1992 10 07 DRBa
T N !
1982 - 1992
lima
Ten Carat Decade
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
A Regular Meeting to be held at the
La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado
La Quinta, California
October 7, 1992
5:30 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER - Flag Salute
11. ROLL CALL
III. BUSINESS SESSION
A. SIGN APPLICATION 91-159. AMENDMENT #3 - SIMON PLAZA; a request
of Mr. Skip Berg for approval to install a shopping center identification sign,
directional signs and multiple building signs for a future office/commercial
facility planned on five and one half acres.
B. SIGN DEVIATION FOR 111 LA OUINTA CENTER: a request of Payless
Shoesource Shoes for approval of a deviation from the approved sign program for
business sign.
V. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes of September 2, 1992
VI. OTHER
VII. ADJOURNMENT
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DATE: OCTOBER 7, 1992 (CONTINUED FROM JULY 1, 1992)
CASE NO.: SIGN APPLICATION 91-159 (AMENDMENT #3) - SIMON PLAZA
APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC.; MR. PHILIP M. PEAD
SIGN DESIGNER: MR. SKIP BERG, DGI SIGNS
REQUEST: REQUEST TO INSTALL A SHOPPING CENTER IDENTIFICATION
SIGN, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS AND MULTIPLE BUILDING SIGNS
FOR A FUTURE OFFICE/COMMERCIAL FACILITY PLANNED ON
FIVE AND ONE HALF ACRES.
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: SIGN APPLICATIONS ARE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT
FROM CEQA PER SECTION 15311, CLASS ELEVEN
BACKGROUND:
Staff has received a new set of drawings for the Simon Plaza project on Washington Street and
Highway 111. The Design Review Board last reviewed the project in June and July of this year.
Copies of the past reports are attached.
New modifications have been made since the last submittal and the new plans are date stamped
September 15 & 29, 1992. The changes include modifying the "Desert Professional Building"
signs to "La Quinta Medical Center" signs, modifying the "Johnathan's" restaurant sign to
"Milauskas Eye Institute" sign, adding a "Milauskas Eye Institute" sign on the south side of the
building, modifying the "Family Fitness Center" signs to "Fitness Center". No other major
changes have been proposed.
1. Freestanding Signs
A. Center Identification Sign (Sign #2): The applicant has requested that the
proposed 12-foot high sign be allowed to be three -sided (see the attached
background material) and in the past Staff has recommended that the sign be two-
sided which is consistent with the provisions of the Sign Ordinance. A three -
sided sign would require an adjustment to the Sign Ordinance because the sign
would exceed the maximum sign requirement of 50 square feet (two-sided).
B. Materials: Staff has recommended that all the proposed free standing signs be
required to match the construction standards of Sign #2. This includes an
aluminum face with incised sign copy. The applicant has proposed lexan face
C. -002
DRBST.061 1
panels with sign copy to be sprayed onto the cabinet surface. This type of
production and quality of the sign will not be consistent with the integrity of Sign
#2. The Design Review Board should be aware that the sign program for the
TDC (Highway 111) shopping center to the north of the site has been approved
for freestanding signs which have stuccoed backgrounds with cut-out plexi-glass
sign copy graphics. Staff would like the sign program for this site to be
consistent with the TDC Center.
C. Milauskas Eye Institute: The applicant has proposed a new freestanding sign for
the site (Sign #11). The sign is located on the south side of pad building #2.
Staff does not support the applicant's request because the applicant has already
applied for numerous free standing signs which require sign adjustments (Signs
#12, #5, #7 and #2). Staff would recommend that the sign contractor propose a
building sign for the south side of the building similar to other commercial
projects. We believe a building sign will serve the site more effectively than a
ground mounted identification sign. A ground mounted sign at the proposed
location will not be seen because of the on -site parking and landscaping. The Eye
Institute would be better served by an attached traditional sign.
CONCLUSION:
Staff supports the sign program as modified provided the attached recommended conditions of
approval are met.
1 11
1. The proposed additional freestanding identification signs (Signs #5 and #12) should be
permitted on the site because they further the goal of the Master Sign Program which is
to install signs which can easily be read and are located to provide maximum exposure
to passing motorists. By substituting monument signs for attached building signs, Staff
believes the provision of the Sign Ordinance will not be adversely affected nor will the
applicant be receiving preferential treatment for his proposal.
2. The upper story building signs are needed to identify the mixed use commercial center
because the single story buildings along Highway 111 and Washington Street block the
exposure of some of the signs if not permitted above a single story height limitation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff would request that the Design Review Board approve the attached sign program, as
submitted, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
1. Past draft Design Review Board Minutes.
2. Previous July 1, 1992 Design Review Board report.
3. New submittal (September 15, 1992 and September 29, 1992).
4. Draft Conditions of Approval.
DRBST.061 2 t • `' 6 i, 003
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED
SIGN APPLICATION 91-159, AMENDMENT #3
SIMON PLAZA - SIGN PROGRAM
OCTOBER 7, 1992
GENERAL PROVISIONS:
1. Each freestanding sign shall be a minimum of five feet from the future property line it
abuts. No signs should be placed in the City's right-of-way.
2. All signs should be reviewed by the Engineering Department to assure sight visibility is
not obstructed by the installation of each respective freestanding sign.
3. Site address numbers should be on the main monument sign as a supplemental to the
building addressing plan. The minimum size should be four inches and contrasting to
the background it is affixed to.
