2008 03 11 PCCity of La Quinta
Planning Commission Agendas are now
4S`9 available on the City's Web Page
OF'CKY'9 @ www.la-guinta.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
MARCH 11, 2008
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT
REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2008-009
Beginning Minute Motion 2008-009
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
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meetings of February 12, 2008, and
February 26, 2008.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must
be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission
consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested
the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time.
Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a
public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the
approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s)
in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised
at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior
to the public hearing.
A. Item ....................
CP DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Applicant .............
City of La Quinta
Location ..............
Property located southeast of the Miles Avenue and
Washington Street intersections in the City of La Quinta.
Request ...............
Consideration of development agreement for a multi -use
commercial and residential project consisting of the
following: (i) a medical office/surgical facility; (ii) a
development containing sanctuary villas; (iii) two sit-
down restaurants; (iv) a mid -price suites hotel; (v) resort -
style condominium/casitas development; and (vi) two
single-family residential developments with forty (40)
homes restricted for sale to eligible buyers at an
affordable housing cost.
Action ................
Resolution 2008-
B. Item .................... SIGN PROGRAM 2008-1227
Applicant ............. Imperial Sign Company, Inc.
Location .............. 78-115 Calle Estado.
Request ............... Consideration of a Proposed Sign Program for permanent
business identification signage for Plaza Estado.
Action ................ Minute Motion 2008-
VI. BUSINESS ITEM:
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Review of City Council meeting of March 4, 2008.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to
be held on March 25, 2008, at 7:00 p.m.
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare
that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of
Tuesday, March 11, 2008 was posted on the outside entry to the Council
Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post
Office, on Friday, March 7, 2008.
DATED: March 7, 2008
&44' &��
CAROLY�LKER Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
Public Notices
The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special
equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at
777-7123, twenty-four (24 hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations
will be made.
If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning
Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City
Clerk's office at 777-7123. A one (1) week notice is required.
If background materials is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a
Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all
documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for
distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00
p.m. meeting.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
February 12, 2008 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Alderson who asked Commissioner Engle to lead the
flag salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Katie Barrows, Jim Engle, Paul Quill, and
Chairman Ed Alderson. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Barrows/Quill to excuse Commissioner Wilkinson. Unanimously
approved.
C. Staff present: Planning Director Les Johnson, Assistant City Attorney
Michael Houston, Planning Manager David Sawyer, Principal Engineer Ed
Wimmer, Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen, Assistant Planner Eric
Ceja, Management Assistant Betty Sawyer.
'li 1114[NZK9]LTA ILTA 1:401k=i•.e"
III. PRESENTATION: None.
IV. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
V. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of
January 22, 2008. There being no corrections by the Commissioners,
Chairman Alderson asked that Page 6, Item 17 be amended to correctly
spell Carlos Partida's name; and, Page 7, Item 26, reworded to say,
"Staff has proposed that if the developer does what is required within 60
days, he will be allowed to obtain his building permits. If he doesn't
meet the requirements, they will not be allowed to obtain their permits."
There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Barrows/Quill to approve the minutes as corrected.
Unanimously approved.
P:\Reports - PC\2008\3-11-08\PC Minutes 2-12-08.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
February 12, 2008
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Sign Program 2008-1226; a request of Imperial Sign Company for
consideration of a Sign Program for Permanent Business Identification
Signage for the La Quinta Business Center located at 43-576 Washington
Street.
1 . Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report for the continued item. Assistant Planner Eric Ceja
presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of
which is on file in the Planning Department
2. Chairman Alderson asked for clarification on the location of the
east elevation signs. Staff clarified the sign program identifies
the location of all signs. Chairman Alderson asked about the
monument sign where the address numbers are identified. The
size of the print should be of an appropriate size that would be
visible to emergency vehicles.
3. There being no further questions of staff and there being no
applicant, Chairman Alderson closed the public hearing.
4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Quill/Barrows to adopt Minute Motion 2008-004
approving Sign Program 2008-1226, as recommended and
amended:
a. Condition added: Letters shall be of a reasonable size.
Unanimously approved.
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Appeal 2008-001; a request of Bill Rossworn for consideration of an
appeal of a Notice of Public Nuisance Determination for various violations
on a vacant lot with no primary structure for the property located at 52-
275 Avenida Martinez.
2
Planning Commission Minutes
February 12, 2008
1. Chairman Alderson asked for the staff report. Senior Code
Compliance Anthony Moreno presented the information contained
in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning
Department.
2. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Quill asked if the Commission granted this as a
public nuisance how long will it take to take action and could the
City lien the property. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston
said the motion would be to deny the appeal and uphold the
determination of Notice of Public Nuisance. If the applicant does
not comply with the nuisance abatement, the City prosecutor
would obtain a court order to remedy the violations, this would be
a lien against the property. It would also be a court order which
would allow the City to foreclose on the property, but this is rarely
ever needed. It is a severe remedy and will cloud the title on the
property.
3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson
asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr.
Bill Rossworn, 78-174 Calico Glen, Bermuda Dunes, explained that
when he bought the property it consisted of three lots with a small
house. When he applied to the City to build on the three lots the
City required them to merge the lots and create two lots which he
did. He had a buyer for the sale but it fell out. He has the
property up for sale and it is listed with the pool. When he has
received notice to fix the property, he has done so. He does have
plans to construct the house, and would like to retain the pool
until such time as the property sells. He recognizes he has the
liability for any injuries occurring on the property, but he is willing
to maintain the fence and pool.
4. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of the
applicant. Commissioner Engle asked if the pool would have to be
removed if the property is sold. Mr. Rossworn stated no, he
would only have to replaster the pool and replace the pool
equipment.
5. Commissioner Barrows asked if the fence prevents access to the
pool. Mr. Rossworn stated there is no opening. Staff stated they
have people either jumping over or tearing down the fence. The
concern is to the neighboring residents and the Sheriff's
Department. It makes a good skating area for the kids.
k
Planning Commission Minutes
February 12, 2008
6. Commissioner Engle asked how long it has been in this condition.
Staff stated 2005 is when staff started issuing citations on the
property for nuisance violations. Staff initially had no objections
believing the property would be sold and the problem would solve
itself. Commissioner Engle asked who has the liability if someone
is hurt. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston stated it is the
applicant's responsibility. Commissioner Engle asked if there was
a reasonable time frame that could be given for the applicant to
sell the property. Staff stated it has already been over two years.
7. Commissioner Barrows asked what time frame the applicant would
request to allow him to sell the property. Mr. Rossworn stated he
is receiving calls and it is his hope something will happen soon.
8. Chairman Alderson stated he visited the site and he would be hard
pressed that the pool would be salvageable if the property even
sold now and questioned why the applicant would want the
liability the pool is creating. He cannot believe the pool has any
economic value to any potential buyer. The tree has caused
damage by the root growth. In addition, the second lot has a lot
of debris that needs to be cleaned up. Staff stated there is a
second nuisance case on that lot.
