Loading...
1993 03 03 DRBI. II. inta Carat Decade A Regular Meeting to be held at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California March 3, 1993 5:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - Flag Salute ROLL CALL A. Conditional Use Permit 93-004; a request of Carl's Jr. Restaurant for approval of the drive-thru window shade structures. B. Sign Approval 93-197; a request of JFK Memorial Hospital for approval of a deviation from the Master Sign Program and Sign Ordinance for the new JFK Sign Program at Plaza Tampico. C. Sign Approval 92-190; a request of Simon Motors for approval to install a new freestanding sign for the existing Simon Motors Car Dealership. D. Sign Approval 93-203; a request of Anchovie's Pizzeria for approval of an awning and sign. E. Tentative Tract 23269; a request of Century Homes for approval of landscaping plans for a new model and the model complex. F. Street Medians and Frontage Roads; a review of landscaping plans for street medians and frontage road along Washington Street south of Singing Palms Drive. CONSENT CALENDAR Approval of the Minutes of the regular Design Review Board Meeting of February 3, 1993. OTHER ADJOURNMENT DATE: CASE: REPRESENTATIVE: REQUEST: LOCATION: BACKGROUND: STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MARCH 3, 1993 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-004; CARL'S JR. RESTAURANT FRANK T. OLEY, SITE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER APPROVAL OF THE DRIVE-THRU WINDOW SHADE CANOPIES 78-672 HIGHWAY 111 (ONE ELEVEN LA QUINTA CENTER) The Planning Commission approved the request to construct a fast food restaurant on Pad I-1 of the One Eleven La Quints Shopping Center on January 12, 1993. The approved Conditions of Approval require the applicant to submit drawings to the Design Review Board for their review and approval of the proposed covered trellises which need to be built over each drive-thru pick-up window. The applicant submitted their plans to staff on February 22, 1993. A copy of their submittal is attached. The proposed design will include 2-foot by 2-foot stucco columns with tile wainscoat to match the building and wood cross -members for the top portion of the open trellis structure (e. g. 4-inches by 6-inches at 12-inches o.c.) . The wood will be stained to match the exterior color of the building. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff is comfortable with the Applicant's covered trellis design for each respectable drive-thru lane pick-up window because the materials and color of the future building have been used to design the two structures. It should be noted that the plans before you have not been fully revised as required by the Conditions of Approval. Included in the needed revision still are reduction in the building and play structure height, and redesign of the fencing around the patio area. RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend approval of the attached plans date stamped February 22, 1993. Attachments: Plans dated February 22, 1992 ' -- -. 002 g 1005F. 2000 SF. 20005E :l is ooz' 1 i S o0z' 1 i S 009' 1 3S 009 l r - -_iS 0091 Ci iS 009'l 3 S 009 1 i'S OOL'Z --------------- -'--__ m i S 006'S i_ s o a S ooe_os__ _ _s 006 a i_S 008- i i5 96L' 1 ON ``� !III III no a ci'¢N000w ¢ lFat-, NH � Y4 O E�IP c✓/ g dorrv`w ` 3 SdOHS M ^� Cr b \ \ O 'm$ n �o u�8 p v v U m�8 a h m QppS¢ i V'POSy Q` V o STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: MARCH 3, 1993 PROJECT: SIGN APPLICATION 93-197 APPLICANT: MR. SKIP BERG, DGI GRAPHICS CLIENT: JFK MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, MR. HARRIS F. KOENIG REQUEST: DEVIATION FROM THE MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE NEW JFK SIGN PROGRAM AT PLAZA TAMPICO. LOCATION: 78-150 CALLE TAMPICO (NORTHEAST CORNER OF DESERT CLUB DRIVE AT CALLE TAMPICO). BACKGROUND: The existing two story office/retail complex was approved in 1985. The existing site is developed with improvements which were made to the site during the development of Phase One of the property as required by Plot Plan 85-217 (Plaza Tampico). The westerly half of the site is vacant. The master plan approved for the site allows the ultimate development of 100,000 square feet. The six acre site is zoned C-V-N (Commercial Village "North"). APPROVED MASTER SIGN PROGRAM: The Master Sign Program for this site was approved by the City on April 25, 1989. The program was drafted by the Imperial Sign Company for the Plaza Tampico center. A copy of the approved program is attached. APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The Applicant has requested new identification signs for the main tenant of the building (JFK Medical). The new program includes a 52 square feet freestanding sign on Calle Tampico and a 42 square feet building sign. Both signs are internally illuminated can signs. The 12-foot high freestanding sign is located at the southeast corner of the site and the new building sign will be placed on the west side of the building on the building parapet. The new signs will replace the existing on -site signs. The JFK corporate colors will be used (white and blue). DRBST.079 1 EXISTING SIGN ORDINANCE PROVISIONS: "General Retail Sales and Services, Business and Professional Offices, Eating and Drinking Establishments and Other Commercial Uses. 1. Freestandini 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, which 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 to this case.) C. The maximum height of any freestanding sign shall be twelve feet. 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. EXISTING DOWNTOWN VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN: The Downtown Village Specific Plan (87-009) was approved in 1988. The plan covered approximately 100 acres and includes this property. The specific plan addressed many topics and it included development guidelines for on and off -site signs. These guidelines are attached. However, the C-V-N Zone code also states: "Signs in the North Subzone shall focus on commercial centers or complex identification, oriented to views from automobile traffic. Internal site signage shall be scaled appropriately to its purpose and function. Building identification shall be oriented to parking lot access. Uses within buildings shall be provided with pedestrian directories. It is not intended that all occupants of the C-V-N Subzone have equal signage exposure to the public right-of-way. All signs shall comply with Chapter 9.212, Sign Regulations, except that more restrictive provisions of the design standards for the Village shall apply." DRBST.079 E 005 ANALYSIS: The Applicant has requested a deviation from standards of the 1989 Master Sign Program and the 1988 Downtown Specific Plan requirements. The first issue Staff would like to address is the proposal by the Applicant to remove the existing 'Plaza Tampico" monument sign from the project site in order to install the new twelve foot high multiple copy sign to the east of the existing identification sign. The existing low profile sign is located at the westerly -most driveway into the center on Calle Tampico. The existing sign (shown on Page 5 of 10 of the Master Sign Program) is consistent with the intent of the Village Specific Plan for signs to have a visual relationship to the building or its surroundings be indirectly lit and be wood or tile. The new sign generally meets the provisions of the Sign Ordinance, but it does not meet the intent of either the existing sign program nor the Specific Plan guidelines. Staff is opposed to the new submittal because it is out of character with the future design program for this area and it includes multiple copy graphics for the on -site physicians. Staff would support a similar sign to that which exists except with new copy identifying the "JFK Civic Center Medical Plaza" if properly designed. The second issue is the request for a new cabinet sign to replace the existing building mounted sign on the westerly side of the building. The new sign measures 3' X 14' and is located on the upper portion of the two story structure (see the attached plans). The graphics for the side of the building are located on Page 9 of 10 of the sign program. The approval allows a sign on the first floor level of the building versus the second story elevation proposed by the Applicant, plus only non -illuminated signs are not allowed. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, Staff cannot support the Applicant's request based on the adopted materials for this site, design, and ordinance requirements. If the Applicant would like to deviate from the adopted provisions noted above, the application must be reviewed by the Planning Commission per Section 9.212.120.C.1 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend denial of the current proposal, but if the Applicant would like to revise the graphics package, Staff would request continuing the matter to the April agenda. Attachments: 1. Sign Exhibits 2. Letter from JFK Hospital 3. Excerpts from the adopted Village Specific Plan 4. Master Sign Program DRBST.079 3 006 CIVIC CENTER MEDICAL PLAZA 78-150, INTERNAL MEDICINE OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY T. WAYNE UOXLEY MA.__ UlU [4 it 0 C=3 vi z x jl L+ NON ��a 008 009 JOHN F. KENNEDY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL 47-111 MONROE STREET INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 619. 347. 6191 February 11, 1993 To Whom it May Concern: Please be advised that Diversified Graphic Industries (DGI) is authorized to represent JFK Memorial Hospital with regard to the presentation for approval of signage to be installed at 78-150 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. This authorization is limited only to presentation of the signage plans. DGI is not authorized to enter into any conditions relating to the sign approval or modifications to the sign design that might occur as a result of the review without approval by JFK Memorial Hospital Administration. If there are any questions regarding this authorization, please do not hesitate to give me a call at 775-8019. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sinc ely, r s F. K(oenig Associate Administrator kc FEB 22 1993,``k U1 0 Ll 6.5 6.5.1 Si ns Building Signs Excerpt from the Village Specific Plan Every sign shall have good scale and proportion in its design and in its visual relationship to buildings and surroundings. Every sign shall be designed as an integral architectural element of the building and site to which it principally relates. The colors, materials, and lighting of every sign shall be restrained and harmonious with the building and site to which it principally relates. Signs on glazed tile with indirect lighting are to be encouraged. Back lit (box or can) signs are to be discouraged, directly illuminated signs shall be limited to individual letters. Exposed bulb or garish neon lighting is prohibited. The number of graphic elements on a sign shall be held to the minimum needed to convey the sign's major message and shall be composed in proportion to the area of the sign face. Accessory signs shall be given the same careful consideration of approval as that given for main signs. Each sign shall be compatible with signs on adjoining premises and shall not compete for attention. Identification signs of a prototype design and corporation logos shall conform to the criteria for all other signs. BOOK STORE BOUTIQUE RESTAURANT 4.8.7 Si ns Good signage is very important. Control over signs on private property will be handled through the City's sign ordinance and by the additional standards contained in this Specific Plan. But there is a whole array of signs that the City itself will be responsible for, which include directional signs, street signs, traffic signs and informational signs. The signs used in the Village should differ from signs used elsewhere in the City. This will help to reinforce the uniqueness of the Village. Village signs should have a special design that reflects the character of the Village itself. Ideally there should be a special logo for the Village which will appear on all Village related signs. Directional signs to the Village should be placed at or near the main highway entrances to the city, particularly Highway ill, Washington Street, and Jefferson Street. Since the Village is not located on one of the major arterials in the Coachella Valley, people must be informed on how to get there. Hence the significance of the directional signs. Village directional signs should be Incorporated with other directional signing, in order to reduce sign proliferation. l ATTACHMEMr #1 p G / or /D JAM 26 1993 G MASTER SIGN PPOGRAM FOR PLAZA TAMPICO Prepared For La Quinta Medical Plaza Ltd. By Imperial Sign Company, Inc. Indio, California EXHIBIT --411-15- .__CASENO. f'2, 2 cM"o,ns^'AL9% App?.G'Ar, 71 °��`: ;nG CIVISION E 0 Pv Z of 10 ._/L-maSLar 61GnOruuraiu iGi iiaaa a'ni.:Cu �� a ue4lnate neCBSSiCV�-- _s- -� - c t.C:Grd .S responslble for �7rOgra-1 CJ,,erb si-fir_ tnat he La. g.i =-,9 ..,'_. = Tenant signage. -he .lf*grer.`- =_yr groups are as follows: Primary directional signs, Secondary directional signs, Tra;fic regulatory, and Tenant signs. All proposed Exterior Signage is to be submitted for approval to: La Quinta Medical Plaza LTD 500 South Sepulveda, Suite #400 Los Angeles, California 90049 Once approved, the City of La QuiPlanning Department will hale to see scaled drawings. suppliedlicensed contractor. In developing the Sign Criteria, one must keep the five basic categories 04 good signage in prospective, and those are: Direction, Information, Identification Regulation and/or Information Displays. SIGN GROUP "MONUMENT" The existing monument will consist of 10" Helvetica Medium Oxidized Bronze Letters, stud mounted to both sides of base, to read: iPLAZA TAMPICO SIGN GROUP PP (Plot Plan) LANDLORD - SECONDARY DIRECTIONAL SIGNS: These signs are tp be located so that they follow and offer reinforcement to the Primary Sign Group. For instance, Directory Cabinet close to curb, listing Tenants within, along with A Plot Plan. Approximately 4'x4' free standing Plot Plan Cabinet, located inside the Tampico entrance, labeled PP. 13 EXHISR �• 2 ors _CASE NO. ri, I n p& 3 of 10 ycrNiLUnC - TRAFFIC REGLL,;TOR'r Si:i..5. Signs :ocatec wit hin the ...a-ctnlr,i 'equ;atIr.g cne *:--w z+ traff:_ ie. St-_p signs, Do v=t Enter. or One way, signs. RESE.RVEC PARKING ONLY Signs: To be located at "P" locations on t`e "PLOT PLAN". Approximately 7"x14" double faced sign with 1,,c.ry and Brown cop•:. Signs to be installed on o F.ot ste?I Drsts. SIGN GROUP VP (Visit_r Parking) VISITOR PARKING Signs: Approximately 18"x24" single faced signs. One located at Plaza Tamo:co entrance, to direct visitors to proper Darking areas. SIGN GROUP S (Tenant Signs) TENANT Signs: Exterior mounted signage (City permit and Landlord approval needed). FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION: In general, Imperial Sign Company has written the sign program, and is familiar with Landlord and City requirements. All exterior signage is to comply with City of La Quinta's Sign and Building Codes in conjunction with La Quinta Medical Plaza people. Exterior signage is not to exceed one square foot of sign area per lineal 'foot of frontage, or for a total of 50 square feet. MATERIALS: 1/411 painted bronze aluminum letters for company name. Pictorial type Logos may be constructed from different type of substrate, if need be. ILLUMINATION/NON-ILLUMINATICN: 01 Tenant may illuminate signage indirectly with fluorescent rack lighting, with a low profile fixture to blend with building col ors. EXHIBIT 660 3010 0 0 Pa- q of to - _====•c.