4. Any and all proposed illuminated signs shall be installed to avoid undue brightness which
would distract passing motorists and/or pedestrians.
5. The sign colors shall be blue (#607-1GP Acrylite Blue) except for the other supplement
signs such as the bowling pins and top of the monument sign can be royal blue, orange
and white as depicted on the attached drawings.
6. The building signs can be internally illuminated or non -illuminated.
7. No exposed raceways, crossover, conduits, conductors, transformers, etc., shall be
permitted. All supplemental electrical hardware shall be behind the building structure
inside the sign structure, or located underground.
8. The lettering styles for the building signs shall be either Clarendon or Souvenir.
9. All attached buildings shall be comprised of channel letters (individually constructed).
10. All freestanding signs shall be double -sided and perpendicular to the public street they
serve unless noted otherwise in the following section.
SIGN ADJUSTMENTS:
11. a.) The Fitness Center sign (Sign #8) located on the second story elevation of the
building shall be permitted as depicted in the attached drawings.
CONAPRVL.065
Conditions of Approval
Sign Application 91-159
October 7, 1992
b.) Sign #7, #3, #14C shall not be allowed because they are not necessary for the
center nor its patrons, and they degrade the architectural character of the project.
c.) The La Quinta Medical Center sign (Sign #6) located on the third story elevation
of the four story building shall be permitted as depicted in the attached drawings.
d.) The La Quinta Medical Center freestanding monument sign (Sign #5) located on
the north side of the four story building shall be permitted provided the sign is
one-sided and is constructed with the same materials as Sign #2.
e.) The Milauskas Eye Institute sign (Sign #12) on Highway 111 shall be permitted
provided the sign is perpendicular to Highway 111 and constructed in a similar
fashion to Sign #2.
MISCELLANEOUS:
12. The final sign graphics shall be subject to review by the Director of Planning and
Development prior to permit issuance by the Building and Safety Department.
13. Each tenant and/or his sign contractor shall obtain approval by the property owners (or
management company) in writing prior to submission of the sign drawings to the
Planning and Development Department for permit consideration. The property owner
shall review the signs for lettering style, color, sign location, lighting, and any other
"important" issues.
14. All sign contractors shall be licensed to do business in the City of La Quinta and possess
a State Contractor's License to perform the work outlined in the sign permit.
15. All signs shall conform to the City's adopted Sign Ordinance in effect at the time the sign
permit is issued.
16. Underwriter Laboratories certification labels shall be affixed to all internally illuminated
signs, thus assuring that the sign (or sign structure) meets industry specifications.
17. The background cabinet for sign(s) #14 shall be opaque (e.g., sheet metal and stuccoed
to match the building).
CONAPRVL.065
005
Saoborm/weU loc. • T.
lovaod"
U
W
a
CC
171
//,
IT]
"CW
•
Oo
006 j
L
N pp
till
Y
L
A
d
L
O
Z
II
W
O
CC
d
IC
s O
f ��[aa�n v�a�dAV
uJC_K'crb
4 2
• 1' (iiJ
wj
Design Review Board Minutes
July 1, 1992
11. There being no further discussion it was moved by Boardmember
Anderson and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to recommend
approval to the Planning Commission of Plot Plan 92-488 as
presented with the elimination of Condition #7 and Condition #4.
B. Simon Plaza, Inc. ; a request to install a shopping center identification
sign, directional signs and multiple building signs for a future
office/commercial facility planned on five and one half acres.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa stated that the Applicant had
requested a continuance of his application as he did not get all
the information to Staff.
V. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Chairman Harbison asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes
of June 3, 1992. Boardmember Anderson requested that his comments
that were submitted in written form be added to the minutes. Planning
Commissioner Ellson suggested that the roll call be amended to show
that Boardmembers Anderson and Rice were absent. There being no
further corrections, it was moved by Boardmember Curtis and seconded
by Chairman Harbison. Unanimously approved.
VI. OTHER
Boardmember Wright asked Staff if the City had a height limit on three story
units. Staff stated the limit is 50 feet in the C-P-S Zone. Discussion followed
regarding other projects where the height limit was a concern.
Boardmember Anderson asked if Gruen and Associated had planted their test
site for the plants proposed for the Civic Center. Staff stated as of this date
he did not believe they had. Discussion followed.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Boardmember Curtis and seconded by Boardmember Anderson to
adjourn to a regular meeting of the Design Review Board on August 5, 1992, at 5:30
P.M. This meeting of the La Quints, Design Review Board was adjourned at 6:20
P.M., July 1, 1992.
_? DRBM7/1
00
Design Review Board Minutes
June 3, 1992
F. Sign Application 91-159; a request of Simon Plaza to install a shopping center
identification sign, directional signs, and multiple building signs for a
future/commercial facility planned on five and one have acres.
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's opposition to the sign program as proposed was
noted.
3. Mr. Skip Berg, DGI, representing the Applicant asked for clarification on
signs V, #5, #3, #12, #2, #14.C.
4. Boardmember Harbison asked Staff if they felt there was too much
signage at the corner of Highway 111 and Washington.
5. Following discussion relative to the different signs, it was moved by
Boardmember Curtis and seconded by Planning Commissioner Barrows
to continue the application to the next Design Review Board meeting of
July 1, 1992. Unanimously approved. The Applicant was to supply
copies of the perspective plans for Boardmembers use.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Chairman Llewellyn asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of March
4, and May 6, 1992. Boardmember Harbison seconded the motion and it carried
unanimously.