9. Mr. Billy Cave, stated the property has appealed to him and he is
interested in purchasing the property. He believes he could repair
the pool. Living in the area he is around the property and sees the
kids that are gaining access to the pool. If you put ridges in the
pool, it will deter any of the skaters from using it. He could install
a fence that would prevent people from entering the pool. In
regard to the debris, he can see where the neighbors have dumped
their debris on this lot. This is a tough situation on a landowner
and he believes it would be best to allow the property owner time
to sell the property. He believes he could remedy all the City's
concerns to keep the pool in place and safe. Staff asked if he was
a prospective buyer. Mr. Cave stated he was, but at the time it
was in escrow with someone else. Staff asked if he was currently
trying to buy the property and if he had any financial investment in
18
Planning Commission Minutes
February 12, 2008
the property. Mr. Cave stated he just became aware of the
property falling out of escrow, but he has not secured any loans or
made any offers on the property. Staff stated the suggestions
offered by the applicant do not appear to be any remedial
solutions. If it were backfilled, the pool is still salvageable and the
waterproof cap would enable them to continue to sell the property.
10. There being no questions of the applicant, Chairman Alderson
asked if there was any other public comment. There being no
public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation
portion and opened the item for Commission discussion.
11. Commissioner Engle stated the applicant has had over two years
to remedy the problem and it is a nuisance and should be resolved.
12. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Quill/Engle to adopt Minute Motion 2008-005
denying the appeal and uphold the determination that a Public
Nuisance exists at the aforementioned address as referenced in
Case No. 07-5797.
B. Modification by Applicant 2008-008; a request of Trans West Housing,
Inc., for consideration of a request to modify Condition of Approval No.
19 requiring off -site improvements as a part of the first phase of
development for the property located on the east side of Monroe Street,
'/4 mile south of Avenue 54.
1. Chairman Alderson asked for the staff report. Principal Planner
Andrew Mogensen presented the information contained in the
staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning
Department. Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer explained the bonding
requirements that staff was requesting is to ensure all
improvements were completed and if the City is required to
enforce the bond, the applicant would be liable for the costs and
expenses for that.
2. Chairman Alderson asked first, if there was an existing bond in
place and was this a request to extend that bond; and second, if
the applicant was responsible for the costs associated with the
improvements. Staff stated this action differs because this
request is for a modification of a site development permit
condition. So there is no Subdivision Improvement Agreement in
place and therefore no bonds have been required. Therefore,
5
Planning Commission Minutes
February 12, 2008
currently the City does not have any bonds for the improvements
under a site development permit. Chairman Alderson asked if the
extent of the improvements was for the frontage of Monroe
Street. Staff stated it is for the frontage along Monroe which
fronts the Saddle Club only. Staff stated all the improvements in
the site development permit would need to be evaluated as far as
cost estimates and whatever the Commission would want to add
would be considered.
3. Commissioner Quill asked if the final tract map included all the
improvements to Monroe Street. Staff stated it is a tentative
map and not a phased map for the Griffin Ranch and there are no
bonds for the street improvements. Commissioner Quill clarified
that this request is for the Saddle Club only and there are no
bonds in place for Avenue 54 or Monroe Street that fronts the
Griffin Ranch. Staff stated this application is for bonding for the
frontage of the Saddle Club and not the tract map.
4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson
asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms.
Marty Butler, representing Trans West Housing Inc., explained
their request and stated they would be building the caretakers
home in the first phase. She stated they have no problem with
bonding for Monroe Street.
5. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of the
applicant. Commissioner Quill clarified they had no problem with
bonding for the Monroe Street improvements. Ms. Butler stated
that was correct.
6. Chairman Alderson stated it was his understanding they currently
have tenants with horses that requires them to have the
amenities constructed. Ms. Butler stated that was correct.
7. There being no further questions of the applicant and no other
public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public
participation portion and opened the matter for Commission
discussion.
8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Barrows/Quill to adopt Minute Motion 2008-010
approving Modification by Applicant 2008-008, as recommended
and amended:
3
Planning Commission Minutes
February 12, 2008
a. Condition No. 7: If the bonds were executed and additional
costs were incurred, the applicant shall be responsible for
those costs.
Unanimously approved.
Vill. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
E�Ki]IT, lIT, IRl-itoP►DIM 1119:1kTA& l
A. Staff gave a review of the Council meeting of February 5, 2008.
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Barrows/ Quill to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting to be held on February 26, 2008. This regular meeting was adjourned at 8:06
p.m. on January 22, 2008.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Management Assistant
City of La Quinta, California
7
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
February 26, 2008 7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:03
p.m. by Chairman Alderson who asked Commissioner Quill to lead the
flag salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Katie Barrows, Paul Quill, Robert Wilkinson, and
Chairman Ed Alderson. Absent: Commissioner Jim Engle.
C. Staff present: Planning Director Les Johnson, Assistant City Attorney
Michael Houston, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Principal Planner Andy
Mogensen, Associate Planner Jay Wuu, Assistant Planner Eric Ceja,
Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. PRESENTATION: None.
IV. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
V. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. The minutes of February 12, 2008 were unavailable for this meeting and
will be reviewed at the March 11, 2008 meeting.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 2007-901; a request of Washington 1 1 1, Ltd.
for consideration of development plans for a parking lot, retaining wall,
and landscaping within Washington Park Commercial Center which is
bounded by Highway 111, Washington Street, Avenue 47, and Adams
Street, within the Washington Park Retail Center.
1. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Planning Department.
P:\Reports - PC\2008\3-11-08\CW -PC Minutes 2-26-08.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 2008
2. Chairman Alderson asked where the trees were located as
discussed in Condition of Approval No. 51. Principal Planner
Mogensen explained where they were and the modifications the
applicant had requested.
3. Commissioner Barrows asked if a sidewalk would be occurring
along Washington. Principal Planner Mogensen said there is
currently a sidewalk on Washington. Commissioner Barrows said
she was concerned about walkable opportunities as they are not
available in some of the large shopping centers. She added she
appreciated the condition of adding a sidewalk.
4. Commissioner Barrows asked about the shade requirements. She
was glad the applicant was going to use the Palo Verde tree as
they work well for parking lot shading. Principal Planner Mogensen
referred to part of the Municipal Code describing the percentage of
shading and growth requirements of the parking lot trees.
Commissioner Barrows asked if there was a valuation of individual
trees. Principal Planner Mogensen said there was a statement put
on the plan, by the landscape architect, stating these trees would
meet the requirements.
5. Commissioner Barrows asked if the water feature met the new
landscaping ordinance requirements including the water source.
Principal Planner Mogensen said this feature was proposed before
the new ordinance went into effect. He added he did not currently
have information on the source of the water but the applicant
could answer that question.
6. Commission Quill asked about the sidewalk on La Quinta Centre
Drive to gain access to Lowe's or Target. Principal Planner
Mogensen said there is no sidewalk currently along the side of
Lowe's or Target, but the plans submitted does identify a sidewalk
along this portion of the project.
7. Commissioner Quill asked if there was any reasonable access from
Avenue 47 into the area for pedestrians. Principal Planner
Mogensen said yes there is a sidewalk along Avenue 47.
Commissioner Quill asked if there was direct access into any of
these structures from either Washington Street or Avenue 47.
Principal Planner Mogensen replied the plans were not clear and
staff would have to evaluate the situation at the plan check level.
2
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 2008
8. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about the size of the future water
feature. On the site plan it showed something significantly smaller
than what was shown on the landscape conceptual plan. He
wondered what the water feature would look like. Principal
Planner Mogensen said the water feature would be brought back
through the final landscaping plans and reviewed at that level. It
would be brought back to the Architecture and Landscaping
Review Committee, but staff did not have an actual set size.
Planning Director Les Johnson said all water features had to use a
non -potable water source according to the new code and that it
was brought before the Commission to provide awareness there
would be a water feature incorporated into the project. He said it
would probably be similar to the water feature in front of Cosi's
Restaurant. The applicant would be able to expand upon this
subject.