•� _ter== rat`,ar than aover-:s:ng services. F'ic-_oriai Locos are permitted as long a=_ the square footage is rc= exceedet. C:OLLfiG: - all rnoy Wi'l be medium oronze color. Tenants will be abie to use :heir corporate colors within their pictorial type logos Win. V. T'rFE bT'rLE ANC CHARACTER HEIGHT: Tenant will be free to use their corporate type style. as long as :t .:ices not detract from the overall look of the structure. Character heignt for company name not to exceed 14". Pictorial Logo nay be proportionally larger. ADDITIONAL NOTES: All type styles, pictorial type logos and colors, still need Landlord and City approval. All tenant signage is located on the submitted "plot Plan" and is labelled "S". The proposed individual painted bronze letters will be stud mounted into plaster, at designated area on elevation print. EXHIBIT Q F'Voj° 10O-CASE NO� Z'?'*L •�,�, U1;i rl! ! it J i If W l O t � J I � Z i r - Y= i Y • of W JV l� r ` o J H QI j J J 2 N i ?I J N_ 7�� 7 �4nv�i W pr,n j OI P6, S or' 10 . 016 0:)Owvl 31-IYS I I 1 I - I I I w I I I JJ JI Z I I I yl)1NY a�i}Ytl I _ Fes^_ II P& (,c*:- P 017 � 4 0 W d t O OG fOr10 018 s s PC,, io N a m �s 0 W ` l � •� � yl n 1 I" jig �I 10 _;EIS Ali � t•• 4 `� �'LI � � V F—� v� DEG Y •::::11 -y I /eo. 9 ota to O2J 11 14C P& ovic 21 ATTKNM61VT 4r_7• iG /or2 Tq 4 Qamrtu D78-106 CALLE ESTADO • LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 • 1619) 564.2246 April 25, 1989 Mr. Mark Ross Imperial Sign Company, Inc. 46-120 Calhoun Street Indio, California 92201 SUBJECT: PLAZA TAMPICO SIGN PROGRAM Dear Mr. Ross: The Planning and Development Department has reviewed the above -referenced program, and has approved it in concept, subject to the following conditions: 1. All signage submitted shall substantially conform to locations as shown on Exhibit A (6 sheets), and the descriptions as set forth in Exhibit B of the sign program, except where the following conditions make modifications, deletions, or additions. 2. Signage not poothe under this mucshall conform to Chapter 9.212fLaQuintaniipalCode. 3. The following signage is permitted without further review or building permit(s) required: a. Monument sign as proposed, if non -illuminated; b. Any required or necessary directional signage for parking and traffic control purposes only. 4. The following signage shall pbensubject ato more revdetailed review (no fee) by the elopment Department prior to installation: a. All tennant signage locations, size and design, and colors; b. Tennant directory sign. The Landk th 5. elevationar(sheet jl2goofsh5) isown nnot hpermitted npursg E u pursuant to 022 0 ® 'PC, 2 or 2- Section 9.212.120.C.1 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. An adjustment from the Planning Commission may be requested pursuant to 9.212.030.F for this signage. 6. Any illumination shall be limited to backlit lettering/logos or back lighting located underneath signage to be illuminated. Neon, channel -lettered, or can -type signage is prohibited. 7. No pictorial logo may exceed 30 inches in height, unless a written request to do so is approved by the Planning and Development Director. This sign program approval governs only the number, location, and sign types to be permitted. No specific tennant signage approvals are being implied; only the monument sign and parking/traffic control signs may be installed as a result of this approval. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, JERKY HERMAN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Wallace Nesbit Associate Planner WN/ad cc: Bill Gates,.Code Enforcement Officer enclosures: Approved Exhibits A and B 023 C V O E • F N Om wr ea � F O W .Yi q Y • � Y V • Y u Y a G m 0 N C OL m Yu 0 C a0 O � Y 6 Y Y U W V e .ci uo a• i o Y Y O e t a Y G Y Y M O Y m u0 • O W Y EWV m 4,4 • C c '0 v WN Maa • �~ CY �� Ywg Y i Y Y w <uC ..lU me 4 I I lJ i 1� �FRI He JIM 1 k 0 4 rr ,-'4--, *,vr. 03 0000 E A �4 &- Z 000 - s C u 1 i t u R i (408) 899-1805 (408) 899-0903 FAX JUKE 6, 1989 Tower W id LANDMARK LAND 0• ' 78-140 CALLS E9— LA QUINTA, CA 2253 773- 3737 TO: PAM RE: TAMPICO SIGNAGE BRONZE LETTERS TO BE CUT FROM 1 AS TREE,SATIN FINISH,DARR EDGES •DURATHANE• MOUNTING SHALL BE I 1/4x2O.BRONZE STUDS PROVIDED. COST FOR LETTERING ONLY 1,850 SALES TA)rPACRING AND SHIPPING ALLOW FOUR TO SIX WEEKS DELIVW ONLY ®N • BRONZE P TE SANE MATERIAL AND TO BE SEALED IN A CLEAR As HOLES DRILLED AND TAPPED 00 CRAPGRS TO BE ADDED. EXHIBIT e .5A CASE NO. &9-12" 0 vi r; I UT a VICINI `( NIA° c S4 So • 1 IS v tn u z o CALLE 1AMFICO A77A► .wf-i9 .rr- *q mn 1 .. rKWN _ [I nil 026 78.105 CALLE ESTADO — LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 564-2246 FAX (619) 564-6617 December 4, 1989 Ms. Lynn Jensen Landmark Land Company 78-140 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON SA 89-106 Dear Ms. Jensen: This is to inform you that that La Quinta Planning Commission, at their meeting of November 28, 1989, did take the following action regarding the above subject: By minute motion, the Planning Commission granted approval for Sign Application 89-106, subject to conditions as set forth in the Staff Report previously sent to you. A copy of the Conditions is attached for your files, along with the approved sign exhibits. Should you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. very truly yours, JERRY HERMAN PLANNING 6 DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Wallace Nesbit Associate Planner WN/mr attachments cc: Code Enforcement Division Tom Hartung, Building Official MR/LTRWf 0A%G ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1604 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 , 027 0 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SIGN APPROVAL NO. 89-106 NOVEMBER 28, 1989 1. Design and location of the approved signage shall be in conformance with Exhibits A and B, as contained in the file for SA #89-106, except where these conditions shall take precedence. 2. This approval for SA #89-106 shall be used within one year of the date of approval, or the approval shall become null and void. 3. Prior to installation of the approved signage, Applicant shall apply for and obtain a building permit through the Planning and Development Department. BJ/CONAPRVL.028 - 1 - 028 STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: MARCH 3, 1993 (CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 6, 1993) PROJECT: SIGN APPLICATION 92-190 APPLICANT: SIMON MOTORS OWNER: MR. FRED SIMON REPRESENTATIVE: MR. SKIP BERG, DGI GRAPHICS REQUEST: TO INSTALL A NEW FREESTANDING SIGN FOR THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS CAR DEALERSHIP AT 78-611 HIGHWAY 111. THE SIGN IS 29-FEET HIGH AND APPROXIMATELY 129 SQUARE FEET. A SIGN ADJUSTMENT HAS BEEN REQUESTED BECAUSE THE SIGN EXCEEDS THE EXISTING SIGN ORDINANCE STANDARDS. BACKGROUND: The Design Review Board examined the requests of the Applicant on January 6, 1993. A copy of the original report and Design Review Board Minutes are attached from this meeting. The Design Review Board requested that Mr. Berg submit for their review, perspective sketches of how the new sign would be visually blocked by the future development of the Simon Plaza project to the west of the Simon Motors Automobile Dealership. The Design Review Board also wanted to know if Mr. Simon was willing to remove some of his exterior building signs in order to build the new freestanding sign at the intersection of Simon Drive and Highway 111. NEW SUBMITTAL: The sign designer submitted to Staff on February 22, 1993, new information on the proposed project. Mr. Berg has taken 13" X 20" colored photographs of the area and has added an overlay sheet to each exhibit which examines the effect of the future Simon Plaza project on the Simon Motors sign request. These exhibits are not reproducible but they will be available for viewing at the meeting. Attached is information the Applicant has also submitted on the existing Simon Motors building signage program. DRBST.078 029 STAFF COMMENTS The existing Simon Motors building has numerous illuminated cabinet signs and some non - illuminated signs on each of the street frontages for the car/truck dealership. Staff estimates there is approximately ±466 square feet of signage area on the facility at this time but this excludes some smaller supplemental services signs which were not counted toward the above cited number. The Applicant has expressed a desire to eliminate a few signs from the building if they are allowed permission to install the new freestanding sign at Simon Drive and Highway 111. However, Staff has not received specific information on this matter prior to preparing this report. ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed the perspective overlays which were submitted on February 22, 1993. The rendering exhibit that the new sign will not be visually blocked by the future development of Simon Plaza to the west of the automobile dealership. Therefore, the Applicant's original written statement that the main reason for the increase signage height was based on the future installation of the parking structure for Simon Plaza is not an appropriate argument for a sign adjustment. The photos show that the sign will be intermittently blocked by the existing palm trees on Highway 111 versus the future project. The Applicant's request to eliminate some of the building signs is commendable but the number removed does not diminish the overall square footage to something within reason to again justify a sign two and one-half times the existing sign code provisions. Staff feels there are other locations on the site for a freestanding sign if the Applicant would like a new detached structure within the provisions of the existing Sign Ordinance. CONCLUSION: Staff cannot find any valid reasons to recommend approval of the proposed design or an adjustment for this sign based on the existing Sign Ordinance or site conditions. RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend that the Design Review Board recommend denial of the Applicant's request to exceed the provisions of the Sign Code based on the provisions of Section 9.212.030F of the existing Sign Ordinance. Attachments: 1. Design Review Board report dated January 6, 1993. 2. Existing Building Signage Summary. 3. January 6, 1993, Design Review Board Minutes. DRBST.078 z 039 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 6, 1993 CASE: SIGN APPLICATION 92-190 APPLICANT: SIMON MOTORS OWNER: MR. FRED SIMON REPRESENTATIVE: MR. SKIP BERG; DGI GRAPHICS REQUEST: TO INSTALL A NEW FREESTANDING SIGN FOR THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS CAR DEALERSHIP AT 78-611 HIGHWAY 111. THE SIGN IS 29-FEET HIGH AND APPROXIMATELY 129 SQUARE FEET. A SIGN ADJUSTMENT HAS BEEN REQUESTED BECAUSE THE SIGN EXCEEDS THE EXISTING SIGN ORDINANCE STANDARDS. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: SIGNS ARE EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT TO SECTION 15311A EXISTING ZONING/ LAND USE: CPS COMMERCIAL - AUTO DEALERSHIP BACKGROUND: The existing dealership was built on the property in 1982. Presently, Mr. Simon sells General Motors vehicles on the property which includes Cadillac, Pontiac, Buick & GM Trucks. The property is located at the southwest corner of Simon Drive and Highway 111 and the dealership is on approximately 4.0 acres. SIGN REQUEST: The applicant has requested one freestanding pylon sign for the property since one does not exist. The sign is 29-feet high and 129 square feet in size. The sign identifies the dealership and the types of cars/trucks which are sold at the site. The corporate identification colors (blue, red, black, etc.) are proposed for the sign names and the cabinet background will be white. The sign support and frame would be blue & "chrome" in color. The sign is proposed to be located at the intersection of Highway 111 and Simon Drive. 031 EXISTING SIGN ORDINANCE: The existing sign ordinance requires that the applicant meet the following standards if a freestanding sign is to be built on the property: "Individual commercial uses, with a minimum of two hundred feet of street frontage and not a part of a larger complex, are permitted one freestanding business identification sign of up to one-half of the area permitted for attached signs, not to exceed fifty square feet. Freestanding sign area shall be subtracted from the total allowable attached sign area. The maximum height of any freestanding sign shall be twelve feet." SIGN ADJUSTMENT REQUEST: The applicant does not meet the requirements of the La Quinta Sign Ordinance. Therefore, staff cannot approve the applicant's sign request. The sign code does, however, allow the applicant the means to pursue a Sign Adjustment with the Planning Commission. The Sign Code states: Adjustments to permit additional sign area, additional numbers of signs, an alternative sign location, an alternative type of signage or additional height may be granted by the Planning Commission. The applicant for a planned sign program application must request the adjustment in writing on forms provided by the Planning and Development Department. The Planning Commission must find that one or more of the following facts exist when an adjustment is made: 1. Additional Area: a. To overcome a disadvantage as a result of an exception setback between the street and the sign or orientation of the sign location; b. To achieve an effect which is essentially architectural, sculptural, or graphic art; c. To permit more sign area in a single sign than is allowed, but less than the total allowed the site, where a more orderly and concise pattern of signing will result; d. To allow a sign to be in proper scale with its building or use; e. To allow a sign compatible with other conforming signs in the vicinity; f . To establish the allowable amount and location of signing when no street frontage exists or when, due to an unusual lot shape (e.g., flag lot) , the street frontage is excessively narrow in proportion to the average width of the lot. 2. Additional number, to compensation for inadequate visibility, or to facilitate good design balance. 2 :. 032 3. Alternative locations: a. On -site. To transfer area from one wall to another wall or to a freestanding sign upon the finding that such alternative location is necessary to overcome a disadvantage caused by an unfavorable orientation of the front wall to the street or parking lot or an exceptional setback; b. Lots Not Fronting on a Street. To permit the placement of a sign on an access easement to a lot not having street frontage, at a point where viewable from the adjoining public street. In addition to any other requirements, the applicant shall submit evidence of the legal right to establish and maintain a sign within the access easement; c. Additionally, alternative on -site locations may be granted in order to further the intent and purposes of this chapter or where normal placement would conflict with the architectural design of a structure. 