1993 05 05 DRB Minutes
MINUTF.S
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
CITY OF LA QUINT A
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California
May 5, 1993
5:30 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Chairman Harbison brought the meeting to order at 5:33 P.M. and Boardmember
Curtis led the flag salute.
II. ROLL CALL
A. Present: Boardmembers Fred Rice, John Curtis, James Campbell, Planning
Commission Representative Barrows, and Chairman Harbison. Boardmember
Anderson arrived at 5:45 P.M.
B. Boardmember Curtis moved to excuse Boardmember Wright. Boardmember Rice
seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
C. Staff present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell,
and Department Secretary Betty Anthony.
Boardmembers Campbell/Curtis moved to reorganize the agenda moving Item #1 to the end of
the agenda. Unanimously approved.
m. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Conditional Use Permit 93:007; a request of McDonalds for approval to construct
and operate a fast food, drive-thru restaurant located within the 111 La Quinta
Center on Highway 111.
I.
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.
Boardmember Curtis asked if Council had made any changes to the Taco
Bell submittal that should apply to this application. Staff stated there were
none.
DRBS-S
1
Design Review Board Minutes
May 5, 1993
9.
11.
DRB5-5
3.
Chairman Harbison inquired about the menu board. Staff stated this
would be reviewed by the Planning Commission as an adjustment.
4.
Boardmember Curtis questioned the size of the revised logo sign.
Discussion followed regarding the size of the sign. Chairman Harbison
stated it was 12 square feet and Boardmember Rice stated the red
background made the logo stand out.
5.
Mr. Rob Jenkins, construction project manager for McDonalds, spoke
regarding the logo sign on the building. Chairman Harbison asked if Mr.
Jenkins had any objections to the staff conditions. Mr. Jenkins stated he
had no objections, but inquired how many trees would be required to
screen the play structure (Condition #1). Staff stated they would prefer
a minimum of three trees. Boardmember discussed the location of the
trees with Mr. Jenkins.
6.
Chairwoman Barrows asked Mr. Jenkins to replace the Purple Fountain
Grass that the plans called for to eliminate the change of White Fountain
Grass mistakenly being planted. Mr. Jenkins stated he would.
7.
Boardmember Campbell asked if the flagpole was the same height as
Carl's Jr. Staff stated it was. He then asked if the "McDonalds" sign
could be reduced in size. Mr. Jenkins stated that all their signs were
premade and this sign was already in production. He indicated a smaller
sign was available.
8.
Boardmember Anderson stated he felt the sign overpowered the building.
Chairwoman Barrows stated she felt the "M" was what the public
identified not the sign "McDonalds". Discussion followed regarding the
size and color of the signs.
10.
Boardmember Anderson asked how the tile would be tied in behind the
tower arches. Mr. Jenkins stated it was tied into the back structure of the
wall. Discussion followed regarding the tower treatment on the north
elevation.
Boardmember Campbell inquired why another stucco parapet couldn't be
tied into the back of the tower arches. Mr. Jenkins stated the mechanical
equipment filled the roof area. Discussion followed regarding different
possibilities. Chairman Harbison felt the Planning Commission would
want the same continuity as Carl's Jr. was required to have. Mr. Jenkins
stated he would eliminate three rows of the tile and dress up the back of
the parapet. The Board concurred with doing this.
2
Design Review Board Minutes
May 5. 1993
12. Boardmember Campbell asked Mr. Jenkins to clarify what the material on
the screen wall and trash enclosure was to be. Mr. Jenkins stated it was
painted concrete. Discussion followed regarding the problems with
graffiti and repairing the wall. Boardmember Campbell stated he felt that
stucco would be better than a block wall. In addition, the height detector
pole sign should not have the yellow letters on bronze. It was suggested
it be red.