9. Chairman Alderson complimented Principal Planner Mogensen on
alerting the Commission to any concerns that might be brought up
and it was appreciated. He asked if the applicant was okay with
the changes made. Principal Planner Mogensen said the applicant
was present to answer those questions.
10. Chairman Alderson asked if they would be seeing the water
feature design. Principal Planner Mogensen explained the
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee would see them,
but not the Planning Commission.
11. Chairman Alderson asked about the bike route in the parking lot.
Principal Planner Mogensen said the condition was included to
allow for the possibility of adding bike racks in the future.
12. Chairman Alderson said the Commission had received a letter from
Dick and Bonnie Holt, 47105 Via Antibes. He referred to
Condition of Approval No. 54, regarding lighting fixtures, and
asked if the Holt's were aware of the change of condition.
Principal Planner Mogensen said he did not know if the Holt's were
aware of the 18 foot height requirement. Previous phases were
conditioned to be 18 feet in height on the perimeter.
13. Chairman Alderson asked about Condition Of Approval No. 26
which references a dustless groundcover. Principal Planner
Mogensen said gravel is considered to be a dustless ground cover
3
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 2008
and would be similar to what was used at the JC Penney's site.
Chairman Alderson wanted to be assured there would be dust
control in the unpaved area. Principal Planner Mogensen said a
larger caliper stone would be used for dust control.
14. There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson
asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. .
15. Applicant's representative, Bill Sanchez, Washington 1 1 1, Ltd,
80-618 Declaration Avenue, Indio, gave an explanation of what
they were going to be planting to assure the recommended shade
requirements. He added they do not have the water feature
designed yet, but were hoping to incorporate it into a monument
feature. He also addressed the question of the sidewalks and used
the report attachments to show where they would be located. He
said there is currently no sidewalk access on Avenue 47 and none
proposed but they would be working with staff to modify that.
They will also be working with staff to provide dust stabilization.
16. Chairman Alderson asked if there are any questions of the
applicant.
17. Commissioner Quill asked the applicant if there was a problem
with providing access from Avenue 47 and Washington Street. Mr.
Sanchez said no. Commission Quill said it would be a problem
walking down Avenue 47 without having to use a shortcut from
Avenue 47 and Washington Street. Mr. Sanchez said they'd much
rather have people use a sidewalk than a shortcut.
18. Commissioner Barrows said it would be conducive to include a
sidewalk in that area. Mr. Sanchez said there would be a bus stop
in that area and they had planned to provide access.
19. Commissioner Quill commented on the utilization of bike racks in
shopping centers.
20. Chairman Alderson asked if the Commission was going to see a
grading plan with storm drains. Planning Director Johnson said it
would not come back to the Commission but it would go through
the Public Works Department.
21. There being no further questions of the applicant, Chairman
Alderson asked if there was any public comment.
E
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 2008
22. There being no public comment, the public hearing was closed and
the item was opened for Commission discussion.
23. Commissioner Barrows requested the applicant try to be creative
with the water feature and encouraged him to eliminate the water
feature all together. She added she appreciated the applicant's
favorability to add walkability to the project.
24. Commissioner Quill agreed the water feature was for no other use
than a monument and agreed it should be eliminated. He
described some of the problems involved with the maintenance of
a water feature. He agreed with Commission Barrow's suggestion
and also in adding a condition for additional sidewalks.
25. Commissioner Wilkinson was concerned about the retaining walls,
sidewalks, and the slopes with regard to ADA requirements.
Planning Director Johnson clarified the retaining walls were really
screening walls and would not be an ADA hinderance.
26. Chairman Alderson asked staff about the retaining wall
landscaping and the source of irrigation. Planning Director Johnson
said the landscaping was at the back of Lowe's and there was
sufficient area to add vines irrigated through a bubbler system.
Principal Planner Mogensen said there was existing landscaping.
27. Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant had access to that water.
Planning Director Johnson said it would not be difficult to add.
28. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if this was a screening wall versus
a retaining wall. Staff replied it was a retaining wall.
29. Commissioner Barrows asked if the 18 foot height requirement
would satisfy the lighting concerns. Principal Planner Mogensen
said it would.
30. Chairman Alderson said the lighting seemed to affect houses
across Avenue 47 and it appeared there were four or five
offending light standards. He asked if these could be hooded.
Principal Planner Mogensen said there were two lights currently in
place along La Quinta Center Drive (which were circled on the
Power Point presentation) that have been reversed to face away
from the street. The applicant would do the same to all lights
5
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 2008
along Avenue 47. Planning Director Johnson said there was a
photometric plan which would be reviewed by staff and if
additional screens, or hoods, were needed staff would work with
the applicant.
31. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Barrows/Quill to adopt Resolution 2008-008
approving Site Development Permit 2007-901, as recommended
and amended:
a. Condition added: Water feature be eliminated.
b. Condition added: Applicant to provide sidewalk access
along Washington Street and Avenue 47 along parking lot.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson, and
Chairman Alderson. NOES: None. ABSENT:
Commissioner Engle. ABSTAIN: None.
B. Sign Application 2006-1022 Amendment No. 1; a request of Accretive
La Quinta Partners, LLC for consideration of a Sign Program Amendment
for permanent business identification signage for the La Quinta Medical
Center located at 47-647 Caleo Bay Drive, East of Washington Stret,
North of Avenue 48, South of Lake La Quinta Drive.
1 . Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report. Associate Planner Jay Wuu presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Planning Department.
2. Chairman Alderson asked if there were questions of staff.
3. Chairman Alderson asked if the sign construction and configuration
were within the legal limits and were the same as those currently
on the building. Associate Planner Wuu replied yes. Chairman
Alderson asked if the applicant was asking for any special
consideration. Associate Planner Wuu replied no.
4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson
asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
5. Applicant's representative, Chris Bush, 474 South Westbridge
Circle, Anaheim, said she was available to answer any questions.
T
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 2008
6. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of the
applicant.
7. There being no questions of the applicant, Chairman Alderson
asked if there was any other public comment.
8. There being no public comment, the public hearing was closed and
the item was opened for Commission discussion.
9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Barrows/Quill to adopt Minute Motion 2008-007
approving Sign Application 2006-1022, Amendment No. 1 as
recommended. Unanimously approved.
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Modification By Applicant 2008-009; a request of Stamko Development
Company for consideration of a request to modify an existing sign
program to allow for neon elements to be incorporated into tenant sign
design for Parcel 1, Centre at La Quinta, located at the southwest corner
of Dune Palms Road and Highway 111.
1 . Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report. Assistant Planner Eric Ceja presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Planning Department.
2. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff.
3. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Alderson asked if the
applicant would like to address the Commission.
4. Mr. Russ Beckner, representing Stamko Development said he did
not realize the Sign Program did not allow neon without a certain
type of modification. He wanted to let the Commission know
Stamko is proud to have this tenant and happy with the sign.
5. Mr. Carl Mc Peters, (potential tenant for Jumpin Juice & Java)
81250 Chiraco Avenue, Indio thanked Stamko Corporation and
the Commission for the opportunity to address them. He stated
this is a corporate sign. He thought the sign was very attractive
7
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 2008
and his research showed neon signs were very well accepted. He
thanked the staff for their due diligence and said they will comply
with the conformity of the sign per the standards of the City's
Municipal Code.