IV. AD.IOURNMENT
It was moved by Chairman Llewellyn and seconded by Planning Commissioner Barrows to
adjourn to a regular meeting of the Design Review Board on July 1, 1992, at 5:30 P.M. This
meeting of the La Quinta Design Review Board was adjourned at 6:54 P.M., June 3, 1992.
DRBM6/3 5 '���' 009
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DATE: JULY 1, 1992
CASE NO.: SIGN APPLICATION 91-159 (AMENDMENT #3) - SIMON PLAZA
APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC.; MR. PHILIP M. PEAD
REQUEST: REQUEST TO INSTALL A SHOPPING CENTER IDENTIFICATION
SIGN, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS AND MULTIPLE BUILDING SIGNS
FOR A FUTURE OFFICE/COMMERCIAL FACILITY PLANNED ON
FIVE AND ONE HALF ACRES.
SIGN DESIGNER: MR. SKIP BERG, DGI SIGNS
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: SIGN APPLICATIONS ARE., CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT
FROM CEQA PER SECTION 15311, CLASS ELEVEN
BACKGROUND:
On June 3, 1992, the Design Review Board continued action on the attached sign
program due to some confusion on the request based on the number of signs
proposed and there proposed locations. A copy of the draft minutes from this
meeting are attached. Since the meeting, the Applicant has submitted a rendering
of the project and depicted the signs on each respective building.
A verbal report will be given at the meeting regarding this case
Attachments:
1. Draft Design Review Board Minutes.
2. Previous June 3, 1992 Design Review Board report.
DRBST.061
1
1
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
DATE: JUNE 3, 1992
REQUEST: SIGN APPLICATION 91-159 (AMENDMENT #3): SIMON PLAZA,
PLANNESIGN PROGRAM. REQUEST TO INSTALL A SHOPPING
CENTER DIDENTIFIICATION SIGN, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS AND
MULTIPLE BUILDING SIGNS FOR A FUTURE
OFFICE COMMERCIAL FACILITY PLANNED ON FIVE AND ONE
HALF ACRES
LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY ill AT WASHINGTON
STREET
APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC.; MR. PHILIP M. PEAD
SIGN
DESIGNER: MR. SKIP BERG, DGI SIGNS
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: SIGN APPLICATIONS ARE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT
FROM CEQA PER SECTION 15311, CLASS ELEVEN
PLOT PLAN 91-466 (REVISION):
The Planning Commission and City Council approved the commercial project
approximately three months ago after various modifications were made to the
proposal. The project will include a 44 lane bowling alley, two restaurants, fitness
center, office complex and two parking structures.
BACKGROUND:
The signage proposal has been reviewed by the Design Review Board on a few
occasions over the last six months. At each meeting the design graphics were either
different or other minor modifications were made. Staff finally recommended that the
sign program not proceed forward until the Architect finalized the project with the
Planning Commission and City Council. On March 3, 1992, the City Council accepted
the revised Plot Plan Application.
The sign contractor has submitted a new sign program based on the March 3, 1992
City Council approval. The program is generally based on the sign graphics which
were seen by the Design Review Board in December, 1991.
PROPOSED SIGN PROGRAM (AMENDMENT W:
The Applicant has submitted a freestanding center identification sign, a concept
building sign program, and directional signs for the proposed multiple use complex.
PCST.028 -
Oil
s: The
is 12-feet
A in�heiahtiand the graphic
Identification cab�net is approximatelyg50 Square feet
excluding the decorative arched top. The sign is internally illuminated and
the cabinet will be stuccoed to match the proposed building color (Navajo
White). The "Simon Plaza" portion of the sign will be blue whereas the
decorative arched top will be royal blue (translucent vinyl over white
-shaped sign will
plexiglass). The cabinet base will be tiled. This triangular
be located at the northwest corner of the site. The sign is three -sided.
B. Directional Parking Signs: The freestanding directional signs are three feet
in height and three square feet. The signs will be internally illuminated and
the design is consistent with the center identification sign.
C. Monument Signs: New monument signs have been proposed for one of the
restaurant pad sites (Sign #12) and one for the four story office building
(Sign #5).
D. Attached Building Signs: The building signs are located on various areas of
the building complex which will house the future bowling alley, fitness center,
office building, and restaurant. The illuminated channel lettered signs are
to have blue plexiglass faces (#607-1GP Acrylite Blue) except for a slight
variation in the bowling alley sign adding orange/white/red to the blue. The
sign program will consist of:
1. Restaurant(s)
Cabinet sign (recessed)
A. Sign #14 (3) _ (35 sq. ft. each)
B. Sign #11 = 1811 letters (33 sq. ft. )
2. Family Fitness Center
C. Sign #8 = 20" letters (63 sq. ft.)
D. Sign #7 = 14" letters (27 sq. ft. )
3. Bowling Alley
E. Sign #9 = 18" letters (17 sq. ft.)
F. Sign #10 = 18" letters (17 sq. ft.)
G. Sign #13 = 18" letters (17 sq. ft.)
4. office/Medical
R. Sign #6 = 14" letters (31 sq. ft.)
TOTAL = +310
ZONING CODE PROVISIONS (EXCERPTS):
io
PCST.028
012
1. Freestanding Signs.
a. Each commercial complex containing a multiple -tenant
building or multiple buildings is permitted one complex
identification sign per street frontage. The area of any
one sign shall not exceed one -quarter of a square foot of
sign area per lineal foot of street frontage, or fifty square
feet, whichever is less. The aggregate area of all such
signs shall not exceed one hundred square feet and sign
area may not be combined among street frontages.
b. Not pertinent for this report.
