Loading...
1993 05 05 DRBAL T H EJ A 1982 - 1992 Ten Carat Decade A Regular Meeting to be held at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California May 5, 1993 5:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER - Flag Salute II. ROLL CALL III. BUSINESS SESSION A. Continued - Sign Approval 93-203; a request of Anchovie's Pizzeria for final approval of an awning and sign, located at 78-110 Calle Estado. B. Conditional Use Permit 93-007; a request of McDonalds for approval to construct and operate a fast food, drive-thru restaurant located within the One Eleven La Quinta Center on Highway 111. C. Plot Plan 93-496; a request of Bill Howard (Mumbil) for approval of exterior modification to commercial building located at 78-039 Calle Estado. D. Plot Plan 93-495; a request of Simon Plaza to develop a mixed use commercial project on approximately 5.6 acres zoned C-P-S commercial located at the southeast corner of Highway I I I and Washington Street. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR Approval of the Minutes of the regular Design Review Board Meeting of April 7, 1993. V. OTHER VI. ADJOURNMENT BI "All STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 1993 (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 3, AND APRIL 7, 1993) CASE NO: SIGN APPLICATION 93-203 APPLICANT: ANCHOVIE'S PIZZERIA (MR. RICHARD MC CORMICK) AWNING CO.: PALMS TO PINES CANVAS; ERNEST BROOKS REQUEST: TO INSTALL AN ILLUMINATED AWNING SIGN LOCATION: 78-110 CALLE ESTADO BACKGROUND: At the March 3, 1993 Design Review Board meeting, the Board conditionally approved a new awning sign at the Anchovie's Pizzeria across the street from City Hall. The Board requested that the Applicant install the awning with temporary fluorescent lighting and with temporary exterior lighting so that the Board could review the new structure plus the proposed lighting prior to the meeting. On April 7, 1993, the Board examined the existing awning, but the temporary lighting was not installed. Therefore, the case was continued to May 5th. Staff has been informed that the temporary fluorescent lighting has been installed, and the applicant will try to have the temporary bullet lighting installed prior to the meeting. Prior to the meeting, if you have time, please try to stop in at the restaurant and have Mr. McCormick turn on the fluorescent light fixture inside the existing awning so that you can examine the applicant's request. RECOMMENDATION: The Design Review Board should review the awning during the meeting and vote whether or not fluorescent lighting should be permitted for the existing canopy sign. Attachments: 1. Previous Design Review Board report DRBST.084 1 ` l)02 DATE: CASE NO: APPLICANT: AWNING CO.: REQUEST: LOCATION: BACKGROUND: STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING APRIL 7, 1993 (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 3, 1993) SIGN APPLICATION 93-203 ANCHOVIE'S PIZZERIA PALMS TO PINES CANVAS; ERNEST BROOKS TO INSTALL AN ILLUMINATED AWNING SIGN 78.110 CALLE ESTADO At the last Design Review Board meeting, the Board conditionally approved a new awning sign at the Anchovie's Pizzeria across the street from City Hall. The Board requested that the Applicant install the awning with temporary fluorescent lighting and with temporary exterior lighting so that the Board could review the new structure plus the proposed lighting prior to the April 7th meeting. The awning has been installed. The installed awning is slightly different than the attached sketch, but the Board can review whether or nor the new design is consistent with last month's approval. Staff did not review the new design before its on-siel'nstallation. RECONtNI NDATION: The Design Review Board should review the awning during the meeting and vote whether or not fluorescent lighting should be permitted for the existing canopy sign. Atta:hments: 1. Location map 2. Awning exhibit DRBST.084 t no J AW Existing library Project Site Parking lot r .. p vac nt 'r can 17.r • / I • •� •• h' a -' • --1CALLE ( �ESTAOO� -� �� I •„ �orta •.k. Q 0 a Ci Halil ®-0rslr' p ! � s s s i i9 s D Q •,' C 0 0 C C O citOHal CanT r /G2 � • a t � • t s •. Q 1'• i � en +•n O 0 Design Review Board Minutes March 3, 1993 7. Boardmember CanK stated that if the Simon Motors tower were painted to be m9prContrasting, the Simon Motors sign would stand out more. Mr. g stated they wanted this signage removed also. 8. Boar ember Anderson clarified his request that the icant bring in johics that prove why a 12-foot high sign woul be visible. 9. Planning Commissioner Ellson stated this a landscaping problem not an issue of height. 10. Chairman Harbison stated he the palm trees were the prob . 00 11. There being no furth iscussion, it was moved by Boar mber Curtis and seconded by Planning Commissioner Ellson to co ue this matter to a further date until the issue of Simon Plaza i olved. Unanimously approved. a request of Anchovie's Pizzeria for approval of an awning and sign. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Boardmember Anderson asked Staff how far the awning extended in comparison to the present trellis. Staff explained it does not reach the columns. 3. Boardmember Curtis and Chairman Harbison asked for clarification on the height and color of the awning. 