6. Chairman Alderson asked if there was any other public comment,
there being none, the public hearing was closed and the item was
opened for Commission discussion.
7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Barrows/Quill to adopt Minute Motion 2008-008
accepting the Modification by Applicant 2008-009 as
recommended. Unanimously approved.
Vill. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Planning Director Les Johnson gave a review of the Council meeting of
February 19, 2008.
B. Planning Director Les Johnson gave an overview on implementation of
the Phase I Golf Plan which had been postponed to the April 15`h City
Council meeting.
C. Chairman Alderson asked what date the Eden Rock hearing was
postponed to and was told April 1, 2008.
D. Pedestrian Issues:
1. Commissioner Barrows asked about Commission Quill's Comments
on the sidewalk/walkability issue and asked if this could be
incorporated as a standard condition in future commercial
developments; especially along Highway 1 1 1 . She was interested
in what ways the Commission could address this issue. Planning
Director Johnson said he appreciated this subject had been
brought up on this project. Staff would be looking at this issue in
future reviews and a standard would be used if practical. Staff is
interested in the City being pedestrian -friendly, and is open to
guidance from the Commission, but he asked if at this time the
f3
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 2008
Planning Commission would continue to have trust in the Public
Works and Planning Departments to look at these issues. If the
Commission wanted to see something more definitive staff would
certainly look at that.
2. Commissioner Barrows said she was interested in what other
communities had done and wondered if there were standards that
could be used. Planning Director Johnson said there are standards
but they are more institutional, such as ADA. One of the things
they hoped to do with Mr. Sanchez' project was to make it a
priority on how to link the sidewalks to make them more walkable
and useable.
3. Commissioner Quill said he had seen various suggestions by urban
planners about pedestrian access, even including big box retail
centers. He said the Commission tried to force JC Penney, with
very little cost, to make the site more accessible to the folks in the
nearby apartments, without success. Now the tenants have to
walk around to obtain access to the JC Penney site, because the
Commission's suggestion was overruled. He said he would like to
see a standardized way to handle pedestrian accessibility. Planning
Director Johnson said there are some great resources, such as
those presented by CVAG about a year and a half ago, with
regards to walkability. They actually gave the City a compliment
on the elevated crosswalks. Staff is researching ways to
encourage walkability, as well as a strategic plan, to encourage
walkability in the Village. Staff is going to enhance what we have
been encouraging in the past few years and certainly wants to see
the opportunity of a more green -friendly community. The City
wants to encourage energy savings by encouraging people to walk
versus driving in the City. He asked if staff could do some further
research and report back, on this discussion Item, in the next 60
or 90 days.
4. Chairman Alderson said there might be a problem with
standardizing walkability access due to differences in the project.
5. Commissioner Quill suggested standardizing walkability/
accessibility be added as a requirement for projects on the major
thoroughfares as it could affect how the applicants lay out their
sites.
W
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 2008
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Alderson/Barrows to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a
regular meeting to be held on March 11, 2008. This regular meeting was adjourned at
8:03 p.m. on February 26, 2008.
Respectfully submitted,
Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
10
PH #A
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: MARCH 11, 2008
CASE NO.: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2003-006, AMENDMENT #3
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND
CP DEVELOPMENT LA QUINTA, LLC
LOCATION: THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILES AVENUE AND
WASHINGTON STREET.
APPLICANT: THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND CP DEVELOPMENT LA QUINTA,
LLC
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-436 AND SUBSEQUENT
ADDENDUM WERE CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON
FEBRUARY 5, 2002, UNDER RESOLUTION 2002-07 AND
RESOLUTION 2003-034 ON JUNE 3, 2003, RESPECTIVELY. THE
AMENDMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DO NOT
INVOLVE CHANGES TO THE PROJECT ITSELF. THERE HAVE
BEEN NO CHANGES IN CIRCUMSTANCES OR NEW
INFORMATION REGARDING THE PROJECT OR ITS SETTING
THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. THEREFORE, PURSUANT TO
SECTION 15162 OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, THE CITY
HAS CONCLUDED THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW IS NECESSARY IN CONNECTION WITH THE REVIEW OF
THE AMENDMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
CURRENT GENERAL
PLAN/ZONING
DESIGNATION: TOURIST COMMERCIAL, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND
PARK
BACKGROUND:
Site Background
The 50-acre site is situated at the southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Washington
Street, a major entry point to the City. On March 11, 2003, the Planning Commission
reviewed and recommended approval of the following on the subject site:
A. A mid -priced 134 unit suites type hotel;
B. 132 Condominium Casitas type units;
C. Two restaurants;
D. A medical office/clinic facility;
E. A development containing 30 privately -owned Villas development, and
F. 13 courtyard cluster villas;
G. 54 residential units containing 29 courtyard cluster and 25 perimeter homes of
which 40 units will be moderate -income affordable units
The City's Redevelopment Agency and CP Development La Quinta, LLC (the
"Developer") entered into a Disposition and Development Agreement for the
development of this project (the "DDA"). Concurrently with the execution of the DDA,
the City and the Developer entered into a Development Agreement concerning the
development of the project, as provided by the La Quinta Zoning Code and State
statutes. A Development Agreement is a binding agreement between both parties for
the purpose of establishing certainty in the development.
Transfer of Land and Improvement Interests Prior to Project Completion
The developer, CP Development La Quinta, LLC, has completed construction of the
mid -priced suites -type hotel. In order to secure permanent financing for the hotel, the
lender required the underlying real property (the "Hotel Property") to be transferred to a
single -purpose entity. Therefore, the developer created the single -purpose entity, "L.
Q. Hospitality, LLC." On February 28, 2008, the Redevelopment Agency consented to
the developer's execution of an Assignment and Assumption Agreement, which
transferred the Hotel Property and all rights and obligations under the DA from CP to L.
Q. Hospitality.
The lender is also requiring certain DA modifications as they relate specifically to the
Hotel Property. The draft Amendment ("Amendment No. 3") modifies DA Section 6.3
to allow the hotel to continue operation in the event of a foreclosure action; and
modifies DA Section 7.2 to allow transfers to an encumbrancer, or to a purchaser at a
trustee's sale, in the event of a foreclosure.
The City Attorney has, in conjunction with the Developer, prepared the Amendment.
Public Noticing
This Amendment was advertised in The Desert Sun on March 1, 2008 in a 1 /8 display
ad. As of this writing, no correspondence has been received regarding this project.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
The findings necessary to recommend approval of Amendment #3 to the Development
Agreement can be made, as noted in the attached Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2008- , recommending to the City
Council approval of the Development Agreement Amendment #3.
Prepared by:
L�12.e_J Z—g�LSZ
Deborah Powell, Management Assistant
Attachments:
1. Development Agreement, Amendment #3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND
CP DEVELOPMENT LA QUINTA, LLC
CASE NO.: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2003-006,
AMENDMENT NO. 3
APPLICANT: CP DEVELOPMENT LA QUINTA, LLC
WHEREAS, on or about December 18, 2003, the City of La Quinta
("City") and CP Development La Quinta, LLC (the "Developer"), entered into
Development Agreement 2003-006, pursuant to California Government Code Section
65864 at seq. and Section 9.250.030 of the City's Municipal Code (the "Development
Agreement"); and
WHEREAS, City staff and the Developer have negotiated an Amendment
to the Development Agreement that would revise the transfer and assignment
provisions set forth in the Development Agreement (the "Development Agreement
Amendment"); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City (the "Planning
Commission") did on the 11th of March, 2008, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider the Amendment; and
WHEREAS, Environmental Assessment 2001-436 and subsequent
Addendum were certified by the City Council on February 5, 2002, under Resolution
2002-07 and Resolution 2003-034 on June 3, 2003. The Development Agreement
Amendment does not involve changes to the project itself. There have been no
changes in circumstances or new information regarding the project or its setting that
would require the preparation of a subsequent environmental review. Therefore,
pursuant to Section 15162 of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California
Environmental Qualify Act, the City has concluded that no further environmental
review is necessary in connection with the review of the Development Agreement
Amendment.