13. Following the discussion, it was moved by Boardmembers
Anderson/Campbell to recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 93-
007 subject to the following conditions:
a. Three trees would be required to screen the play structure from
view of Highway Ill.
b. The "McDonalds' sign would be the next standard size down.
c. The screen wall to be block with slurry finish and painted.
d. The letters on the height detector pole sign would be red with a
yellow background.
e. The north facade tower shall have a full plaster return with the
three rows of tile removed.
Unanimously approved.
B. Plot Plan 93-496: a request of Bill Howard (Mumbil) for approval of exterior
modification to a commercial building located at 78-029 Calle Estado.
DRB5-5
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.
Boardmember Anderson stated the different plate heights caused an
illusion of the addition being off center. He stated his concern that by
tieing the two unrein forced structures together would not allow the
building to move during an earthquake. He had no objections to the arch
archi tecturall y.
3.
Mr. Bill Howard, owner, stated the building is connected and always has
been and had been reinforced and approved by the Building and Safety
Department. He further stated he would like to keep the arch but was
willing to eliminate the tower facade. Boardmembers discussed the
building surface materials with Mr. Howard.
3
Design Review Board Minutes
May 5, 1993
4. Boardmember Anderson expressed his concern about the thickness of the
arch. Boardmember Curtis expressed his concern that the facade could
create a problem in an earthquake. Members expressed their desire to see
the building remain in its original state.
5. Following the discussion, it was moved and seconded by Boardmembers
Anderson/CampbelI to deny the plot plan as submitted, but would be
willing to consider a new proposal. Unanimously approved.
C. Plot Plan 93-495 (Revision); a request of Simon Plaza to develop a mixed use
commercial project on approximately 5.6 acres zoned C-P-S commercial located
at the southeast corner of Highway III and Washington Street.
7.
DRBS-S
I.
Associate Planner Greg TrousdelI presented the information contained in
the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2.
Boardmember Curtis asked if the parking was at grade. Staff stated that
some were two story. He then asked why the curb line was tapered back
so far. Staff stated it was based on what the Engineering Department
required for street widening.
3.
Boardmember Campbell asked Staff what the height limit was. Staff
stated four stories or 50-feet was allowed in the C-P-S Zone.
4.
Mr. Phil Pead, President, discussed the height changes with the Board.
5.
Boardmember Rice asked if this was to be a medical building. Mr. Pead
stated it would be with outpatient surgery, urgent care, etc.
6.
Mr. Pead expressed his concern that the meandering sidewalk would end
at a block wall at the existing Simon Motors site. He further requested
that the landscaping at the parking structure required in Condition #74
needed to be eliminated. Boardmember Anderson stated he felt the
parking structure needed to be integrated more with the building. The
building design features needed to be carried into the parking structure.
Mr. Pead stated the parking structure did have an appearance of being
stuck there, but time constraints didn't allow other design alternatives. He
stated they would berm and heavily landscape the Highway III elevation.
4
Design Review Board Minutes
May 5, 1993
9.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
DRB5-5
8.
Boardmember Curtis stated this was an opportunity for public and private
cooperation and he felt this would be an asset to the comer.
Boardmember Anderson stated he needed to see the design in whole, not
piece meal.
10.
Chairman Harbison stated he felt that large palm trees needed to be used
to soften the building height.
II.
Boardmember Campbell stated that the plans on Sheet #3 did not show the
elevators for the parking structure. Mr. Pead stated they had not
determined their location as of yet. Boardmember Campbell asked what
the material would be around the glazed opening. Mr. Pead stated stucco
ornamentation with different stucco colors.
12.
Boardmember Campbell asked about the window treatment. Mr. Pead
stated he would prefer to use the inside grid window treatment.
Boardmembers determined that they wanted multi-pane weld windows.
Discussion followed regarding the two different styles.
Boardmember Campbell stated the building needed columns where the two
buildings met. Discussion followed regarding alternatives to the parking
structure and the building in regards to the roof on the south elevation.