4. Boardmember Anderson stated his concern that the sign would be internally illuminated. He did not feel this was appropriate for the Village even though the sign was attractive, this could be setting a precedent. He felt this was an opportunity to use externally illumination instead of flourescent lighting. A discussion followed regarding what the members preferred in the Village. 5. Boardmember Anderson stated he felt the externally illuminated sign would give a cleaner view of the sign rather than an "X-ray" effect. Members discussed the differences between the externally and internally illuminated sign. DRB3-3 s Design Review Board Minutes March 3, 1993 6. Mr. Ernest Brooks, Palm to Palms Awnings, representing the applicant stated he felt the externally illuminated lighting would became a spot light rather than an illumination of the sign. Boardmember Anderson stated that since the sign was recessed the lighting on the shade structure could accent the sign, where normally awnings protrude beyond the architecture of the building and the internal illumination would enhance the signs. 7. Mr. Brooks stated that the fabric was translucent and would glow. Members asked Mr. Brooks if he could build the awning and submit a detailed plan for both types of lighting. Mr. Brooks stated he would need to build the trough to hold the internally illuminated lighting during the construction of the awning. Mr. Brooks stated he would do this and at the next meeting members could visually look at both examples and determine which would be better. 8. Planning Commissioner Ellson asked how high the canopy was from the sidewalk. Mr. Brooks stated six feet. 9. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Rice and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to approve the awning structure as submitted with the lighting to be reviewed at the next meeting of April 7, 1993, and subject to Staff recommendations. Unanimously approved. E. Tentative Tract 23269; a west of Century Homes fo�proval of landscaping l d plans for a new modethe model complex. 1. Principal ner Stan Sawa presented the formation contained in the Staff r rt, a copy of which is on file VIhe Planning and Development 2. cardmember Anderson stated h rsonally preferred the diciduous tvs. He then asked Staff if the Otis on the back of the new mod was permanent or temporary. Bob Diehl of Century Homes stall it was permanent and for them el only. Boardmember Anderson s that he preferred that the w used for the trellis be a minimum Y X 3'. 3. Mr. Diehl, slate that he noted Staffs recomm, trees be requi and that on their master street t the /secon and third corner lot are provid 4. Folla brief discussion regardi theBober Anderson moved and Boar emberto Tentative Tract 23269 dscapin Unanimously approved. 4n that additional tans for the project would be planted. landscaping pallette, Rice seconded a motion ; plans as submitted. DRB3-3 6 00 B 1 "B" STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 1993 CASE NO: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-007 APPLICANT: MC DONALD'S CORPORATION ARCHITECT: CRHO, ARCHITECTURE REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE-THRU. LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET WEST OF ADAMS STREET WITHIN THE ONE ELEVEN LA QUINTA CENTER. BACKGROUND: General Description The subject property is a pad site (G-2) within the One Eleven La Quinta Center. This pad is located in front of Wal-Mart and east of the recently approved Taco Bell. The proposed fast food restaurant will consist of approximately 2400 square feet of interior floor space with outdoor patio seating, a playland structure, and a drive-thru lane. Site Desien The building is a rectangular structure laid out parallel to Highway 111. A drive-thru lane will wrap around the south, east, and north sides of the building. A trash enclosure is located at the northeast corner of the structure adjacent to the parking lot area. The playland structure is proposed to be located on the south side of the structure between the drive-thru lane and building. A screen wall is indicated along the south side of the drive-thru lane as required. A 40-foot high flag pole is indicated at the southwest corner of the building adjacent to the entry into the drive-thru. DRBST.090 1 Architectural Design The structure has been designed in a manner which is architecturally similar to the main shopping center area. The building utilizes a rile roof stucco walls, wood trellis and beams over the drive-thru windows and a portion of the play yard area. The structure will utilize a tile mansard type roof around all four sides of the structure which matches that used in the center. Along each elevation of the building will be a plastered tower structure similar to that used west of the Albertsons supermarket. Around the play yard area there will be stuccoed columns similar to those used in the shopping center with decorative wrought iron fencing around the playground area. Across the bottom two feet of the fencing will be exterior plaster with a decorative cornice treatment. The materials, colors, and light fixtures match those utilized within the shopping center area. The main exterior plaster used on the stricture