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 make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify
a recommendation for approval of said Development Agreement Amendment:
1. The proposed Development Agreement Amendment is consistent with the
objectives, policies, general land uses and programs of the City of La Quinta
General Plan and Specific Plan 2001-055.
Planning Commission Resolution 2008-
Development Agreement 2003-006, Amendment #3
CP Development La Quinta, LLC
Adopted: March 11, 2008
2. The land uses authorized and regulations prescribed for the Development
Agreement Amendment are compatible with the zoning and its related
regulations applicable to the property.
3. The proposed Development Agreement Amendment conforms with public
convenience and the general welfare by providing for extensive public
improvements and conforms to good land use practice by encouraging a long-
range, comprehensive approach to the development of a major hotel, services,
and mixed residential complexes.
4. Approval of this Development Agreement Amendment will not be detrimental to
the health, safety, and general welfare since adequate provisions have been
made in previous City approvals to provide for necessary and desirable
improvements which are incorporated herein.
5. Approval of this Development Agreement Amendment will not adversely affect
the orderly development of the subject or surrounding property, nor the
preservation of area -wide property values, but rather will enhance them by
encouraging planned, phased growth.
6. Consideration of the Development Agreement Amendment has been
accomplished pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864 et seq.
and the City of La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.250.030, which governs
Development Agreements.
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 recommend approval to the City Council of the Development
Agreement Amendment for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 11th day of March, 2008, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
Planning Commission Resolution 2008-
Development Agreement 2003-006, Amendment #3
CP Development La Quinta, LLC
Adopted: March 11, 2008
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
EDWARD L. ALDERSON, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
LES JOHNSON, Planning Director
City of La Quinta, California
ATTACHMENT #1
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED
MAIL TO
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Attn: City Clerk
Space Above This Line for Recorder's Use
(Exempt from Recording Fee per Gov't Code § 6103)
AMENDMENT NO.3 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Amendment No.
3") is made and entered into as of , 2008 by and between THE CITY OF
LA QUINTA, a California municipal corporation and charter city organized and existing under
the laws of the State of California ("City"), and L.Q. HOSPITALITY, LLC, a California limited
liability company ("Owner").
RECITALS:
A. On or about December 18, 2003, the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
("Agency") and CP Development, LLC, a California limited liability company ("CP") entered
into that certain Disposition and Development Agreement (the "Original DDA" ), pursuant to
which the Agency sold to CP that certain real property located southeast of the Miles Avenue
and Washington Street intersection in the City of La Quinta, California 92253 (the "Property")
and CP agreed to construct, complete, and operate thereon a mixed use project containing a
medical office/surgical facility, a development containing sanctuary villas, a mid -price suites
hotel, a resort -style condominium/casitas development, two (2) sit-down restaurants, and two (2)
single-family residential developments, with forty (40) of the single-family homes restricted for
sale to Eligible Buyers at an Affordable Housing Cost (collectively, the "Original Project").
B. Concurrently with the execution of the Original DDA, CP and the City entered
into that certain Development Agreement which was recorded in the Official Records of the
County Recorder for the County of Riverside on January 5, 2004 as Instrument No. 2004-
0005256, and amended by that certain Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement executed
on or about October 28, 2004 and recorded in the Official Records of the County Recorder for
the County of Riverside on November 8, 2004 as Instrument No. 2004-0885063, and by that
certain Amendment No. 2 to Development Agreement executed on or about November 17, 2005
and recorded in the Official Records of the County Recorder for the County of Riverside on
December 19, 2005, as Instrument No. 2005-1045418 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the
"DA").
C. On or about August 15, 2007, Agency and CP entered into that certain Partial
Termination of Right of Reverter, Power of Termination, and Amended and Restated Option
Agreement ("Partial Termination"), pursuant to which Agency terminated, with respect to the
882/015610-0085
882678.02 a02/06/08 -t-
Hotel Property, (i) Agency's right of reverter and power of termination pursuant to the Original
DDA and the Grant Deed, which was recorded in the Official Records as Instrument No. 2004-
0979137, and (ii) the Amended and Restated Option Agreement, which was recorded against the
Hotel Property on October 24, 2006 in the Official Records as Instrument No. 2006-0780202.
The Partial Termination was recorded in the Official Records on August 20, 2007 as Instrument
No. 2007-0535552.
D. On or about January 29, 2008, CP completed construction of the mid -price suites
hotel portion of the Project ("Hotel") on that portion of the Property described on Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (hereinafter the "Hotel Property".)
E. After completing construction of the Hotel on the Hotel Property, CP conveyed
the Hotel Property to Owner.
F. Owner has identified permanent financing for the Hotel, however, as a condition
to making the loan for such permanent financing, the lender thereunder has required certain
modifications to the DA as it relates to the Hotel Property.
G. In order to facilitate permanent financing for the Hotel, Owner and the City now
wish to modify certain terms set forth in the DA as provided herein. Unless defined herein to the
contrary, all capitalized terms in this Amendment No. 3 shall have the meanings ascribed in the
DA.
AGREEMENT:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated
herein by this reference, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:
The DA is hereby amended as follows:
1. Section 6.3 of the DA is hereby modified, as it relates to the Hotel Property to provide
that if any mortgagee acquires title to the Hotel Property, whether via foreclosure or deed in lieu
of foreclosure, said mortgagee shall have the right to continue to operate the Hotel on the Hotel
Property. Any subsequent purchaser of the Hotel Property, whether such purchase be before, at
or after a foreclosure shall similarly have the right to continue to operate the Hotel on the Hotel
Property. Such operation of the Hotel by a mortgagee or a subsequent purchaser shall be in
conformity with all provisions of the DA, and all applicable laws of the City and any other
jurisdiction having authority over the Hotel and/or the Hotel Property, and the mortgagee or
subsequent purchaser shall be deemed to have assumed all of Owner's obligations under the DA.
2. The transfer restrictions set forth in section 7.2 of the DA shall not be applicable to any of
the following transfers: (a) a transfer of the Hotel Property to the encumbrancer under the deed
of trust securing the permanent financing for the Hotel, whether the transfer occurs as the result
of a foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, (b) a transfer of the Hotel Property to any
purchaser at the trustee's sale in the event of foreclosure, or (c) a transfer of the Hotel Property to
882/015610-0085 882678.02 a02/06/08 -2-
any successors in interest who acquire title to the Hotel Property from any party identified in
subparagraphs (a) and (b) above.
3. Owner shall reimburse City for all of the costs City incurs or has incurred to negotiate,
prepare and process this Amendment No. 3.
4. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Amendment No. 3, all of the terms and
conditions of the DA shall remain in full force and effect.
5. In the event of any action between or amongst the parties hereto seeking enforcement of
any of the terms and conditions to this Amendment No. 3, the prevailing party in such action
shall be awarded its reasonable costs and expenses, including without limitation its expert
witness fees and reasonable attorney's fees.