4. Alternative Type of Sign. To facilitate compatibility with the architecture of structure(s) on the site and improve the overall appearance on the site. 5. Additional Height. To permit additional height to overcome a visibility disadvantage. The applicant has applied to increase the height of the sign from 12-feet to 29-feet and an increase in sign size from 50 square feet to 129 square feet. STAFF COMMENT: Staff has reviewed the requirements which could necessitate a larger sign or a higher sign that the standards of the Sign Ordinance. However, we find no reason to support the request based on the following summary: A. Additional Area: The sign location proposed is not in a location which is a disadvantage to the applicant. The sign is located in a highly visible location with excellent exposure to Highway 111, and no obstructions are apparent at this location (e.g. buildings, billboards, landscaping, etc.). A traffic signal is also proposed at Simon Drive and Highway 111 in the near future which will help the exposure to the property once installed. The applicant presently has building signs on the property which are visible to passing motorists, and vehicles which are displayed in front of the building (outside) adds to the marketability of the center. The surrounding properties are presently vacant which further helps the visibility of the dealership. The applicant also has over 400-feet of frontage on Highway 111 and another 500-feet of frontage on Simon Drive (east side of the site) to market his products. [!33 B. Additional Height: No sight visibility problems are apparent at the site which would create a disadvantage to the proprietor. The Design Review Board should also be advised that the City has not approved any signs along Highway 111 which exceed the 12-feet height limit. Sight visibility problems have thus far not been an issue as the buildings are set back from the street 50 feet or more and the properties are also large enough to design a freestanding sign which is appropriate for the proposed business. We encourage the applicant to forego trying to identify all the makes of vehicles sold at the site and focus on designing a sign which specifies the dealer's name instead. CONCLUSION: Staff cannot find any valid reasons to recommend approval of the design or an allowance for this sign based on the existing Sign Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend that the Design Review Board recommend denial of the applicants request to exceed the provisions of the Sign Code based on the provisions of Section 9.212.030 F of the existing Sign Ordinance. Attachment: Vicinity Map Exhibits Letter from DGI Signs ssalwn/w6b Inc. 5 Inaceuccoo P.O. Box 1770 La Ouinta, Ca. 92253 Voice: 619-564-1961 Fax: 619-564-1761 DIVERSIFIED GRAPHIC DIMMTRIES CITY OF LA QUINTA 78-105 CALLE ESTADO LA QUINTAL CA. 922W ATTN: GREG TROUSDELL; ASSOCIATE PLANNER RE: SIMON MOTORS DEAR GREG: 11-24-92 SIMON MOTORS WOULD LIKE TO INSTALL R PYLON DISPLAY AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF SIMON DRIVE, PERPENDICULAR TO HIGHWAY Ill. THE FOLLOWING ANSWERS THE PERTINENT QUESTIONS AND STATEMENTS OF SECTION 9.212.030, "F" ADJUSTMENTS. 186 = 160 6 186 - 161 IA. WHEN CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE FOR THE SIMON PLAZA PROJECT THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS WALL DISPLAYS WILL BE OBSCURED BY THE PARKING GARAGE WHEN APPROACHING SIMON MOTORS FROM THE WEST. B. OUR SIGN IS A DLP'LICATE OF THE GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATE SIGN PROGRAM. WE FEEL THIS DISPLAY IS ARCHITECTURALLY PLEASING. C. THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE IS NECESSARY TO ACCOMODATE THE FIVE LISTED PRODUCTS AND COMPANY. THIS DISPLAY ALLOWS MOTORIST TO INSTANTLY IDENTIFY THE AUTOMOBILES SIMON MOTORS OFFERS. IT IS A MORE CONCISE AND ORDERLY METHOD OF ADVERTISING. D. THE SIGN IS COMPATIBLE TO EXISTING BUILDING HEIGHT. 2. BOTH THESE ITEMS ARE TRUE Q36 P.O. Box 1770 La Ouinta. Ca. 92253 Voice: 619-564-1961 Fax: 6 i 9-564-1761 DIVERSIFIED GRAPHIC HDUSTRIES 5. WE REQUIRE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE MOTORIST ADEQUATE TIME AND VISABILITY TO COMPREHEND THE MESSAGE. THE OVERALL DESIGN AND PANEL COLORS ARE CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING COLORS AND BUILDING ARCHITECTURE. AVERAGE COPY SIZE FOR THE AUTOMOBILE NAMES IS 12". THIS PROJECTS TO A READABILITY DISTANCE OF 4609 - 5P5' OR ONE BLOCK OR LESS. SINCERELY, DIVERSIFIED GRAPHIC INDUSTRIES D. G. I. NgFs�r M. S. "SKIP" BERG 031 1 1O \•\� 11 "-"-^- 1 r�•.tr7 ~Y err. 4`.:.r:•I —� l c I� -- ` t a .poi i l..•r�. I=L EXISTING BUILDING SIGNS (A Thru H) A = Simon - 25 sq. ft. (2) = 50 sq. ft. (non -illuminated) B = Cadillac/Pontiac = 50 sq. ft. (illuminated) C = Simon Motors =168 sq. ft. (illuminated) D = Buick = 50 sq. ft. (Illuminated) E = Used Cars = 18 sq. ft. (illuminated) F = GMC Truck = 24 sq. ft. (illuminated) (non G = Simon - 25 sq. ft. (2) = 50 sq. ft. -illuminated) H = Simon = 56 sq. €t. (illuminated) 038 PLa/,, j.j. 039 Design Review Board Minutes J-' Commissioner Adolph asked if the north end of the building encroacpEd into the setback area. Mr. Knutson stated it did and they had appljo for anance for the setback. Commissioner Adolph asked if the licant w lanning to use pepper trees near the sidewalk area. Knutson sta would refer the matter to the landscape architect. 7. Commissio Adolph asked the applicant if the baysAuld have hoists. Mr. Knutson ted therewere no hoists and the ould be no major automobile r ork done at the site. Commis ' er Adolph also asked if the tree at the e ce to the car wash ould create a nuisance. Mr. Knutson stated h anted the tree to en the amount of concrete in this area. Discussio ollowed as a actual processing of cars through the car wash. 8. Commissioner Adolph asked i e applicant had any environmental problems. Mr. Knutson stat e d not and explained their recycling program. 9. Commissioner /swould if the\wdroll-up doors. Mr. Knutson stated thave adoor painted to match the split face cc 10. Boardmem Campbell inquired about the thickne f the arches and sugges hat the tower needed to stand out more. Knutson stated he wo add more bright colors to the tower if the Boar ted him to. 11. ere being no further questions, Boardmember Anderson ed and dmember Campbell seconded a motion to recommend approv the Planning Commission for Plot Plan 92-494 subject to the sign pro returning to the Design Review Board review. Unanimously approv C. Sign Approval 92-190; a request of Simon Motors for approval of a freestanding sign on Highway 111. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. DRBl-6 2. Boardmember Wright asked how many existing signs there were. Staff stated they were not certain but believed there to be nine. 3. Mr. Mark Simon, owner, stated his reasons for his request and that they 3 040 Design Review Board Minutes would be willing to give up some of their present wall signage to gain the larger freestanding sign. He further made a correction on one of the logo sign colors. 4. Boardmember Rice gave a history of the car dealership for the Board. Boardmember Wright asked the applicant to explain how the future Simon Plaza building would hide their signs. Discussion followed regarding the location and view of the different signs. 6. Boardmember Curtis asked if the applicant had tried to build a sign within the Code requirements. Mr. Skip Berg, DGI Graphics, stated this was impossible because the sign graphics would be reduced to a size that could be seen and still have it seen. Discussion followed regarding the height of the sign and the concern for setting a precedent for other developers on Highway 111. 7. Boardmember Wright stated that the future Simon Plaza sign was so similar in letter style that motorist would tie the two projects together. Mr. Simon stated he did not agree. Discussion followed regarding the present signage. 8. Boardmember Anderson stated he could not support a 29-foot high sign. He felt the applicant should submit to the Board justification that provided the sign needed to be 29-feet to be seen. 9. Mr. Berg stated that the 12-foot high Code requirement should only be a guideline, as all developments would not be able to meet that requirement. 