Loading...
1993 03 03 DRB Minutes MINUTES 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 March 3, 1993 5:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. Chairman Harbison brought the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. and Planning Commissioner Ellson led the flag salute. II. ROLL CALL A. Present: Boardmembers Paul Anderson, Fred Rice, James Campbell, John Curtis, Planning Commission Representative Ellson, and Chairman Harbison. B. Boardmember Curtis moved to excuse Boardmember Wright. Boardmember Anderson seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. C. Staff present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Department Secretary Betty Anthony. III. BUSINESS SESSION A. Conditional Use Permit 93-004; a request of Carl's Jr. Restaurant for approval of the drive-thru window shade structure. I. 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 Anderson asked Staff if the play structure had been resolved and if the overall height was to be reduced to the height of the eaves, not the parapet. Staff stated they had reviewed what was submitted and the structure would be two stories not to exceed 15-feet 7-inches. DRB3-3 1 Design Review Board Minutes March 3, 1993 3. Boardmember Anderson stated that since the wrought iron fence was to be enhanced, perhaps this would be a good opportunity to involve the Applicant with an artist as the Art in Public Places Commission is requesting. 4. Planning Commissioner Elison stated she would rather see the artist design the play structure and leave the fence as is. 5. Chairman Harbison asked Staff to verify the height of the flag pole. 6. Boardmember Campbell asked if the tower element height had been resolved and if so why were they not shown on the new plans. 7. Mr. Frank Oley, representing Carl's Jr., stated that the building height had been reduced to 23-feet overall per the City Council approval. The patio structure had always been present, they only added the shade structure to match the drive-thru shade structure. He further stated that the wrought iron fence would be embellished. The working drawings were in process and would be submitted to Staff soon. They have already added the columns to enhance the fence. The submitted plans were not revised as some phases of the changes were still in the process of being redrawn. 8. Boardmember Anderson asked Mr. Oley what the size of the wood trellis members would be. Mr. Oley stated they would be 4" X 6" with decorative cut tips. Boardmember Anderson stated his concern about the wood holding up in the desert weather, but felt the 4" X 6" would hold up. He then asked Mr. Oley how he felt about working with an artist to design the fence. Mr. Oley stated this would be the last item to be installed and it would not be difficult to alter. Mr. Oley stated that to change the play structure would require all the approvals for liability from all the different agencies they had already acquired approvals from for the existing plans and this would be a great hardship. 9. Boardmember Anderson inquired about the landscaping. Mr. Oley stated it was in the process and would come back before them at a later date. 10. Planning Commissioner Elison stated she had no problem with the design of the shade structures, but asked if they could be extended out east beyond the pay window. Mr. Oley stated he would work with the architects to see that the vehicles would be screened from the sun. He saw no problem with extending the structure 3-feet or moving the structure to the east. DRB3-3 2 Design Review Board Minutes March 3, 1993 11. Boardmember Campbell asked if the clay tile roof matched the shopping center tile. Mr. Oley stated it did. Boardmember Campbell asked if the shade structure ledger detail shown on Sheet 3 could have a treatment given it to match the decorative ends. Boardmember Anderson stated it should be the same as the decorative ends, the scroll cut. Mr. 01ey stated that would be no problem. 12. Boardmember Campbell asked if the public telephones could be moved. Mr. Oley stated they were being moved along with the bike rack. 13. Boardmember Campbell inquired if the awnings over the windows on Sheet 3 were on the original plans. Mr. Oley stated they were. 14. Boardmember Anderson asked about the awning colors. Mr. Oley stated they will conform with what City Council approved. 15. Boardmember Anderson asked whether the columns of the shade structure would appear to blend in with the retaining wall. Mr. Oley stated that with the berming that would be provided on that elevation, the columns would not be visible from the street. 16. The Board encouraged the Applicant to utilize the services of an artist to provide the wrought iron fence desing. 17. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Rice and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to approve the shade structure subject to the extension of the shade structure 3-feet to the east, and the detailed scrolling on the shade structure ledger. Unanimously approved. 