6. This Amendment No. 3 shall be construed according to its fair meaning and as if
prepared by all of the parties hereto.
7. This Amendment No. 3 shall be governed by the internal laws of the State of California
and any question arising hereunder shall be construed or determined according to such law. The
Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Riverside, or such other
appropriate court in such county, shall have exclusive jurisdiction of any litigation between the
parties concerning this Amendment No. 3. Service of process on City shall be made in
accordance with California law. Service of process on Owner shall be made in any manner
permitted by California law and shall be effective whether served inside or outside California.
8. Time is of the essence of this Amendment No. 3 and of each and every term and
provision hereof.
9. A waiver of a provision hereof, or modification of any provision herein contained, shall
be effective only if said waiver or modification is in writing, and signed by City and Owner. No
waiver of any breach or default by any party hereto shall be considered to be a waiver of any
breach or default unless expressly provided herein or in the waiver.
10. This Amendment No. 3 may be executed in counterparts, each of which, when this
Amendment No. 3 has been signed by all the parties hereto, shall be deemed an original, and
such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument.
11. The person(s) executing this Amendment No. 3 on behalf of each of the parties hereto
represent and warrant that (i) such party is duly organized and existing, (ii) they are duly
authorized to execute and deliver this Amendment No. 3 on behalf of said party, (iii) by so
executing this Amendment No. 3 such party is formally bound to the provisions of this
Amendment No. 3, and (iv) the entering into this Amendment No. 3 does not violate any
provision of any other agreement to which such party is bound.
12. Except as modified herein, the DA remains in full force and effect as written. In the
event of a conflict between the terms of the DA and the terms of the Amendment No. 3, this
Amendment No. 3 shall control.
882/015610-0085 882678.02 a02/06/08 -3-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Owner each hereby represents that it has read this
Amendment No. 3, understands it, and hereby executes this Amendment No. 3 to be effective as
of the day and year first written above.
Date: 2008
11:
"Owner"
L.Q. HOSPITALITY, LLC, a California
limited liability company
By: Equity Directions, Inc.
Its: Manager
By:
Dennis French
Its: President
By: Oliphant Enterprises, Inc.
Its: Manager
By:
Richard Oliphant
Its: President
"City"
CITY OF LA QUINTA, a California
municipal corporation and charter city
organized and existing under the laws of the
State of California
Date: 2008 By:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Veronica J. Montecino, Agency Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
M
M. Katherine Jenson, City Attorney
882/015610-0085
882678.02 a02/06/08 "4-
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF HOTEL PROPERTY
882/015610-0085
882678.02 a02/06/08 _ 1 _
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF HOTEL PROPERTY
PARCELS 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 31116 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY
OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN
BOOK 212 AT PAGES 60 THROUGH 66, INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2005-0262238
PH #B
DATE:
CASE NO:
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY OWNER:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 11, 2008
SIGN APPLICATION 2008-1227
IMPERIAL SIGN COMPANY
CALLE ESTADO LLC
CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A SIGN
PROGRAM TO SERVE PLAZA ESTADO
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CALLE ESTADO AND DESERT
CLUB DRIVE
ON -PREMISE SIGNS ARE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT
UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 1531 1(a)
VC (VILLAGE COMMERCIAL)
VC (VILLAGE COMMERCIAL)
Plaza Estado was approved through Village Use Permit (VUP) 2005-532 in July
2005, for general office and retail uses. The recently completed 10,709 square
foot structure is located on the southwest corner of Calle Estado and Desert Club
Drive (Attachment 1).
The applicant is requesting approval of a sign program for Plaza Estado
(Attachment 2) to identify specifications, general requirements, standards and
provisions for two building -mounted signs, eight tenant identification signs, and
one directory sign.
SIGN PROGRAM PROPOSAL:
Building Identification Signs
The Program proposes two building mounted identification signs, one on the north
building elevation facing Calle Estado and the other on the west building elevation
facing Desert Club Drive. The signs ("PLAZA ESTADO") are proposed with non -
illuminated twelve -inch tall metal letters with a black -iron finish in a Garamond
font, and placed in a curvilinear fashion on both building elevations; the sign on
Desert Club Drive will be placed above the wrought iron elements and the sign on
Calle Estado will be placed below the vigas.
SA 2008-1227 Plaza Estado Staff Report
Tenant Identification Signs
Attachment three highlights the eight proposed locations for the tenant signs along
the front elevation; there are six locations for signs on the floor/street level and
two locations on the second/upper level. Leased spaces at these locations will be
allowed approximately a 2.77 square foot sign to identify the suite number and
business name. Per the sign ordinance, business identification signs are not
permitted for tenants above the ground floor in buildings with only interior access.
Plaza Estado provides exterior access to the upper level through the back of the
building. The building has the potential for thirteen tenants but the proposed Sign
Program provides for only eight tenant identification signs.
The tenant identification signs will include vinyl lettering in "cobalt blue" color
letters on 8"x8" "off-white" color ceramic tiles inlayed on wood that will be
painted to match the window trims of the building. The tenant identification signs
are proposed to be mounted over the double -entry doors of the leased space.
Directory Sign
The 9.3 square foot directory sign will be mounted on the building and facing Calle
Estado and be similar in color and design to the tenant identification signs. The
wood frame will match the color of the window frames of the building and have
3"X6" "off-white„ ceramic tiles inlayed that will display the tenants' names and
suite numbers with "cobalt blue" color vinyl lettering. The directory sign will have
enough space for up to thirteen tenants.
ANALYSIS:
The two proposed building -mounted identification signs ("Plaza Estado") are
suitable in style, size, and scale, but the code does not have a provision that
addresses this type of signage for a multi -tenant building; the code does provide
regulations for freestanding signs for multi -tenant buildings. Under the Planned
Sign Program review process, § 9.160.090 4.E., sign adjustments to permit
additional sign area, additional number of signs, alternative sign location, and
alternative type of signage, new illumination or additional height may be granted
for planned sign programs by the Planning Commission.
In this case, the applicant is requesting approval of a sign adjustment from the
Planning Commission to allow two building -mounted signs ("Plaza Estado") at
approximately 17 square feet each instead of two freestanding signs. The
alternative location (from freestanding to building -mounted sign) is justifiable
because of the orientation of the building within the property; the building is
immediately adjacent to the northern property line and part of the westerly
property line (Attachment 4). This makes it nearly impossible to add a freestanding
sign in a suitable location. Approval of the sign adjustment would allow the
property owner to place the signs in highly visible areas and because they will be
non -illuminated, it will not impact nearby residents.
Tenant signs meet the standards contained in the City's sign code provisions; the
exhibits currently illustrate them at 3.81 square feet and per the sign ordinance, Section
9.160.151 Table 9-19, a commercial or office tenant is allowed one square foot per
SA 2008-1227 Plaza Estado Staff Report
lineal foot of lease frontage up to a maximum of 50 square feet. The proposed signs are
smaller than what would be allowed under the code, but the design is to scale with the
space available for the signs and anything much larger would create visual clutter.
The directory sign exhibit illustrates space for up to thirteen (13) tenant names. This
would allow the remainder five tenants not allowed a tenant identification sign to display
their business name.
