in conformance with the exhibits
contained in the file for Plot Plan 93-498, unless otherwise amended by the following
conditions.
2. The approved conditional use permit shall be used within one year of the Planning
Commission approval date of July 13, 1993; otherwise it shall become null and void and
of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction
which is allowed by this approval, not including grading, which is begun within the one
year period and thereafter diligently pursued to completion.
3. All applicable conditions of SP 89-014 and Parcel Map 25865 shall be complied with as
necessary.
4. An exterior lighting plan for the parking lot area and building shall be approved by the
Planning and Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Lighting
fixtures shall be shielded to eliminate glare on the adjacent streets and surrounding areas.
5. Should mandatory recycling be required at sometime in future, separate recycling bins
if needed shall be provided within a masonry enclosure.
6. That all conditions of the Coachella Valley Water District shall be met as required.
7. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted
infrastructure fee program in affect at the time of issuance of a future building permit.
8. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements in effect
at the time of issuance of a building permit.
9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and building permit for construction of any building
or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances
from the following public agencies:
o City Fire Marshal
o City of La Quinta Public Works Department
o Planning and Development Department
o Coachella Valley Water District
o Desert Sands Unified School District
CONAPRVL.092 1
Conditions of Approval
PP 93-493 - Stonington
July 13, 1993
o Imperial Irrigation District
o Riverside County Health Department
Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be
presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for any permit
for any use contemplated by this approval.
10. The trash enclosure shall be large enough to hold two standard size trash bins and shall
comply with City and Waste Management of the Desert design requirements. These
requirements include but are not limited to decorative masonry wall, solid metal doors,
and a concrete pad in front of the enclosure.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD:
11. Along the south side of the building, the small trellis structures shall be raised to meet
the bottom of the roof facia. Additionally, each trellis structure shall be widened by
approximately three feet (east to west).
12. A minimum three foot distance shall be maintained between the trellis along the south
side of the building and adjacent sidewalk. In order to do this the building may need to
be shifted to the north since the sidewalk is presently existing.
13. Provide a roof plan for Planning Commission review.
14. A sign program for the building shall comply with the adopted sign program for the
Center.
15. The perimeter landscaping shall be modified and designed to blend in with the new
landscaping. Should any retaining walls be necessary adjacent to the perimeter
landscaping, they shall be provided by the applicant as required by the Planning and
Development Director.
16. The Fountain Grass shall be eliminated from use for this project.
17. All exterior colors shall match those utilized within the shopping center.
FIRE MARSHALL REQUIREMENTS:
18. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 1250 gpm for a two
hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any
combustible material is placed on the job site.
CONAPRVL . 092 2
Conditions of Approval
PP 93-498 - Stonington
July 13, 1993
19. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6" X 4" X 1-1/2"),
located not less than 25-feet nor more than 165-feet from any portion of the building(s)
as measured along approved vehicular travelways.
20. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13 Ordinary Hazard Occupancy,
Group 1. 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 buildings.
21. 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.
22. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building
Code/Riverside County Fire Department and National Fire Protection Association
Standard 71.
23. Install panic hardware exit signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code.
24. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A10BC
in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment.
25. Install Knox 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 Lock Boxes. This form must be
authorized and signed by this office for the correctly coded system to be purchased.
26. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee
must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT:
27. The applicant shall submit site civil, landscaping, and irrigation plans to the Engineering
Department for review and shall pay the costs of plan checking. The applicant shall not
begin construction activity until the plans have been approved by the City Engineer.
28. Site grading and off -site improvements adjacent to the site shall conform to the approved
improvement plans prepared pursuant to Specific Plan 89-014.
29. All storm water and nuisance water run-off produced on this site shall be discharged in
accordance with the approved drainage plan prepared for Specific Plan 89-014 unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
CONAPRVL.092 3
Conditions of Approval
PP 93-498 - Stonington
July 13, 1993
30. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall
submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with
Chapter 6.10, La Quinta Municipal Code. In accordance with said Chapter, the applicant
shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to
guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit.
31. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall obtain
an encroachment permit from the Engineering Department. During construction of the
site improvements, the applicant shall comply with all provisions of the permit.
32. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical
engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have his or her agents
provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to insure that all work
site work complies with the approved plans, specifications and applicable codes. The
engineer or surveyor monitoring grading shall provide a certification that the finish
building pad elevation conforms with the approved grading plan.
33. The applicant shall pay all fees charged by the City for processing, plan checking, and
permits. The fee amounts shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is
undertaken and accomplished by the City.
SPECIAL:
47. The required State Department of Fish and Game fees of $1300 shall be paid to the
Planning and Development Department (check made out to the County of Riverside)
within 24-hours after review of the case by the City Council.
CONAPRVL.092 4
Q
0
0
LOCATION MAP
r.Anl D,1
,CASE NO.13"..Is
6f6��
u
DATE:
CASE:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
BACKGROUND:
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
JULY 13, 1993 (CONTINUTED FROM JUNE 22, 1993)
SIGN APPLICATION 93-215; LAGUNA DE LA PAZ
ROGER SNELLENBERGER
(ROGER SNELLENBERGER & ASSOCIATES)
SIGN ADJUSTMENT TO ALLOW A PERMANENT WALL SIGN ON
WASHINGTON STREET, NORTH OF EISENHOWER DRIVE.
NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND EISENHOWER
DRIVE (1,600+ FEET NORTH OF EISENHOWER DRIVE)
On June 22, 1993, the Planning Commission reviewed the Applicant's request to install a
new freestanding sign on Washington Street for the Laguna De La Paz condominium project
(see the attached memorandum) . The Planning Commission continued the project at its last
meeting because the Applicant did not provide a color sample of the sign color nor a scaled
drawing of the signage report.
The information was submitted to staff on July 2, 1993. The new material is attached. The
Applicant's new request is to install one foot high letters on the wall instead of the larger
letters which were originally proposed.
FINDINGS TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST:
1. The sign location is at an existing T-intersection (Washington Street and 48th
Avenue) which could be considered an "entry" or focal point for the Laguna De La
Paz development.
2. The optional sign location on Washington Street is more appropriate than a possible
second sign on Eisenhower Drive at the westerly entrance to the project because the
sign would not be highly visible nor necessary since the main entrance (700 feet from
Washington Street) includes the guard gate, fountain, and other architectural
amenities.
3. No health or safety hazards would occur if the sign was permitted.
STAFFRPT . 012
RECOMIMENDATION:
The Planning Commission approve the painted plastic letters on the existing five foot high
wall as submitted by the developer on July 2, 1993, provided the sign is removed within two
years and the sign is a minimum of five feet from the edge of the wall as required by the
City's existing Sign Ordinance.
Attachments:
1. July 2, 1993 transmittal
2. Previous Planning Commission report
STAFFRPT . 012
2
N\C� . (A L
y fLl
02 1993
UE'. ok3- D-Ns (Na vas)
'a\ 1���7> -VAl - T--� -zr AA;- lI=F`TEQky ,.
BI 3
DATE:
CASE:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
BACKGROUND:
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION FILE
COP
JUNE 22, 1993
SIGN APPLICATION 93-215; LAGUNA DE LA PAZ
ROGER SNELLENBERGER
(ROGER SNELLENBERGER & ASSOCIATES)
SIGN ADJUSTMENT TO ALLOW A PERMANENT WALL SIGN ON
WASHINGTON STREET, NORTH OF EISENHOWER DRIVE.
NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND
EISENHOWER DRIVE (1,600+ FEET NORTH OF EISENHOWER
DRIVE)
Mr. Roger Snellenberger is the current developer of the existing Laguna De La Paz
development. In May, the Applicant submitted a request to staff to install a new
permanent sign on the northern property line wall on Washington Street for the
Laguna De La Paz condominium project. The sign would be located so that it faces
south bound traffic. The sign is generally located at Washington Street and 48th
Avenue, westerly of the existing intersection. The signage request is not permitted
unless an adjustment is allowed by the Planning Commission.
PROJECT BACKGROUND:
In 1979, the County of Riverside approved Tract 13640, Conditional Use Permit 2262
and Variance 1370 which allowed 396 condominium units on 100+ acres. In 1980, the
site was rough graded and Phase 1, 2, & 3 were recorded. The City of La Quinta
issued the first building permits for the project in 1981. The tentative tract map
approval expired in August, 1984. A new tract map (20052) was filed on the site in
1984 for the remaining unrecorded property or 336 units on 70+ acres. The
additional phases of the tract were recorded in 1984, and at the present time there
are 220+ units built within the first few phases of the project. No new units have
been built in the last few years.
Mr. Snellenberger's company purchased the remaining 40+ acres of the project in
1993, and consturction has started on 30+ units.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST:
The Applicant would like to affix individual plastic letters on the existing five foot
high slumpstone wall along the northern property line. The existing wall is painted
white and is approximately 12 feet from Washington Street. The letters would be two
feet high for the word "Laguna" and one foot high for the other portion of the sign.
The letters will be painted teal to match the existing entryway sign for the project
on Eisenhower Drive, west of Washington Street.
STAFFRPT . 011
EXISTING SIGN CODE PROVISIONS:
The Applicant was informed that his sign could not be approved by staff because the
present Sign Ordinance states: "Each development is permitted a sign which
identifies the development name at major entrances determined during project
review. The identification sign(s) may have a maximum sign area of thirty-two
square feet and a height of eight feet. Illumination is not permitted. "
The proposed location does not qualify as an entrance into the development. The
Applicant was informed that if a temporary sign (+6 months to one year) were
proposed (Special Advertising) the City Council could review the request, or if a
permanent sign was necessary, an adjustment to the Sign Ordinance would be
required pursuant to Section 9.212.030 F of the Municipal Code. The Applicant
would like a permanent sign for his project and for the existing development.
ADJUSTMENT PROVISIONS:
The Planning Commission can consider the Applicant's request for an alternative
location to their future entry on Eisenhower Drive as noted in the Sign Adjustment
guidelines. The provisions for an adjustment are:
1. Not applicable.
2. Additional number, to compensate for inadequate visibility, or to facilitate
good design balance.