C. The maximum height of any freestanding sign shall be
twelve feet.
M. Directional Signs. Nonadvertising, freestanding signs used to identify
street entrance and exit. Said signs must have three square feet of
sign area and be three feet in height.
2. Attached Signs
a. Each tenant within a multiple -tenant commercial complex
may have one attached identification sign not to exceed one
square foot of sign area per lineal foot of tenant space
frontage along a street, or frontage along a common use
parking lot where no direct street frontage is provided,
not exceeding fifty square feet. Corner, end, or separate
tenant spaces may split the allowable frontage sign area
among two signs."
STAFF COMMENTS:
The monument sign and directional signs are consistent with the design theme of the
project, and the proposed colors are appropriate for this area. The signs would be
architecturally compatible with surrounding businesses uses. A summary on the
building sign package is as follows:
A. Building Sign Colors: The blue copy of the building letters is not a contrast
to the architectural style of the project and the blue letters will be legible
during the day and at night. The blue letters would match both the Simon
Motors and the Downey Savings signs which are in the immediate area.
C. Sign Lettering Height: Sign lettering is a key component of building
identification, but architectural compatibility is also an ingredient, as well as
human -scale. As noted before, the sign contractor has proposed lettering
heights of 14" to 18" for this project. Therefore, the legibility of the signs
from a distance will be approximately:
PCST.028
013
Readability Maximum Readable
Letter Height
Impact
Distance
White/Red (Blue)
12"
120' (1081
525'
s14"
150' (1351)
630'
s18'0
180' (162')
750'
24"
240' (216')
1, 000'
NOTE: Red, black, or white letters (maximum) with 10% variation for other
colors (e.g., blue) for internally lit signs.
In summary, the size of the letters for the project will be easy to read for all
patrons in the parking lot area and for passing motorists on either main
thoroughfare depending upon your direction of travel.
PREVIOUS DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING:
The Design Review Board met on November 6, 1991, to discuss this case. Discussion
ensued on whether or not the building letters should be internally illuminated or
externally illuminated. After much debate, the Board felt that the building(s) is
close enough to the street to warrant external lighting versus internal illumination
as requested by the Applicant and, further, the group did not believe reverse
channel letters would be appropriate for this building complex. The Applicant did
not want to install reverse channel letters either because they require more
maintenance (they get dirty) and are exposed to natural elements since they have
exposed parts. At one point in the meeting Mr. Berg, the sign contractor, did state
that he would be receptive to rust letters if he could have internally illuminated
signage for the building. However, this concept did not gain approval by the
Board.
Another topic by the Design Review Board was the lettering style for the building
signs. The Board thought the building warranted a stylized lettering design instead
of the Helvetica Bold as presented by the sign contractor. The sign contractor was
amicable to the changes requested by the Board. A copy of the lettering styles are
attached.
The Design Review Board also approved the building plexigiass letters which were
presented by the Applicant. No color changes were made by the Board.
Finally, the Design Review Board felt the Fitness Center sign location was acceptable
since it was for one of the major tenants of the complex and it did not hinder the
architectural elements of the project or reduce their character.
On November 20, 1991, Staff received a new sign package submittal from the sign
contractor. The new program (Program #2) includes internally illuminated cabinet
signs for the proposed buildings. The cabinet signs vary in size from two feet wide
to three feet and range in height from 14 feet to 36 feet.
PCST.028
The signs will have white (Navajo) backgrounds with the copy colors matching the
original program (blue with accent colors).
The new program was reviewed by the Design Review Board on December 4, 1991.
However, the Board did not support this new request because it is not as
architecturally structured as other types of programs previously examined in this
report.
The Design Review Board at their meeting of December 4, 1991, reconsidered their
action of November 6, 1991, and decided as a group to allow internally illuminated
sign (channel letters) submitted by the Applicant. Therefore, the Board voted (6-
1, Boardmember Anderson voting no) to permit internally illuminated channel letters
on the building.
The following findings and recommendation are based on the Design Review Board's
action of December 4, 1991.
FINDINGS:
1. The size and location of the Bowling Alley building signs are placed to provide
for maximum sight exposure to passing motorists and the general public at
large. The sign on the northerly elevation will not detract from the
architectural character of the building nor impact the sign program as
presented. The sign graphics dictate a need to adjust the City's size
standards to compensate for the proposed design theme.
2. The Fitness Center sign is needed on the second story of the building
complex. If located on the first floor level, it could not be seen by passing
motorists, and as it is an integral part of the Bowling Alley complex, building
advertising is needed for this type of commercial use.
ADDITIONAL STAFF COMMENTS:
Staff has a problem with the following signs:
Sign #7 - The proposed Family Fitness sign is located on the northwest side of the
building on the upper -most part building under the roof. The sign is out of
character with the building because the sign length is approximately the same
distance between each building corner which over emphasizes the signing mass. The
sign concept is not consistent with osaother signs in the complex. We would prefer
to eliminate the sign from the prop
Sign #3 (Parking Sign) - The proposed garage parking sign is located on the north
side of the proposed parking structuring facing Highway 111. This sign is not
needed because the m t#4 serves the he on site two-way primary
ewayon to direct patrons into the
parking structure from
Sign #5 (Desert Professional Freestanding Sign) - This sign is not permitted unless
a finding can be made to justify the sign based on 9.212.030 (Section F) of the Sign
Ordinance. As mentioned before, one freestanding sign is permitted per street
frontage. Sign #2 meets this requirement as proposed. Staff is supportive to Sign
#5 because the applicant has forfeited his right to have a building sign facing
PCST.028 O� C
v i; J
wo-sided (angled
esign) monument
of
tihe four 1st order to
have Wetwould recommenddthatt the sign be onesfront sided an
positioned parallel to the building, therefore, visible only as you enter the project.