10. Boardmembers discussed with the applicant how the future Simon Plaza building would block Simon Motors signs. Following the discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Anderson and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to continue the Sign Approval to the next meeting to give the applicant time to submit line of sight graphics, graphics showing the existing signage, and giving examples of what the different height signs would look like. Unanimously approved. D. SMific Plan 92-022 and Plot Plan 92-490; a request of E.F.P. Corporation (Ed Carnes) for approval of development standards for a future shopping center and approval to develop a ±251,272 square foot commercial shopping center located at the northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Highway 111. DRB1-6 Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in .1."" 041 STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DATE: MARCH 3, 1993 CASE: SIGN APPLICATION 93-203 APPLICANT: ANCHOVIE'S PIZZERIA AWNING CO.: PALMS TO PINES CANVAS; ERNEST BROOKS TO INSTALL AN ILLUMINATED AWNING SIGN REQUEST: LOCATION: 77-110 CALLE ESTADO BACKGROUND: In 1992, the City approved Plot Plan 92-484 which allowed the development of a single story 1,500 square foot restaurant on a 50-foot by 100-foot lot across from the existing City Hall facility. The restaurant was constructed and opened in 1992. On August 5, 1992, Staff and the Design Review Board examined the initial sign request of the applicant which was to place a sand blasted wood sign (10 inch x 24 inch) over the front door of the building on Calle Estado. The Design Review Board approved the request but the sign was never installed because the owner felt the neon window sign was adequate. SIGNAGE REQUEST: Staff received the new request for back lit awning sign on February 24, 1993. The awning will be approximately 4-feet by 3-feet by 12-feet. It will be affixed to the south side of the building between the entry columns. The alloy vinyl awning will be white and the name of the restaurant and logo will be printed on the front of the awning in red vinyl letters (capital letters 10-inches high by 10-feet total length). A copy of the request is attached. The awning will be back lit with florescent tubes. The tubes will be behind the signage copy and mounted within a metal channel. The awing will be made of one inch square tubing and painted white to match the awning fabric. STAFF COMMENTS: The project is in the Downtown Village Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan was established in 1988. This property is within the Commercial Village "The Core" district. An excerpt from this document is attached. The primary purpose of the sign guidelines is to encourage signs which are compatible with the existing building, and the amount of copy information is limited, and externally illuminated signs are encouraged. "Back lit (box or can) signs are to be discouraged, directly illuminated signs shall be limited to individual letters." 042 Staff would like to point out that the illuminated awning is not the same style awning which was installed at the Beachside Cafe on Highway 111 because the letters on this awning will not be neon channelized letters. As mentioned above, the red letters will be vinyl and affixed to the white vinyl material. Technically, the awning structure is a sign because it will be lit by the recessed light bar behind the front of the awning. However, since the awning designer has constructed a metal channel for the light source, Staff is not opposed to the proposed design. The graphic copy on the awning is approximately 40% of the awing surface, but this is based on both the name of the business and the logo. The owner's request for an illuminated awning is a hybrid design to the guidelines of the Specific Plan because the letters are lit from behind but are not part of a can sign design program. Staff supports the concept but we would like to impose a few conditions on the application. Our suggested conditions are: 1. That only one low wattage florescent light tube should be used to illuminate the awning sign. 2. The awning should be suspended by rigid attachments that will not allow the awning to move or swing in the wind. 3. The minimum clearance height of the awning supports should be eight feet in height above the existing concrete pedestrian sidewalk unless a lower overall height is approved by the building official. 4. A building permit is required prior to any on -site construction. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the signage request based on our recommended Conditions of Approval. Attachments: Site Location Map Sign Exhibit Excerpt from Village Specific Plan 343 3 / 1 �� , • /0 C CALLE W� w.. �t., ---- • --Cad'' Q .O a� i ;I� •• �'. In rn ` I O © o `J tuts . 119 1. Existing Library D,D4nn Lot Project Site ,.r r, MA • 010. 0 Vat nt V Cant J� Jr { ? �O I 6 7 al � �t {O I'dr, O 16 1O171r I / 44 STADO FOrt� �d •' Q �_—� • I--�CALLE--�E: J L _i / i r. Ci Halll w ®lozlm. /! ? �V a can 8 0 NORTH SCALE: nts 044et Top View Existing Building Proposed Awning 12 Excerpt from the Village Specific Plan 6.5 Si ns 6.5.1 Building Signs - Every sign shall have good scale and proportion in its design and in its visual relationship to buildings and surroundings. - Every sign shall be designed as an integral architectural element of the building and site to which it principally relates. The colors, materials, and lighting of every sign shall be restrained and harmonious with the building and site to which it principally relates. Signs on glazed tile with indirect lighting are to be encouraged. Back lit (box or can) signs are to be discouraged, directly illuminated signs shall be limited to individual letters. Exposed bulb or garish neon lighting is prohibited. The number of graphic elements on a sign shall be held to the minimum needed to convey the sign's major message and shall be composed in proportion to the area of the sign face. 4.8.7 Si ns Good signage is very important. Control over signs on private property will be handled through the City's sign ordinance and by the additional standards contained in this Specific Plan. But there is a whole array of signs that the City itself will be responsible for, which include directional signs, street signs, traffic signs and informational signs. The signs used in the Village should differ from signs used elsewhere in the City. This will help to reinforce the uniqueness of the Village. Village signs should have a special design that reflects the character of the Village itself. Ideally there should be a special logo for the Village which will appear on all Village related signs. Directional signs to the Village should be placed at or near the main highway entrances to the city, particularly Highway 111, Washington Street, and Jefferson Street. Since the Village Is not located on one of the major arterials in the Coachella Valley, people must be informed on how to get there. Hence the significance of the directional signs. Village directional signs should be Incorporated with other directional signing, in order to reduce sign proliferation. - Accessory signs shall be given the same careful consideration of approval as that given for main signs, c - Each sign shall be compatible with signs on adjoining premises and shall not compete for attention. - Identification signs of a prototype design and corporation logos shall conform to the criteria for all other signs. BOOS( STORE BOUTIQUE RESTAURANT 047 BI #E STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: MARCH 3, 1993 PROJECT: TRACT 23269 APPLICANT: CENTURY HOMES (LA QUINTA DEL REY) LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: JOHN KAWADA AND ASSOCIATES REQUEST: APPROVAL OF LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR NEW MODEL AND MODEL COMPLEX. LOCATION: MIDWAY BETWEEN FRED WARING DRIVE AND MILES AVENUE WEST OF ADAMS STREET. BACKGROUND: Century