3. Alternate Locations:
"a. On -site. To transfer area from one wall to another wall or to a freestanding
sign upon the finding that such alternative location is necessary to overcome a
disadvantage caused by unfavorable orientation of the front wall to the street or
parking lot or an exceptional setback;
b . Lots Not Fronting on a Street. To permit the placement of a sign on an
access easement to a lot not having street frontage, at a point where viewable from
the adjoining public street. In addition to any other requirements, the applicant
shall submit evidence of the legal right to establish and maintain a sign within the
access easement;
c. Additionally, alternative on -site locations may be granted in order to
further the intent and purposes of this chapter or where normal placement would
conflict with the architectural design of a structure."
HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION APPROVAL:
A letter from the Applicant's Homeowners' Association is attached. The Laguna De
La Paz Association has approved Mr. Snellenberger's request.
STAFFR.PT . 011 2
STAFF COMMENTS:
During the initial review of the request, staff was more inclined to have the
Applicant apply for a temporary sign at this site versus a permanent sign so as not
to establish a precedence with this type of request. However, we have the following
options for the request:
1. Temporary Sign: The Planning Commission could elect to approve the request
on a temporary basis during the current on -site construction activities to
assist the developer in his marketing program. It is staffs understanding
that the developer has purchased 40 acres and currently there are 30+ units
under construction at the site. The Planning Commission might want to allow
the sign for one or two years.
2. Permanent Sign: The Planning Commission could permit the sign on
Washington Street if the Applicant and/or the Homeowner's Association realize
that another sign would not be allowed at the westerly entrance to the complex
in front of the new phase of construction. The Sign Ordinance permits a
transfer provided a disadvantage exists to the placement of the sign. The
Applicant's disadvantage is the project has two main entrances on Eisenhower
Drive and no access points for the property on Washington Street. If the
County of Riverside would have allowed a driveway on Washington Street, the
Applicant could have applied for a permanent sign on this street. But since
the access point was discouraged because Washington Street is a planned major
arterial street, the City's Sign Ordinance precludes a sign on Washington
Street. Most cities usually permit a project identification sign on each street
frontage similar to the way the City's Sign Ordinance is written for commercial
businesses. Thereby the development is not penalized for accommodating the
City's need to increase traffic flow on Washington Street.
3. Denial: The Planning Commission could deny the request based on the City's
current requirements irregardless of the Sign Adjustment parameters.
CONCLUSION:
Staff supports the Applicant's desire to place a sign on Washington Street to identify
the project during the on -site construction of the additional condominium units .
However, whether or not the sign should be temporary or permanent is the key
question for this submittal. Staff would prefer that the sign not be installed for a
period of time greater than two years based on the Applicant's request. Our reason
is that we believe a higher quality type freestanding sign is warranted if the sign
is to be permanent. We believe a freestanding monument sign with decorative planter
would be more appropriate instead of the wall mounted proposal submitted by the
developer. Washington Street is an image corridor and all buildings and/or signs
need to reflect an integrated architectural character.
Staff would also recommend that the beight of the letters be reduced in size from by
six inches to be in scale with the existing five foot high perimeter wall and because
the sign will be highly visible since it is only 12+ feet from the existing street.
STAFFRPT .011 3
FINDINGS TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST:
1. The sign location is at an existing T-intersection (Washington Street and 48th
Avenue) which could be considered an "entry" or focal point for the Laguna
De La Paz development.
2. The optional sign location on Washington Street is more appropriate than a
possible second sign on Eisenhower Drive at the westerly entrance to the
project because the sign would not be highly visible nor necessary since the
main entrance (700 feet from Washington Street) includes the guard gate,
fountain, and other architectural amenities.
3. No health or safety hazards would occur if the sign was permitted.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission permit the painted plastic letters on the existing five
foot high wall as submitted by the developer provided the sign is removed within two
years and the height of the letters are reduced by six inches.
Attachments:
1. Site Plan
2. Sign Exhibit
3. Letter from Mr. Snellenberger
4. Letter from Laguna De La Paz Homeowner's Association
STAFFRPT . 011 4
LO
N .-+
N
I � �- ; e� re. " V) A, e A' -,
M
Y
S-
ea
a.
l'
b
S_
4'
V)
C
O
C
s
N
m
17 May 1993
Roger Snellenberger, Developer
Laguna De La Paz
La Quinta, CA 92253
Mr. Snellenberger:
The Laguna De La Paz Homeowners Association has approved your request to
mount a block letter (individual letters) sign on the exterior wall at the
north east corner of the property facing south bound Washington traffic.
Said letters "LAGUNA" to be approximately two feet in height and "DE LA PA2"
to be approximately one foot in height per the sketch as submitted to the Board.
All letters to be of the same color as the signs on the walls at the
entrance of the complex..... teal.
Sincerely,
Ron Perkins, President
Laguna De La Paz HOA
8
�
Q
V
VZ
V
tt !
J �
V
a
`+c 0
FT
Y
V
i
I�
(i
AA
i3-4
it
I.,Q'I
1 L.1J cmi
yi1
Lf)
co
rn
C
'L7
N
O
S-
Q
CL
to
O
U
C
S.
C
W
Q1
C
N
X
LLJ