Additionally, the sign face construction should be the same as Sign #2 (Le. stucco
aluminum background with incised letters and 1" silver trim cap).
Sign #12 (Freestanding Jonathan's Restaurant) - The two-sided angular sign is
located on the north side of the proposed building and south of Highway 111. The
sign has the same characteristics to Sign #5 and staff generally has the same
concerns or comments as mentioned above for Sign #5. The only difference would be
the design of the sign, we would recommend that the sign be double-faced but
perpendicular to Highway 111.
gign #2 (Freestanding Center Identification Sign) - The new request by the
MApplicant is to have a 3-sided triangular center identification sign at the intersection
of Highway 111 and Washington Street.
In the past designs, the sign was triangular but only two sides had copy
information. Staff is opposed to the new request since the Sign Ordinance states one
sign should be permitted per street frontage. There are only two streets at this
site, therefore, only a two sided sign is needed.
FINDINGS:
1. The proposed additional freestanding identification signs (Signs #5 & 12)
should be permitted on the site because they further the goal of the Master
Sign Program which is to install signs which can easily be read and are located
to provide maximum exposure to passing motorists. By substituting monument
signs for attached building signs, staff believes the provisions of the Sign
Ordinance will not be adversely affected nor will the applicant be receiving
preferential treatment for his proposal.
2. The upper story building signs are needed to identify the mixed use
commercial center because the single story buildings along Highway III and
Washington block the exposure of some of the signs if not permitted above a
single story height limitation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff would request that the Design
program, as submitted, subject to the
Attachments:
Review Board approve the attached sign
following Conditions of Approval.
I. Location Map
2. Sign program stamp dated April 22, May 7, & May 8, 1992 (Amendment #3)
3. Lettering styles
PCST.028 6
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: EXHIBIT "A"
SIGN APPLICATION 91-159, AMENDMENT 0 - PROPOSED
SIMON PLAZA - SIGN PROGRAM
JUNE 3, 1992
1. Each freestanding sign shall be a minimum of five feet from the future
property line it abuts. No signs should be placed in the City,s right-of-way.
2. All signs should be reviewed by the Engineering Department to assure site
visibility is not obstructed by the installation of each respective freestanding
sign.
3. Site address numbers should be on the main monument sign as a supplemental
to the building addressing plan. The minimum size should be four inches and
contrasting to the background it is affixed to.
4. Any and all proposed illuminated signs shall be installed to avoid undue
brightness which would distract passing motorists and/or pedestrians.
5. The sign colors shall be blue (#607-1GP Acrylite Blue) except for the other
splement
pins and top of the monument sign
be royal blue,signs t
orange and white as he depicted on the attached drawings. an
6. The building signs can be internally illuminated or non -illuminated.
7. No exposed raceways, crossovers, conduits , conductors, transformers, etc.,
shall be permitted. All supplemental electrical hardware shall be behind the
building structure inside the sign structure, or located underground.
8. The lettering styles for the building signs shall be either Clarendon or
Souvenir.
9. All attached buildings shall be comprised of channel letters (individually
constructed).
SIGN ADJUSTMENTS:
10. a) The Fitness Center sign (Sign #8) located on the second story elevation
of the building shall be permitted, as depicted in the attached
drawings.
b) Signs #7, #3, #14C shall not be allowed because they are not necessary
for the center nor its patrons, and they degrade the architectural
character of the project.
c) The Desert Professional Building sign (Sign #6) located on the third
story elevation of the four story building shall be permitted as depicted
in the attached drawings.
PCST.028
nf7
Conditions of Approval
SA 91-159; Amendment #3
Simon Plaza
June 3, 1992
d) The Desert Professional Building freestanding monument sign (Sign #5)
located on the north side of the four story building shall be permitted
as depicted on the attached drawings.
11. The final sign graphics shall be subject to review by the Director of Planning
and Development prior to permit issuance by the Building and Safety
Department.
12. Each tenant and/or his sign contractor shall obtain approval by the property
owners (or management company) in writing prior to submission of the sign
drawings to the Planning and Development Department for permit
consideration. The property owner shall review the signs for lettering style,
color, sign location, lighting, and any other "important" issues.
13. All sign contractors shall be licensed to do business in the City of La Quinta
and possess a State Contractor's License to perform the work outlined in the
sign permit.
14. All signs shall conform to the City's adopted Sign Ordinance in effect at the
time the sign permit is issued.
15. Underwriter Laboratories certification labels shall be affixed to all internally
illuminated signs, thus assuring that the sign (or sign structure) meets
industry specifications.
PCST.028
0ig
• .tL;a
1
L
I.. 1000
�s 11111'f 11117A9 �.
0
oil
x
r�
2'
�O
r
,
v:
021
P ii6n�rw. •.wet
t��(
It1117 MNf�W
®
�'�
022
g
pi
3i
•`�`� �
1
s -
� <
111ZCCC
♦
j
j
_K
i
m
4t
1
V
4 �r
I r7 i
I
;— -
OHO
DESERT ji L
a PROFESSIONAL ii
+-- BUILDING J
qo
^S��'la•Lr T •I � ayr-'�
I...r+ lr� �/i r ITErIL LLY : Ut ^! Iv"
ExL•` FyE �46v �C.'Nri sc ON: 5� ==aCE - SLVE CCP',, JNI
�6vt.NJ �:ui'E �.ALCGf.GUNG iC✓4�r•: SarrE15 `_Crr '4 ) .
tiGTE - cKJC C'CtG CGLC�G -Tc- 3E LE—I�Rt -C.