Homes recently obtained approval of a fifth residential unit type for their project which is presently under construction. As a result of this approval, the Applicants have submitted hardscape construction, landscaping and irrigation plans for a new unit which will be utilized as a model at 44-370 Las Vistas Drive. Additionally, they have submitted typical landscape and irrigation plans for the unit which would be spread out through the project. PRO.IECT PROPOSAL: The Applicant has provided hardscape construction, planting, and irrigation plans for the new model home unit which will be built adjacent to the existing sales complex. The plans indicate that the two front yard trees and some of the shrubbery is presently existing. However, an on - site inspection shows that there is no existing landscaping. Therefore, all the planting will need to be new. The model home unit would be fully landscaped within the front and rear yard areas. For the production homes, the submitted plans indicate that one 15-gallon tree would be provided in the front yard. The requirements call for two trees per lot. Additionally, if this plan is provided on a corner lot three additional trees along the side street along with ground cover are required. The plan is designed so that north and east exposures have one plant palette while the south and west, which are the hot exposures, have a second type of plant palette. This is to insure that the plants will thrive based on their solar exposures. DRBST.080 1 y]� ANALYSIS: The planting as proposed by the Applicant is acceptable. The model complex will be well landscaped, while the production units will receive an adequate, but minimum amount of landscaping. RECOMMENDATION: The Design Review Board should review the plans in light of the above comments and make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. Staff would recommend that all trees used within the front yard area be evergreen. Attachments: 1. Vicinity map 2. Landscape exhibits DRBST.080 F Oyj FRED WARING DR MILES AVENUE PROJECT SITE sl, �9r Jf, 1 z 0 F C7 z x e TT Sta 40 1 V I fdoirli +f 06re BI# #F STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: MARCH 3, 1993 PROJECT: REVIEW OF LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR STREET MEDIANS AND FRONTAGE ROAD ALONG WASHINGTON STREET SOUTH OF SINGING PALMS DRIVE. APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: TKD ASSOCIATES (TOM DOZCI) BACKGROUND: At the request of the City, TKD Associates has prepared preliminary planting plans for the Washington Street frontage road between Singing Palms Drive and the St. Francis of Assisi Church. Along a majority of this area a stucco covered sound wall has recently been constructed. A small portion of the wall along the northern end north of Singing Palms Drive has not yet been constructed since the permanent street improvements in that area have not yet been installed. However, the landscaping for this area along with the future wall is indicated. The planting scheme has been designed to be compatible with the City Landscape Guidelines as well as the landscaping plans for the Washington Street center medians which were recently reviewed. There has been a slight amendment to some portions of the center medians with the incorporation of Crape Myrtle trees. These trees are also utilized on the frontage road medians. The primary tree materials utilized along the frontage road are California Peppers, Date Palms, Evergreen Pears, Crape Myrtle, with some accent use of California Fan Palms at the intersection of Highland Palms and Washington Street. Shrubs and ground cover utilized are low water native types of plants. Due to the narrow width of some areas there will be use of vines on the walls also. A small amount of turf has been incorporated in the frontage road area in front of the church. A meandering area of turf is utilized to blend in with the turf utilized in front of the church. Additionally a small amount of turf is used at the intersection of Highland Palms Drive and Washington Street. RECOMMENDATION: The Design Review Board should review the submitted plans. Any comments you have will be taken into consideration prior to final working drawings being prepared. Staff would suggest that the turf be designed with additional hardscape being provided adjacent to the curb in the area of the turf. Attachments: 1. Landscaping plans DRBST.080 1 0,51 MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CITY OF LA QUINTA A Special meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California January 13, 1993 L CALL TO ORDER 5:30 P.M. A. Chairman Harbison brought the meeting to order at 5:32 P.M. and Boardmember Curtis led the flag salute. H. ROLL CALL A. Present: Boardmembers Fred Rice, Paul Anderson, John Curtis, Randall Wright, James Campbell, Planning Commission Representative Adolph, and Chairman Harbison. B. Staff present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Secretary II Cristal Spidell. A. Specific Plan 92-022 and Plot Plan 92-490; a request of E.F.P. Corporation (Ed Carnes) for approval of development standards for a future shopping center and approval to develop a +251,272 square foot commercial shopping center located at the northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Highway 111. DRBI-13 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Boardmember Rice asked if Staff had reviewed the plans. Staff stated they had briefly reviewed them. The Board discussed with the Staff the difficulty being experienced between the applicant and the Board regarding what was expected of the applicant on his plans. 1 Design Review Board Minutes December 2, 1992 DRBl-13 3. Mr. Michael Hurst, architect for the applicant, addressed the Board regarding the plans presented in relation to questions raised by the Planning Commission and City Council. 4. Boardmembers asked Mr. Hurst to explain the neon tubing as to its location and visibility. Boardmember expressed their desire that the tubes not be visible from the parking lot. 5. Chairman Harbison asked Mr. Hurst to identify the colors to be used. 6. Boardmember Wright asked if the parapet would be high enough to hide the mechanical equipment. Mr. Hurst stated that it would be. 7. Commissioner Adolph asked if the roof accesses were on the interior. Mr. Hurst stated they were. Boardmember Wright asked if there was an emergency exterior access on the exterior. Mr. Hurst stated they were not required to have one. 8. Boardmember Anderson inquired if the neon would continue from the south elevation to the east elevation to continue the effect. Mr. Hurst stated it could. Boardmembers discussed the different elevations in relation to lighting and security. 9. Boardmembers discussed with Mr. Hurst the turning access points and the circulation pattern to enter and exit the project. 10. Boardmember Campbell inquired what the square footage of Building "B" was. Mr. Hurst stated it was 55,000 square feet and was a two story mass but only one story. Boardmember Campbell expressed his concern that the plans showed a second story. Mr. Hurst stated that as there was no tenant at the time he drew the plans with the flexibility to be either a single or two story building according to the tenant needs. Boardmember Anderson inquired if there was adequate parking for either plan. Mr. Hurst stated there was. Discussion followed regarding building mass and adequate parking. 11. Boardmember Campbell expressed his disapproval of the stair step glass treatment. He questioned the display windows on the cinema building and the materials to be used, the materials to be used on the columns, whether there would be trash compactors and their location. 