18. Boardmember Anderson stated he would be available to help Staff review any aspect of the final plans when they were resubmitted. Boardmember Campbell agreed. ~:,- G , B. Sign Ap.Jlroval 93-197; a request of JFK Memorial Hospital for approval of a deviation from the Master Sign Program and Sign Ordinance for the new JFK Sign Program at Plaza Tampico. 1. Chairman Harbison stated that Staff had received a request from the Applicant to continue this matter to a later date. As there was no objection of Staff or the Board, it was moved by Boardmember Anderson and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to continue the matter. 2. Planning Commissioner Elison questioned why the new signage couldn't continue to use the same concept as the existing monument sign. DRB3-3 3 Design Review Board Minutes March 3, 1993 3. Boardmember Campbell questioned why textcoat and plexiglass letters were always being used by the sign designer regardless of the project situation. C. Sign Approval 92-190; a request of Simon Motors for approval to install a new freestanding sign for the existing Simon Motors Car Dealership. I. 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. Staff informed the Board that the Simon Plaza project to the west of Simon Motors had failed to file an extension of time and therefore the project had expired. This would eliminate the potential visibility problem Simon Motors was expecting. 2. Boardmember Curtis asked if the sign had been lowered as it appeared in the submitted pictures. Staff stated the request had not been. changed. Discussion followed regarding the pictures. 3. . Staff reminded the Board that the Applicant had stated he was willing to remove some of the existing signs in exchange for the pylon sign. 4. Boardmember Rice stated his concern that Simon Motors had been a leading sales tax contributor as well as a very important part of La Quinta's growth. He felt that the sign on the corner may be objectional, but he strongly felt a compromise should be reached to help local businesses. 5. Boardmember Campbell stated his recollection of the Board's suggestion was that the Applicant was to demonstrate why a 12-foot high sign would not work. Mr. Skip Berg, representing Simon Motors stated his understanding was that he was to prove the Simon Plaza building would block the car sign. Mr. Berg further stated that this request may be unnecessary due to the loss of Simon Plaza's application. He suggested this matter be continued until the Simon Plaza issue was resolved. He went on to say that Mr. Simon had agreed to remove seven of the nine existing signs if this would help obtain approval of the request. He then asked Staff if it wasn't true that they could apply for two freestanding signs (one per street frontage) if all of the other signs were removed. Discussion followed regarding the sign requirements. 6. Mr. Berg then requested a continuance of the application and he would instruct his artists to change the pictures to prove a l2-foot high sign would not work and also talk with Mr. Simon regarding the Simon Plaza application. DRB3-3 4 Design Review Board Minutes March 3, 1993 7. Boardmember Campbell stated that if the Simon Motors tower were painted to be more contrasting, the Simon Motors sign would stand out more. Mr. Berg stated they wanted this signage removed also. 8. Boardmember Anderson clarified his request that the Applicant bring in graphics that prove why a 12-foot high sign would not be visible. 9. Planning Commissioner Elison stated this was a landscaping problem not an issue of height. 10. Chairman Harbison stated he agreed the palm trees were the problem. 11. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Curtis and seconded by Planning Commissioner Elison to continue this matter to a further date until the issue of Simon Plaza is resolved. Unanimously approved . D. Sign Approval 92-203; a request of Anchovie's Pizzeria for approval of an awning and sign. DRB3-3 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 Anderson asked Staff how far the awning extended in comparison to the present trellis. Staff explained it does not reach the columns. 3. Boardmember Curtis and Chairman Harbison asked for clarification on the height and color of the awning. 4. Boardmember Anderson stated his concern that the sign would be internally illuminated. He did not feel this was appropriate for the Village even though the sign was attractive, this could be setting a precedent. He felt this was an opportunity to use external illumination instead of fluorescent lighting. A discussion followed regarding what the members preferred in the Village. 5. Boardmember Anderson stated he felt the externally illuminated sign would give a cleaner view of the sign rather than an "X-ray' effect. Members discussed the differences between the externally and internally illuminated sign. 5 Design Review Board Minutes March 3, 1993 6. Mr. Ernest Brooks, Palm to Palms Awnings, representing the applicant stated he felt the externally illuminated lighting would became a spot light rather than an illumination of the sign. Boardmember Anderson stated that since the sign was recessed the lighting on the shade structure could accent the sign, where normally awnings protrude beyond the architecture of the building and the internal illumination would enhance the signs. 