INT_r4^ALLY I:.._VMiNP'TE �Vj 4'C Mt. rLLU i2E �..�^•- .1•.'r'��
14" V V
EXHIBIT �---'q
ACAS
,RNO.
mo"•+3
26.0" —
DESERT PROFESSIONAL BUILDING12"
In?" I;�.U�•�. ��,;`-!:yE� ILG�-% � LE`EQ5 t�a.l: r.•�.. (��
;.Ar1E 5'E I� CAT oNS AS SIcxN, '3"
E\ T LG�TO 'OL02 TO (3E L`ET612M,, C
'T �t
T'
- - -' _I
I O/1
025
.0.0
PARKING
`>� rl �h�TEk�lAILY ILLUMLTr�
EEr uErD•l k'ETJf<1N ElJ N ' 14
MtJ,r I o.)7 - IGII% �3LVE ,E{.- TIZ nq _L F
�I+TE iIa.:Lf IllUhll h:ATE:: Pv'� VdwiTE hC.Gr. .
i"; StY r<6��IreEG
PARKING GARAGE
r EXIT ENTRANCE
CLEARANCE 0'-4'
Y
71•dJ l �` SE`r ,2�;JI12cl�•
APR 2 2 1S92
EXHI£1T
026
:J
0
�C 4
A
w
027
�
G
J I�
1
V
_%
•-+1
�
in
vlli
t=
_
t ?
Ali
i
J
ka- it
tL
i
LJ
�28
i
0
•
$ $ • o
c e <
We
S —_— yM �pyyugS
is
3y' Tcu"UP
us• (ys,rc fKfi
meow Wef-
Woo"
,,W
nYr �l
N BFOC�S• �—
,�yyfQiif,6R
��yV rt•LL 1 Sol(
t1.14;811 9J.
{� SASE
clewing 0^•-q
p n m,..,N
T Date
Joe
MT. M r D r 1 1Q=19�
Haan.. 1 {
Olewn l7T Bcs.
-i,-. — . rl —_T
�oo1 � IL -MD
-
AL � LF-nEQS E*.:�vt���..a �.ov�_ .•� =0._ s� �ih��
� :ICIGpTIONS AS $I[rti ^�..
; - 0
SAl-' E
QaTulz.IS D6UITeQ NW&w-I ;._: (w;pTrt F!tJIjN�
BLACK DACE t�-3-Cx3ry
"fHEEI: BL44:Y- VINYL DOT-L..
P�vAJLINtA PINS
RE'T-V2'�S PAtN''G7 tJAVANQ V/-1't (�I44,1-E F--jI+N�
F3LA�G 1TtlM-CbP. S_LK FpfE .2Go V.IJITE
"2IM A(2QLNC P'N NEc_IGS - 'QGI�St-J_F-K-T- VINYL-5ie3v-3 r��
gLMW- VINYL 5P4D0vV ON t�G' >r <,G�r S .E OF: Mi^Z'LE
ALL INTE12NnL ILLUMINIATlOh1 'W/ WtlTE (V[OIV.
1-N2EE (3) SETS QE�jvi2EC.
,� 031
FANCY STYLES -0)
Al CHIJKLM
NOPVRSTUVWXYZ
0123456789 !"S%&*0'cf:?•:r..
BLOCK STYLES
HELVETICA MED. A.K.REVS
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPORSTUVWXYZ
abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz
0123456789
HELVETICA BOLD A.K. REV.0
ABCDEFGHIJKLM
NOPQRSTUVWXYZ
abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz
0123456789 !'S%8'()'•c£®�;,./?
OPTIMA SEMI 13OLD A.K.
ABCDEFGHI JKLikANOPQRS
TUVWXYZ1234567890
abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz
EXTENDED
EVROSTILE BOLD
A.K. REV. B
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRS
TUVWXYz
abcdef ghijkimnopgrstuvwxyz
0123456789 !"$ol06'()""cC""?I
AVANT GARDE A.K. REV. C
ABCDEFGHIJKLM NOPQRSTUVWXYZ
obcdef ghilklmnopgrstuvwxyz
0123456789
GENERAL SYMBOLS EXT. R V.F
®®®
t�ell'1; } ICtlrt�
vUcUg242,Acy 34999 (;WZ vl.cX. qZM. A
Q(RKuKx'l� obcde�gGyttnwpQistuwYyb
0129456789 ISU LA.
rQ6e2=£ �l� �9?R �'iif i10A2�s'7Z+
2'wz�3
aGccfc g&i�(cl+:Ko,Ergiotuvusyj
pl2�4567�9 !aY���••
UNlVERcSIT)' RO`i.1IS .1 K RED' A
.1bCDEFGIIIJKl `1N0PQ 2 I0 A XYZ
abtdcf`h klmrn,h,lrnlu%A\%i
0123456789
l SC4()'f:9 .