The proposed Sign Program is very compatible with the architectural design of the
building; it utilizes the same wood detail of the windows and tenant and directory
signs appear to be part of the comprehensive design of the building. One of the
favorable elements of the Sign Program is the non -illuminated signs throughout the
building, similar to those for Old Town La Quinta. Overall, the Sign Program is
designed to be an integral feature of the building's design.
FINDINGS:
The following findings can be made in support of Sign Application 2008-1227:
A. Sign Application 2008-1227, as recommended, is consistent with the purpose and
intent of Chapter 9.160, in that it does not conflict with the standards as set forth
in Chapter 9.160.
B. Sign Application 2008-1227, as recommended, is harmonious and consistent with
all signs as proposed under the Sign Program, due to the common use of letter
type and size, color and location of signs.
C. Sign Application 2008-1227, as recommended, is harmonious with and visually
related to the subject buildings as the scale of the signs and letter sizes used
accentuate the building design.
D. Sign Application 2008-1227, as recommended, is harmonious with and visually
related to surrounding development, as it will not adversely affect surrounding land
uses or obscure other adjacent conforming signs.
E. Sign Application 2008-1227, as recommended, is consistent with the purpose and
intent of the sign adjustment review process in that the transfer area from
freestanding sign to a wall is necessary to overcome a disadvantage caused by the
unfavorable orientation and proximity of Calle Estado and Desert Club Drive right-of-
ways.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on March 1, 2008, mailed to all
property owners within 500-feet of the site, and posted on City Public Hearing
information boards. At the time of the filing of this report, staff had not received any
letters or phone calls from the public regarding the proposal.
SA 2008-1227 Plaza Estado Staff Report
Prepared by:
Assistant Planner
Attachments:
1.
Site Map
2.
Sign Program
3.
Elevation
4.
Site Plan
SA 2008-1227 Plaza Estado Staff Report
ATTACHMENT 1
TAMPICO
AVENID__ A� VENTURA
TOWN
ESTADO w CALLE FORTUNA
rc
U)
o
CALLE CA-oIZ
CALLEBARCELONA
yry
Rki
I� CALL
ATTACHMENT 2
roFf/M
Sign Program
Sign Program:
The purpose of the Sign Program is to ensure: design, production, implementation,
consistency, quality coordination, proportion, enhancement, image and compatibility
between all signs within the Sign Program area. As such, the Sign Program is intended to
address placement, color, style, sign material, and their consistency on the property. This
program also serves to communicate particular tenant sign parameters to compliment
the project as a whole, while achieving a unified, attractive balanced appearance.
Although the Sign Program exhibits establish the letter and sign dimensions, the Sign
Program is not intended to substitute Chapter 9.160. Of the City of La Quinta Zoning
Ordinance.
Applicability:
A sign program is a coordinated sign plan for an individual building or a group of
buildings. For those signs requiring a program, no permit shall be issued for an individual
sign unless and until a Sign Program for the lot on which the sign will be erected has been
submitted and approved by the City in conformance with the City of La Quinta Sign
Ordinance.
General Requirements, Standards and/or Provisions:
All signs shall be constructed, installed and maintained in accordance with the following
standards:
1. • All sign (s) shall comply with the Sign Program, current local zoning, meet the
provisions of the Uniform Building code, be maintained in good structural
condition and appearance.
2. The tenant, tenant's agent and/or the tenant's sign contractor and/or general
contractor shall be responsible for obtaining any and all permits required.
3. Former tenant (s) shall be responsible for the removal of the signage, including but
not limited to: sealing, patching, and painting. Removals to be completed within
a 10 (ten) day period of lease termination at the tenant's expense.
-1-
4. No audible, flashing, animated, moving, pulsating, electronic and/or search
lighting or sign (s) not specifically mentioned herein shall be permitted.
5. It is the responsibility of the owner, owner's agent, or owner's representative to
verify all sign locations and/or field conditions, conduit and primary electrical
locations and services, prior to installation of any sign (s).
6. Sign Contractor must have the following: General Liability Insurance, Workers
Compensation, Contracting and City Business License. Tenant will be responsible
for its sign contractor to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Landlord and its
agents from any damage or liability resulting from the contractor's work. Tenant
will also provide adequate evidence of the sign contractor's insurance coverage,
naming the landlord as additional insured.
7. Penetrations of the building structure required by installation (s) shall be neatly
sealed in a "water tight" condition and painted to match exterior surface.
8. No live and/or simulated animals or humans may be used as a sign
9. No sign (s) shall be permitted that pose a nuisance or hazard.
10. Roof sign (s) or projected sign (s) shall not be permitted.
11. Temporary identification signs such as: construction, developer, seasonal
promotions and/or compliance non -illuminated advertising displays are permitted
as per La Quinta City Code. Some time restrictions may apply.
12. Sign (s) that project onto the public right-of-way shall not be permitted.
13. The tenant will be responsible for the maintenance of their sign (s). Repairs may be
required within 30 (thirty) days of needed repair/servicing. If not mitigated within
30 (thirty) days, the Landlord may repair and/or service the sign at the tenant's
expense.
-2-
Specifications for Building Signs, Main:
Signs shall be individually mounted non -illuminated Flat cut out aluminum letters.
2. Lettering to be fabricated from aluminum with an approximately 1 /4" return and
"pinned" W' of the building fascia
Color Options: Black
3. Lettering type style shall be Garamond or equal.
4. Tenant signs shall include the business name only as registered on the lease
agreement.
5. Lettering to be single line.
6. Sign square feet to be 17 square feet each.
7. Signage to stay within designated area as shown on elevations.
8. See exhibits for material and location requirements.
Specifications for Building Signs, Secondary (Tenants) and Directory:
Directory signs shall be wood painted signs to match window concept with cobalt
blue vinyl letters on 3' X 6" ceramic tiles, off white.
2. Tenant building mounted signs shall be wood painted to match concept with
colbalt blue vinyl letter on 8" X 8" ceramic tiles, off white
3. Lettering type style shall be a Garamond or Equal
4. Tenant signs shall include the business name only as registered on the lease
agreement.
5. Lettering to be single or double line copy as noted and shown. Tenant up stairs will
be allowed larger copy not exceeding height of suite number.
6. Tenant (s) with nationally recognized lettering and/or logo (s) i.e., trademarks
and/or franchises must provide the Landlord and sign contractor copies for
permitting. The tenant is responsible for conformance to the type of sign signage
area allocations and must be approved by the Landlord and the City of La
Quinta. 'SEE PROVISIONAL CLAUSE
-3-
7. Signage to stay within designated area as shown on elevations.
8. See exhibits for material and location requirements.
Specifications for window signs (Secondary)
1. One per tenant
2. Not to exceed 12" x 12", name and includes hours of operation, as shown on
exhibits.
3. Copy shall be machine cut vinyl lettering.
4. Lettering to be at least 1" in height.
5. Lettering type to be Times Roman or equal.
6. Lettering to be face or reverse/second surface mount. If tinting prevails on a
window, it is recommended that a face application process is used.
7. Lettering color to be Egg Shell.
Submittal Requirements:
A sign application consistent with this program shall consist of the following:
For each proposes sign application on the building, the following shall be specified or
drawn to scale and dimensioned plans:
A) A dimensioned location of each sign in the building and/or property.
B) Sign dimensions including letter height, color, sign length and sign projection from
the building.
C) Color scheme.
D) Type style or graphic style.
E) Material being used.
F) Method of installation/attachment/cross section.
-4-
G) Site plan indicating the location of the occupant space on the site.
H) Fabrication and installation details.