7. Mr. Brooks stated that the fabric was translucent and would glow. Members asked Mr. Brooks if he could build the awning and submit a detailed plan for both types of lighting. Mr. Brooks stated he would need to build the trough to hold the internally illuminated lighting during the construction of the awning. Mr. Brooks stated he would do this and at the next meeting members could visually look at both examples and determine which would be better. 8. Planning Commissioner ElIson asked how high the canopy was from the sidewalk. Mr. Brooks stated six feet. 9. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Rice and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to approve the awning structure as submitted with the lighting to be reviewed at the next meeting of April 7, 1993, and subject to Staff recommendations. Unanimously approved. E. Tentative Tract 23269; a request of Century Homes for approval of landscaping plans for a new model and the model complex. 4. DRB3-3 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 he personally preferred the diciduous trees. He then asked Staff if the trellis on the back of the new model was permanent or temporary. Mr. Bob Diehl of Century Homes stated it was permanent and for the model only. Boardmember Anderson stated that he preferred that the wood used for the trellis be a minimum of 3" X 3'. 3. Mr. Diehl, stated that he noted Staffs recommendation that additional trees be required and that on their master street tree plans for the project the second tree and third corner lot are provided and would be planted. Following a brief discussion regarding the landscaping pallette, Boardmember Anderson moved and Boardmember Rice seconded a motion to approve Tentative Tract 23269 landscaping plans as submitted. Unanimously approved. _\") . (] \J 6 Design Review Board Minutes March 3, 1993 F. Street Medians and Fronta.ge Road; a request of the City for review of landscaping plans for the frontage road along Washington Street south of Singing Palms Drive to the southern end of the Catholic Church. 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 Anderson stated he like the continued turf in front of the church, but something needed to be in front of the wall as soon as possible. 3, Mr. Tom McCormick, representing TKD Associates, landscape architects for the project, asked if there were any questions. Boardmember Curtis asked if the location at the end of the project was too narrow for the planting of trees. It could cause a problem with overhang into the street. Mr. McCormick stated the trees were high branching, single trunk trees to cause shading. A discussion followed regarding the type of trees used. 4. Chairman Harbison stated his concern for the amount of lawn area. He felt it should be reduced by half along Washington Street and additional ground cover on emitters should replace the turf. Boardmember Curtis suggested that a mow strip be used also. Discussion followed regarding problems with water overspray. 5. Boardmember Campbell asked if basket weave was to be used at the ends of the median islands. Mr. McCormick stated it was but could be open for discussion. It was decided that running bond would be utilized on Washington Street. 6. Following a discussion regarding setting a City signature, it was moved by Chairman Harbison and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to accept the plan as submitted with the turf being reduced by approximately half on Washington Street and the addition of a concrete mow strip. Unanimously approved. '.' - i..' IV. CONSENT CALENDAR Boardmember Curtis asked that the Minutes of January 13, 1993, be amended on Page 2, Item #10, to read, "Mr. Hurst stated there was ample parking for a one story structure and if a second story was added additional parking would be provided." Boardmember Anderson asked that Page 3, Item #12 be amended to read, "... .and the greatest concern is to see the parapets run back to the neon and it run continuously through the building. " Also that Page 3, Item #16.b. "tile" be changed to "style". In addition, Page 3, Item #18 be amended to include that Boardmember Wright, "Agreed that the above comments DRB3-3 7 Design Review Board Minutes March 3, 1993 were recommended as conditions.. There being no further changes to the Minutes of January 13, 1993 and February 3, 1993, Boardmember Anderson and Boardmember Rice moved and seconded to approve the Minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. V. OTHER Staff informed the member that the City Council had set a joint meeting between the Planning Commission, Design Review Board and themselves for sometime in April, 1993. Members would be informed later of the exact date. VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Boardmember Curtis and seconded by Boardmember Rice to adjourn to a regular meeting of the Design Review Board on April 7, 1993, at 5:30 P.M. This meeting of the La Quinta Design Review Board was adjourned at 7:30 P.M., March 3, 1993. DRB3-3 8