CENTURY BOLD A.K. REV. A
,\ItCI►F.FGHIJKI,NIN*OBIRSTUVWXY%
abcdef r hi jkl m nopgrstuvw xyz
0123456784
CLARENDON BOLD A.K. REV. i
ABCDEFGHIJKl .MNOPQRSTUV W XY2
abedefghi jklmnopgrstuvwzya
0123456789
SOUVENIR DEMI A.K. REV. A
ABCDEFGHIJKLhINOPQRSTUVWX
YZ
abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz
0123456789
COOPER BLACK A.K. REV. A
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRS
TUVWXYZ rstuvwxys
abcdefghliktmnopq
moolP+*n�a►:r,:te�v�r® ld� 0123456759®:,,.ti 03
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DATE: OCTOBER 7, 1992
CASE NO: SA 92-182
APPLICANT: PAYLESS SHOESOURCE STORES
SIGN DEVIATION FOR 111 LA QUINTA CENTER
SIGN COMPANY: FEDERAL SIGN COMPANIES
LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY III BETWEEN WASHINGTON
STREET AND ADAMS STREET
BACKGROUND:
Payless Shoesource stores is renting a shop in this center just to the west of Wal-Mart. Because
Payless Shoessource is a large chain, they are requesting to utilize their standard sign which does
not comply with the sign program which was adopted for this center. In approving the sign
program for the center, a provision was included to allow national or regional tenants with more
than five outlets to use their standard sign with approval from the Design Review Board and
Planning Commission.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant's sign is a standard sign utilized for all of their stores. The letter style is
somewhat "Ancient Eqyptian" (see attached exhibits) using capital and lower case letters, rather
than the Helvetica which was approved for the center. The sign color proposed is a medium
yellow for all the letter faces except the "O"'s which are a burnt orange color. The trim cap
and returns are black.
Because the rental space is on a corner where the shops jog, there is frontage facing both the
south and west (see attached exhibit). Because of this, the applicant is requesting one sign for
each frontage. The sign facing south onto the parking lot would be 20-inches high for the
capital letters and 21-feet long (35 square feet). The second sign which faces west onto the
walkway area is proposed to be a maximum 13-inches in height and 13-feet 10-inches in length
(15 square feet). The sign color, materials, and style would be the same as the main sign. The
location of these signs would be the facia of the covered walkway.
APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM PROVISIONS:
The approved sign program allows maximum 24 inch high letters with the length being 75 % of
the frontage up to a maximum of 50 square feet. The approved letter style is Helvetica light or
as approved by the City. Approved colors are white, red, blue, green, yellow, or as approved
DRBST.064 1 t/ 33
by the developer and City through a modification. The approved material color is a plexi-glass
face, matte black painted aluminum can and internally illuminated individual letters. As
previously noted, national or regional tenants with more than five outlets are allowed to use their
standard sign if approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. Additionally
for national tenants only one color per sign, other than the logo, is allowed unless specifically
approved.
ANALYSIS:
The approved sign program does not specifically specify whether the letter style is to be all
capital letters or capital and small letters. However, the approved exhibit does show the sign
area with all capital letters. The proposed sign color is yellow as allowed by the sign program.
The orange "O" is not an approved color, however it can be approved by a modification. The
sign which faces south does comply with the sign program with regards to its size.
The intention of the approved sign program was to allow only one sign per business for the
shops in this area. The applicant has requested approval of a second sign because of a jog in
the store front area which creates two facia surfaces. Staff feels that only one main sign facing
south is warranted. If a second sign is deemed acceptable, Staff would recommend that it be
under the canopy identification sign that is allowed by the sign program (see attached exhibit for
minor tenant secondary signs). This sign would be a maximum 3.5 square feet and be
constructed of a wood or wood -like material. However, should it be determined that a second
sign is warranted, Staff would recommend that the second sign facing west not be illuminated.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the sign as requested facing south be approved and that the second sign
facing west be deleted.
Attachments:
1. Plan exhibits
2. Excerpts from sign program
DRBST.064 2
0311
107VI
Payless Sh Vb .,u
NAME
lAl
75%
O
W
"AREA A"
Q I NET SIGN AREA,
a7------r
75%
I
AREA B"
r-----rt
1 NET SIGN AREA
L
Leasehold Width Leasehold Width
(Varies) (Varies)
Lease Line Lease Line
(MINOR TENANT SIGNS (PRIMARY
c
PURPOSE: MAJOR IDENTIFICATION
QUANTITY: ONE PER LEASE AREA FRONTAGE.
CORNER END SPACES MAY SPLIT
ALLOWABLE FRONTAGE SIGN AREA AMONG TWO SIGNS.45I.�' 1 S �p 50f IT-j
NET SIGN AREA A: AS DEFINED ABOVE, NOT TO EXCEED 50 S.F. MAX. bt7 V��',Y1 +ti'1 u'rw 1 W Anti
(INCLUDING TENANT LOGO) o v1 2 5�a,�ct L Cam
NET SIGN AREA B: AS DEFINED ABOVE (TOWER LOCATIONS), NOT
TO EXCEED 50 S.F. MAX.' - INCLUDING TENANT LOGO
LETTER STYLE: HELVETICA LIGHT OR AS APPROVED BY CITY AND DEVELOPER
COLORS: WHITE/RED/BLUEIGREEN/YELLOW OR AS APPROVED BY
DEVELOPER.'
MATERIAL: PLEXIGLAS FACE, MATTE BLACK PAINTED ALUMINUM CAN. INTERNALLY
ILLUMINATED INDIVIDUAL LETTERS.