2 053 Design Review Board Minutes December 2, 1992 DRBI-13 12. Boardmember Anderson expressed his concern that Building "A" lacked detail compared to the other buildings and needed a loading area as well as the remainder of the project needed a delivery corridor or site. In addition, the location of the trellised breezeway connecting Building "A" and "B" was uncertain according to the plans; the large wood columns at the curbline needed to be eliminated for safety purposes; and the greatest concern is to see the parapets run either all the way through the building or far enough distance that they are not seen as a corner that does not turn. Also the trellis work needs to be connected and serve as pedestrian shading. The north elevation needs detail to break up the long flat look. The glass entries do not relate to the project and making the glass boxes cool in the summer will be a nightmare. 13. Boardmember Curtis expressed his disappointment in the architecture and the project as to how long it took to gain the information necessary to make a decision on the project. 14. Boardmember Rice expressed his concern regarding the tile color and the need for it to be softened. 15. Commissioner Adolph asked the Applicant how the signage would be handled. Mr. Hurst stated that there would be signage for each unit. 16. Boardmember Rice moved to recommend approval to the Planning Commission of the project subject to the revised conditions as follows: a. That the roof tile be softened. b. The awning material be softened in the same desert tile. Boardmember Curtis seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: AYES: Boardmembers Curtis, Rice, Harbison, Wright; NOES: Boardmembers Campbell, Anderson, & Commissioner Adolph. ABSENT: None; ABSTAINING: None. 17. Boardmember Curtis excused himself and left the meeting at 6:50 P.M. 18. Boardmember Wright clarified his vote stating his vote in favor was based on the applicant making the corrections discussed above. 3 al Design Review Board Minutes December 2, 1992 19. Commissioner Adolph discussed with the Applicant the problem with the amount of glass to be used. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR -None V. OTHER A. Principal Planner Stan Sawa addressed the Board regarding the sign program at the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center regarding the use of a businesses logo incorporated in the sign. A clarification was needed regarding who can use a "logo" in the sign. Members discussed three pending cases. Members discussed with Staff what they interpreted to be a logo, what colors were acceptable, and whether the signs should be all upper case or a mixture. Following discussion, it was determined that Staff would make the determination unless the "logo" was out of line. VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Boardmember Anderson and seconded by Boardmember Rice to adjourn to a regular meeting of the Design Review Board on February 3, 1993, at 5:30 P.M. This meeting of the La Quinta Design Review Board was adjourned at 7:15 P.M., January 13, 1993. DRBl-13 055 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 February 3, 1993 I. CALL TO ORDER 5:30 P.M. A. Chairman Harbison brought the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. and Boardmember Rice led the flag salute. H. ROLL CALL A. Present: Boardmembers Fred Rice, Randall Wright, Planning Commission Representative Marrs, and Vice Chairman Curtis. B. Boardmember Rice moved to excuse Boardmembers Anderson, Campbell, and Chairman Harbison. Boardmember Wright seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. C. Staff present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa and Secretary II Cristal Spidell. III. BUSINESS SESSION DRB2-3 A. Sign Approval 93-195; a request of Baskin Robbins for approval of a deviation from the sign program for One Eleven La Quinta Center. 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. Planning Commissioner Marrs asked if there was color in the letters. Staff stated that the face would be white. 3. Vice Chairman Curtis asked Staff if their deviation was only within the Sign Code the fact that they are not 20-feet apart. Staff explained that this was one issue. The other was that the Corporate sign did not comply with the Helvetica light lettering style. 1 Ob7x Design Review Board Minutes February 3, 1993 4. Boardmember Wright asked if the sign program allowed two signs. Staff stated that if you are on a comer you are allowed two signs. Members discussed whether the store was on a corner and the location of the sign(s). 5. Boardmember Rice stated the sign looked much better on the tower and it was the logical place to place it. He was concerned that the trellis would block the sign if placed on the facia facing west. 6. Staff stated that he had received comments from Chairman Harbison and Boardmember Anderson. Chairman Harbison stated: "That the sign did appear to stay within the Sign Ordinance and there is a deviation allowed for a nationally recognized logo as long as they stay with the 20-foot separation between the sign. Under the walkway sign appears to be fine." Boardmember Anderson stated: "After reviewing the proposed project I have no objection or comments regarding the deviation." 7. Vice Chairman Curtis asked if the applicant wished to speak. Ms. Chris Kimpel, Award Sign Company representing Baskin Robbins, stated that as she traveled south on Washington Street you are unable to see the tower and you would not know the store was there and that is why they are requesting the second sign. She stated they had no objection to the size or the 20-foot distance requirement. She stated there was no room to place the sign on the facia. She also stated that they were required legally to stay with the slate grey instead of the black as they has been a new court finding that no city may require any changes to a corporate logo. 8. Boardmember Rice asked if this was to protect the trademark. Ms. Kimpel stated this was to protect the trademark and color. They were both the trademark. 9. Boardmember Wright asked Ms. Kimpel to define what part of the sign was slate grey and what part was pink. Ms. Kimpel described the sign colors. 10. Vice Chairman Curtis asked if the background would remain the same. Ms. Kimpel stated yes. 11. Boardmember Wright stated they were individually fabricated letters and asked what the illumination would be. Ms. Kimpel stated it would be neon. DRB2-3 2 Design Review Board Minutes February 3, 1993 12. Vice Chairman Curtis asked if it would be the same Baskin Robbins sign that is on all the other stores. Ms. Kimbal stated yes. 13. There being no further discussion, Boardmember Rice moved to recommend approval of Sign Approval 93-195 as recommended by Staff with the exception of the corporate colors staying as submitted. Boardmember Wright seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR Vice Chairman Curtis asked that the Minutes of January 6, 1993, be amended on Page 4, Item #6, wording be changed to "that could not be seen". Also Page 5, Item F should be changed to Item E, Page 6, Item #5 wording should read "that if the school facility and City maintenance yard were located side by side so they could use common facilities, the garde between the two would be the same. Otherwise there may be some differences depending on the location." Boardmember Wright seconded the motion and the Minutes were approved as corrected. V. OTHER Vice Chairman Curtis asked why the Simon Motors sign program was not on this agenda. Staff stated the Applicant asked that their application be continued to March 3, 1993. VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Planning Commissioner Marrs and seconded by Boardmember Rice to adjourn to a regular meeting of the Design Review Board on March 3, 1993, at 5:30 P.M. This meeting of the La Quinta Design Review Board was adjourned at 6:10 P.M., February 3, 1993. DRB2-3 3