Planning Commissioner Barrows stated she felt there were too many
window on the south and west elevations with no allowance for shade.
Members discussed the window treatment and Title 24 (State Energy
Code}.
Boardmember Campbell stated he felt the elevator tower needed to be
separated from the building; the ramp parking structure side wall should
be comprised of stone versus stucco for aesthetics reasons.
Boardmember Curtis questioned the roof pitch of the main structure. He
also wanted to see the eight foot wide bikepath remain based on the City's
General Plan Goals and Policies.
Mr. Skip Berg, sign representative, stated he would answer any questions
the Board might have regarding the sign program. Boardmember Curtis
asked if he had any objections to the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Berg
stated he had no objections except for Condition #28 as they would like
to have their monument sign at the intersection. Discussion followed
5
Design Review Board Minutes
Hay 5, 1993
regarding the sign. Staff explained the history of the sign. Mr. Berg
stated the sign needed to be at the corner for identification. Boardmember
Curtis stated that Staff needed to work with the developer to come to
some compromise.
Staff suggested modifying Condition #7. Boardmember Rice stated he felt
the Board should approve the project and let the City Council and
Planning Commission deal with the sign problem.
18. Boardmember Campbell stated he felt the location was agreeable and
asked why the logo was so similar to Simon Motors. Mr. Berg stated that
Mr. Simon was an investor in the project. Boardmember Campbell asked
if signs #2 and #2a were eliminated. Mr. Berg stated that #2a was
originally omitted and only added because of the six foot wall that was
blocking the sign.
19. Boardmember Anderson stated he felt the curb cut would direct the
customers. Mr. Berg stated that the six foot wall would block all of it.
20. Boardmember Campbell asked what signs #3 and #3a would be made out
of. Mr. Berg stated they would be reverse pan channel and set against the
wall. Discussion followed regarding the sign materials.
21. Boardmember Anderson stated his concern for approving a project without
all the suggestions being incorporated into the conditions and visually
seeing the revised plans. Discussion followed.
22. Following the discussion, it was moved and seconded by Boardmembers
Harbison/Curtis to recommend approval in concept of Plot Plan 93-495
(Revision) requiring the applicant to return to the Design Review Board
with the improved drawings in one month to show the revision of the
items discussed. Boardmember Anderson asked for a clarification of the
motion. Members discussed in length with Staff what approving in
concept meant. Following the discussion, Chairman Harbison asked for
a roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
A YES: Boardmembers Curtis, Rice,
Anderson, Campbell, Planning
Commissioners Barrows, and
Chairman Harbison. NOES: None.
ABSENT: Boardmember Wright.
ABSTAINING: None.
r 'J, l ~
oJ
DRB5-5
6
Design Review Board Minutes
May 5, 1993
Chairman Harbison declared a break to give the Boardmembers an opportunity to view the sign
approval for Anchovie's restaurant. Break 8;49 to 9:01 P.M.
D. Sign Application 93-203; a continued request of Anchovie's Pizzeria (Mr.
Richard McCormick) to install an illuminated awning sign.
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. Boardmember Curtis stated the Board needed to see more internal lighting
with fluorescent being incandescent.
3. Following a discussion, it was moved and seconded by Boardmembers
Anderson/Curtis to ask the applicant to have both alternatives available for
viewing at the next meeting of the Design Review Board. Unanimously
approved.
4. Following the vote, Staff informed the Board that the applicant had
withdrawn their request. Therefore, action taken by the Board became
null and void.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
Boardmembers Curtis/Rice moved and seconded a motion to approve the Minutes of
April 7, 1993, as submitted. Unanimously approved.
V. OTHER - None
VI. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved and seconded by Boardmembers Anderson/Curtis to adjourn to a regular meeting
of the Design Review Board on June 2, 1993, at 5:30 P.M. This meeting of the La Quinta
Design Review Board was adjourned at 9:08 P.M., May 5, 1993.
DRBS-S
7