NET SIGN AREA C (ADDRESS):
LETTER STYLE: 6" HELVETICA LIGHT
COLORS:"FRAZEE",CZ-5880W G aWp� Dt vl Icrlvl�Q.tlJ—
MATERIAL: DIECUT FACED L:N:ANTS
ERS ,, u/ q}
lbOard �{ Tl.vt✓�vlIvW LO"NwI��:!oy
NATIONAL OR REGIONA WITH MORE THAN 5 OUTLETS WILL BE ALLOWED TO USE
THEIR STANDARD SIGN 0 TWO ADJACENT SEPERATE TENANT SIGNS SHALL BE THE SAME
COLOR WITHOUT CITY APPROVAL. ONE COLOR ONLY PER SIGN OTHER THAN LOGO UNLESS
APPROVED BY CITY.
22
036
11' 0'
EO.1 3'6" jEQ.
UNDERCANOPY SIGN
IDENTIFICATION SIGN
CENTERED ON SHOP ENTRANCE
MINOR TENANT SIGNS (SECONDARY
PURPOSE: SHOP IDENTIFICATION
QUANTITY: ONE PER LEASE SPACE
SIGN AREA: 3.5 S.F.
LETTER STYLE: HELVETICA LIGHT
COLORS: WHITE/RED/BLUE/GREEN/YELLOW TO MATCH PRIMARY SIGN
OR AS APPROVED BY DEVELOPER AND CITY.
MATERIAL: WOOD OR WOOD LIKE MATERIAL
UNDERCANOPY SIGN OPTIONAL PER DEVELOPER
23
n37
MINUTES
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
CITY OF LA QUINTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California
September 2, 1992
I. CALL TO ORDER
5:30 P.M.
A. Chairman Harbison brought the meeting to order at 5:40 P.M. and Boardmember
Rice led the flag salute.
U. ROLL CALL
A. Present: Boardmembers Paul Anderson, Fred Rice, Planning Commission
Representative Adolph, and Chairman Harbison.
B. Staff present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell
and Department Secretary Betty Anthony.
in. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Specific Plan 91-021: a request of RGB Commercial for approval of architectural
plans for a Power Center south of Highway 111, north of 48th Avenue, east of
Adams Street, and west of Dune Palms Road.
DRBM9/2
1. Planning Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the
Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development
Department.
2. Mr. Russ Beckner gave a brief presentation of the changes that had been
made to the architectural concept. He then introduced Mr. Kevin Mequet
of MPR who gave a more detailed description of the changes that were
made.
3. Boardmember Anderson stated his concern had been for the smaller tenant
buildings and the arcade as well as the use of awnings and the
deterioration of materials due to the extreme sun exposure. Mr. Mequet
stated they were aware of this problem and were looking into different
options to offset the problem.
1
038
4. Mr. Beckner asked the Board to comment on the frontage of the major.
Discussion followed regarding the building texture, color changes,
rounded corners, the appearance of skylighting, the beam affect, and the
arcade.
5. Following the discussion, it was stated by all the Boardmembers that the
drawings were a marked improvement and had a more southwestern look.
6. Planning Commissioner Adolph asked that the squares on the frontage not
be recessed but be replaced with colored tiles. Boardmember Anderson
asked that the wainscot be replaced with a texture and color change
separated by a reveal (indentation).
7. There being no further comment, it was moved by Boardmember
Anderson and seconded by Boardmember Rice to recommend approval to
the Planning Commission of the new architectural plans subject to
modifications regarding tiles and wainscot. Unanimously approved on a
4-0-3 vote.
B. Civic Center Landscaping; a request of T.K.D. and Associates for approval and
recommendation of landscaping design concepts.
DRBM9/2
1. Planning Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the
Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development
Department.
2. Mr. Tom Doczi, of T.K.D. gave a presentation of two design concepts
with a slide presentation.
3. Following the presentation Chairman Harbison stated his preference was
for #2B as the walkways were less restrictive. Boardmember Anderson
stated he also like #2B as he liked the strong linear look with the art work
being concentrated in designated areas.
4. Planning Commissioner Adolph stated he preferred a more free flowing
movement and a more meandering sidewalk. Boardmember Rice agreed
and felt that /t2A lent itself to that look.
5. Planning Commissioner Adolph inquired if there was to be any fencing
security. Mr. Doczi stated it would be fenced.
6. Planning and Development Director Jerry Herman asked the Board to look
beyond the art displays and consider the design as it relates to an overall
use for all functions/activities during the year. Discussion followed
regarding the design layouts.
`A
039
7. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Boardmember
Anderson and seconded by Boardmember Rice to recommend approval of
Design #2B to the Planning Commission. The motion passed on a 3-1-3
vote with Planning Commissioner Adolph voting no.
IN. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Boardmember Anderson asked that the minutes be changed under "Adjournment'
that it be changed from Chairman Anderson to Boardmember Anderson. There
being no further corrections, it was moved by Boardmember Anderson and
seconded by Boardmember Rice to approve the Minutes of August 5, 1992, as
corrected. Unanimously approved.
V. OTHER
A. Planning and Development Director Jerry Herman informed the members that the
landscape test plot had been planted at the Civic Center in front of the Lusardi
trailer. Members were invited to go by and inspect it at any time.
VI. AD.IOURNMENT
It was moved by Planning Commissioner Adolph and seconded by Boardmember Anderson to
adjourn to a regular meeting of the Design Review Board on October 7, 1992, at 5:30 P.M.
This meeting of the La Quinta Design Review Board was adjourned at 6:46 P.M., September
2, 1992.
DRBM9/2
3
n4�f)