All permits for sign (s) and their installation shall be obtained by the owner and/or its
representative (s). Calle Estado, LLC and/or its representative shall satisfy all requirements
and specifications herein.
Binding Effect:
No sign shall be erected, constructed, installed, displayed, altered, placed or maintained
except in conformance with this program. In case of any conflict between the provisions
of this program and any other provisions of Chapter 9.160 of the City Zoning Ordinance,
the City Zoning Ordinance shall prevail.
Approvals:
The design and construction of the tenant's signage must receive written approval by the
Landlord/Owner or the Management Company and the City of La Quinta before
fabrication and installation. The owner's or manager's written approval shall be
submitted to the City, along with a completed City application, approved plans, and
fees.
Owner's approval shall be based on the following:
Conformity of the Sign Program established for the center including fabrication
and method of installation.
2. Complete information, i.e. contractor's name, company name, address, license
number, and workers compensation number.
To secure the owner's approval, three (3) copies of the design drawing of the signage
must be submitted directly to the owner or Management Company.
-5-
Final Inspection of Sign Installation:
The installing sign contractor shall call the City for a final inspection after having
installed the sign.
2. The Final Inspection Card must be maintained on file with the sign contractor.
3. Signs that deviate from this Sign Program will be removed at the tenant's expense.
*Provisional Clause:
This Sign Program is intended to address nearly all sign types while adhering to City sign
codes and facilitating business operations. It is understood that a tenant could have sign
needs that may not "fit" the Sign Program.
With this understanding and in all fairness to applicants, landlord and the La Quinta
Community Development Department will reserve the right to review proposals on a
"case by case" basis.
Applicants that fall into this category are strongly encouraged to meet with landlord and
the Community Development Department prior to sign design, to review and exhaust all
options prior to using said provision due to legal sensitivity and extended lead times of
provision:
The following situations are candidates for the provisional Clause:
Franchises/Business Opportunities/Operation Systems that specifically mandate
certain lettering and/or logos.
2. Hardships as set forth in the City Code.
A letter will be required from tenants on corporate letterhead indicating the businesses
noted on # 1 above plus an approval from the owner approving provision. THIS MUST BE
SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION TO SATISFY THE CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING
DEPARTMENTS SIGN APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS.
Be advised:
This clause is set forth to be fair and just. If it is determined that this provision has been
disregarded, abused, altered or falsified in any way, the offending tenant will be cited,
and the sign may be removed by the Landlord within 30 days of citation, and legal action
may prevail.
z
ATTACHMENT 4
0 r mmmmmmlmmlmillm
I I
jl SITE PLAN
N
m a A T o
z y ti E m 3
N
v mt yx a -
9
2 p A T
= A A w G
s ^ 0 3 m -
e,C.9 Z D N
o. w ae
F e z p N 9 z Ao < a E2 Y
y a o c a a n
p.. z..A
v y y m
n'z z n
n w =
a a
9
mmo r s o -
z a s n n
w
P.
a a
n a
a 9 A, N i
aNm�cao
C a 2 Z m
imm n a x n
jp.92 m
N p Cl y a K
< O 2
2
n n
� on
n a;m � a c
C y.m pA = y
w O e'Z �G m
a T y w -
m
z y9
R t C
3 G N t
0
Vl N A M C
s
A Z T p O S-
m� y y A n
A y 9 v o m
O O p m
s 2 2 n-0 z
3 N i m
e
?N c zoa
$ y p 13 T
zo m p19c '.� 4
A.A 2
p m n p o''�.p
_ m a
ofic3i ��m •
wa yti �� = y p C N gE Y y3
o inozzA
pTTc "E
=TTS 2p
ti r
x e c o i i
-
N 2 N m y a
0
9$ t T A ti
AnC�3a -
n x z a y 3
m 2 m
2 a L p A r
z p
T O y A u
m-
n
m ��Fiu
m
9 A e e Z C
m m m n v
p
m,n c o 3 v
O p.y zav
Z O O W m S
T
z m n K= n
y e 3 c
9 n p
n S O Z N N
2 y O O 0
n2 2 fi
N
p y m T y D
X y s o a
a z 'z M. 9
ti 9 0 O m m
m m e < c
n'a m z e
m N a'i n
y m a Z= w
n 9 a 9'Z
a m m a
y i
n T
m Ono
a 9 N a
a N 00
s y o z m
c � z z m
a
m ac'9 Z
N C n y n K
m 9 y a E o
K o z
o- n
m a n
Ma c
o y r y
y m o S i
z e w a y m
o a c z F m
y�myFew
s3-'-y yme
s z'm e o i
yy 9 O'O r
Ef+_O O T
K Z n n y
a
c p
m Ci o j'i�S
�N.0 Zim
O oIO3 m
T A
e e o o e
_ � a
c
O S Z m y T
m m ti ar _
N p
a T e N
Z y
e z m
e n n 2 9
O m O m Z m
n o n K y
� Nan y
z y m o
S O m'N K
K T 1T1��11 C Z,C
C N % N.a ti
m a p O A
y y.T m
m e a n n
e a o 2¢ C
x c e e n m
z
az-n�cocz,�
n p m m m
�'Z m
0
K p A T
m Z T
n T y y 2 0
zi4m'e o�
b
aH.9'e pr
2 e n
< 2 2p
3 m.N m
a
mco<¢
ze Cc c.a
c n 7= a n
c
z o 3 C
=bm"e�c
c
a
amy 3Di.`
e 2 a x 3
a n 2 z m
pa'e`'a s a
2 n H T N<
Y T.T.0 ZC
C'yk'. yiD.
n
m c y a o n
a-
i c o o a m
i:epez,
e O A a m
N 2 N g N D
2 r'p.2 e
p.S
ana.3a
i an'o cy
N"
q 101
m
v,
Z'
0
E5
m
m
q'm c x. ne
m m.gn
m e a o m V
m
e a a z W P
ay Nm W�
qcm. ms.V
P'y E'Kox
a
ti 9 0 O
;,nxz c
x y a z e
m 9 Z
erma ys
�^ � o m R a a
N N s C
a
C y'12R
e'N 2 e e y
a �`d;yra yin
c m.m'rL N a
T A'T 2
w c n H L s
K
s e Z n e
2 Zo n.
2 p
e'S O a D C
2 9 m = 2
c'1 O C s r2.m
O IN'
0
w N a c c
a z m o o i
�crc em
3 `"gym
a
c o
"3'cz'ro ahz
K H C 2 e a
s y o'3 m
a: c.m olv c
z a a z
e !^cave
y pn yly
a „N z.0 y,
ZOO: c N
F z m O 2o i 3 O
9
a C a D S
C
❑
❑
❑
q❑■
G
D4.1
O1 Ad 009
"Yj
H 1 Z3 Z
DiG D
E 01p
O N
ypQIs
mM
C
i
n❑
i
A
p
S D F
.tip
r
N r p
A N
c m
C O'J
M 2!
IF
V V a •
a
m
>
>
3
�,
�N
a�
m i W m
J
�'
��m
v�
N
o
»�••
f11
�'
W W O N
O
m
3
Q
❑ d
ti
N o�
:m1f
n.
n
300
WWiio •
m
3
n
F
•
(1m
ymu
nc
aq
daaDm
❑
m
p K
�•
•O•
ro»
Nm
r
L^JJ •
NW
m❑
?
m
p
06
NO
N5$
Ow�C
�NO
W
w0) �•.•