will be an off- white which is utilized within the shopping center. The plans do not indicate the use of any awnings. The glass areas are protected by an overhang which is approximately 4.5 feet around all sides of the structure. Signage At the present time, the applicant is proposing four signs. There would be one sign on each stucco column. The signage would consist of the golden arches logo (14 square feet) and "McDonalds" (36 square feet). The golden arches is proposed to be their corporate yellow with matching returns with the "McDonalds" being their corporate red with returns painted to match the stucco walls. These signs would be internally illuminated. Additionally, there will be a menu board sign, drive-thru entry sign, welcome sign, height clearance sign, and an exit sign. The proposed menu sign is located on the east side of the building within a landscaped area. The overall dimensions of this sign will be 67' wide and 6' high. This board will be primarily white to match the stucco walls with a darker tan type color as an accent strip around the perimeter. The directional signs which will consist of a drive-thru entry, a drive-thru exit sign, and a "welcome" sign. These signs are just slightly over three square feet in area each. These signs are proposed to have a corporate red background with yellow black and white signage. An additional sign or pole whose location is not specified would be a height clearance pole. This pole is 9'2" tall with a support indicating a maximum clearance allowed. Additionally on the roof overhang adjacent to the drive-thru lane on the north there would be a red and yellow 9' clearance which is 5" X 2'4" long. Playground Structure An outdoor playground structure is proposed on the south side of the building. This structure is somewhat rectangular with dimensions of approximately 30 feet long and at the maximum point, 16 feet wide. The maximum height of the play structure is indicated to be 14 feet. DRBST.090 E 00a Within this 14 feet are three levels of play area. Over the top of this structure will be a blue cover which increases the maximum height to 15.5 feet. The structure as indicated in the submitted manufacturers brochure will be multi -colored and could consist of blue, green, red, and yellow. Landscaping The applicant has submitted a preliminary landscaping plan for the area immediately surrounding the structure. Additionally, the landscaping which is proposed to be installed between the site and Highway 111 is indicated. Much of the plant material is the same utilized with the shopping center. The majority of the plants are low water user with the exception of a small amount of annual color used around the drive-thru areas. In order to screen the drive-thru area as required by the specific plan, the applicant proposes a five foot high decorative masonry screen wall. Landscape planting is indicated on the inside of this wall adjacent to the drive-thru lane. ANALYSIS: In summary, Staff feels that the proposed project conceptually is acceptable. We do feel that several items should be noted as follows: 1. Although the building sign sizes comply with the allowable City codes and sign program for the center, they appear to be somewhat large for the tower structures that they are proposed to be located on. Additionally, it should be noted we believe McDonalds will have signage on the recently relocated monument sign to the west. If this is the case, the sign program does not allow a separate wall sign on the building facing Highway 111. 2. It will be necessary for a sign adjustment to be approved to allow the 39 square foot menu board. This adjustment will be reviewed by the Planning Commission to allow this sign. 3. While the landscaping is compatible with the shopping center, in the area surrounding the building there is a lack of trees and screening of the playground structure. While there is a five foot high screen wall and seven foot high wrought iron fencing around the play structure, the area above the fencing will be visible. Therefore, additional screening through the use of canopy type trees is warranted. 4. In the case of Carl's Jr., which was recently approved, a requirement to provide a decorative fencing around the play area was required. As noted earlier, the applicant has made an effort to provide wrought iron which is decorative and in colors and a partial decorative low wall below the wrought iron area. 6. The height of the playground structure including the cover is 15.5 feet which is just below that allowed for Carl's Jr. However, it should be noted that in the case of Carl's Jr., the playground structure was located to the west of the building rather than between the building and Highway 111. DRBST.090 3 01g SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: i. That canopy trees be planted in the area around the play structure to minimize the view of it from Highway 111. 2. That some shrub planting be placed on the south side of the five foot high screen wall by the applicant and/or master developer. RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend that you review the plans in light of the above noted comments. Your recommendation will be forwarded on to the Planning Commission for their consideration. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Plan exhibits (including plot plan, floor plan, elevation plans, landscaping plans, sign plans, and playground equipment specifications) DRBST.090 4 BI 11C11 STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 1993 CASE NO: PLOT PLAN 93-496 APPLICANT: BILL HOWARD (MUMBIL, INC.) REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A PLOT PLAN APPLICATION TO ALLOW EXTERIOR MODIFICATION TO AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. LOCATION: 78-039 CALLE ESTADO (VILLAGE AREA) BACKGROUND: General Description The subject property is developed with El Ranchito Mexican food and Becker, Chasen Real Estate and two older structures. These structures are joined by a lattice type trellis structure. Recently, the applicant obtained a building permit to put a solid roof over this area to replace the old trellis. Since obtaining the permit, the applicants decided to do additional remodeling along the front elevation. The applicants now wish to add an archway entry and tower type feature over the new roof area along the front. The work on this has already begun. However, they have discontinued work pending this approval. The tower structure and arch are proposed to be stuccoed. ANALYSIS: The buildings which are fairly old are designed in a Spanish style. The proposed modification appears to be compatible with our architectural style. The appearance of this remodeling is open to subjective judgement. One thing that does detract from the appearance of front of the building is the proliferation of signage and advertising in front of the real estate office. Staff believes that the current signs do not have sign permits. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: 1. That the new tower structure and exterior color of the buildings shall be the same color. DRBST.091 1 n13 2. Any color changes to the exterior from the existing white shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning and Development. 3. That all existing signs shall obtain a sign approval permit or removed prior to final inspection for the Building and Safety Department by the construction approved by this application. Attachments: 1. Plans showing existing front elevation and proposed front elevation. DRBST.091 I� o z -il � 5'-° \ � 8 I—J/ 0_ If AI{ � � m o �o ®1 ❑ 9A z o 0 -p Z )MO m r i CP w m m A G� FrontElevation Remodel for: > EL RNCHITOm m e1"°w°' A <Ta-©39 CALLE E5TaD0 c In L4 CUINTA, CA 92253 O _ AD�o< z T m - wIX EX157 INS PR®NT ELEYATICN 6 s 0 PQ®PJSM� FRONT ELE\\ 4TI®N j � � = w BI "D" STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 1993 CASE NO: PLOT PLAN 93-495 (REVISED) MASTER SIGN PROGRAM 93-210 APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC. (PHILIP PEAD) PREVIOUS CASE: PLOT PLAN 91-466 (REVISED) (EXPIRED) OWNERS: 3S PARTNERSHIP AND POMONA FIRST FEDERAL BANK SUBJECT: REQUEST TO DEVELOP A MIXED USE COMMERCIAL PROJECT ON APPROXIMATELY 5.6 ACRES ZONED C-P-S COMMERCIAL. THE PROJECT WILL INCLUDE A FOUR STORY OFFICE BUILDING, A RESTAURANT OR BANK, AN EYE INSTITUTE OR OFFICE, A TWO LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE, AND RELATED AT -GRADE PARKING. LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY III AND WASHINGTON STREET, BOTH MAJOR ARTERIALS. THE DEVELOPMENT, ON +5.6 ACRES OF LAND, IS LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP ON HIGHWAY 111. ARCHITECT: MERLIN J. BARTH EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MIXED/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WITH NON-RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS: NORTH: I I I LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER SOUTH: WASHINGTON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY (VACANT) EAST: EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP WEST: EXISTING PLAZA LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER DRBST.089 1 BACKGROUND: This project was reviewed by the City in 1992, as part of the review and approval of Plot Plan 91-466 (Revised). The project received approval by the Design Review Board on October 2, 1991, the Planning Commission on February 25, 1992, and the City Council on March 3, 1992. However, the final design approved changed from ±165,000 square feet to ±125,000 square feet and various buildings were shifted on the property to increase visibility into the project. The initial plan is attached for reference. The original Conditions of Approval required the applicant to begin construction of the project within one year or apply for a one year extension of time which required review by the Planning Commission. The original case expired on February 25, 1993. On March 11, 1993, the applicant refrled the original plans with Staff and paid the necessary fees to return the project through the necessary stages to have the project reviewed by the Design Review Board, Planning Commission, and City Council as a new application. DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The proposed ±5.6 acre site is comprised of six parcels. The flat and undeveloped parcels were created by the division of land under Parcel Map 18418 in 1982. The property has frontage on three streets with 650 feet along Washington Street, 700 feet along Highway 111, and 180 feet along Simon Drive. The site elevation along Washington Street is approximately 60 feet above sea level. The site is improved with street improvements. However, additional widening is necessary on Washington Street to conform with the City's adopted Specific Plan Alignment Program and General Plan. A future raised median island is proposed for both Washington Street and Highway 111. The property was subdivided in the early 1980's for the development of Simon Motors Automobile Dealership as well as to establish commercial lots which could be sold or developed with commercial land uses. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: On April 7, 1993, the Design Review Board met briefly to discuss the resubmittal of Plot Plan 91-466 (Revision). The development proposal included a four story office building on Highway 111 which is attached to the three level parking structure abutting the Simon Motors property. On the southwest portion of the site (also attached to the parking structure) was the second story fitness center and one story 44 lane bowling alley. The other two buildings on the site were a restaurant/bank building at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street and a one story eye institute. The project was broken down in the following fashion: DRBST.089 2 017 Offices (4 story) = 60,880 sq. ft. Restaurant = 8,000 sq. ft. Office/Eye Institute = 5,000 sq. ft. Fitness Center = 12,000 sq. ft. Bowling Alley = 40,531 sq. ft. 126,411 sq. ft. (550 parking spaces) The Design Review Board continued action on this case on April 7, 1993, at the request of the applicant. On April 26, 1993, the applicant revised the proposal to conform to the newly adopted City General Plan policy requirements. A copy of the new plan is attached and a copy of the original Design Review Board report from April 7th has also been enclosed. The developer has removed the fitness center and bowling alley from the project and substituted at -grade parking along Washington Street. The number of parking structure levels has also been reduced On April 26, 1993, Staff also received a resubmittal of the master sign program for the center based on the new submittal. As the Design Review Board will recall, a similar sign program (SA 91-159, Amendment #3) was approved by the Planning Commission in 1992. The only difference in this exhibit versus the previous plan is that Sign #1 is double -sided instead of being three -sides. Sign #4a was originally contemplated for the bowling alley, but it is now being used for the 4-story office building. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: Development Request 1. The General Plan policy standards for "Primary Gateway Treatment" as outlined in Chapter 3.0 (Circulation Element) should be met since this intersection is located on an image corridor of the City. 2. The maximum F.A.R. for this project shall be 0.35 as noted in Table LU-4 of the General Plan. Sien Proeram 3. A covered pedestrian arcade should be built along the southwest side of the 4-story office medical facility along the one story portion of the development. A formal entry should be designed for this Washington Street elevation. 4. The roof slope for the 4-story office building should not be greater than 3.5:12. 5. The previous Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan 91-466 (Revision) should be used for this new submittal (see the attached material). DRBST.089 3 01,3 6. The future landscape plan submittal should meet the provisions of the City's newly adopted Water Conservation Ordinance (Ordinance 220). 7. A project identification sign should not be installed at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street since the area should be reserved for landscaping, public furniture, and a public art piece. No private property features such as a project identification sign should be permitted within 150 to 200 feet of the intersection. 8. 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. 9. All signs should be reviewed by the Engineering Department to assure sight visibility is not obstructed by the installation of each respective freestanding sign. 10. 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. 11. Any and all proposed illuminated signs shall be installed to avoid undue brightness which would distract passing motorists and/or pedestrians. 12. The sign colors shall be blue (#607-1GP Acrylite Blue) except for the top of the monument sign can be royal blue, orange and white as depicted on the attached drawings. 13. The building signs can be internally illuminated. 14. 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. 15. The lettering styles for the building signs shall be either Clarendon or Souvenir. Upper case lettering shall be used for all signs except for the medical complex building. 16. All attached building signs shall have channel letters (individually constructed). 17. All freestanding signs shall be double -sided and perpendicular to the public street they serve unless noted otherwise in the following section. SIGN ADJUSTMENTS: 18. a.) The La Quinta Medical Center sign (Sign #5) located on the third story elevation of the four story building shall be permitted as depicted in the attached drawings. DRBST.089 4 Ills b.) The La Quinta Medical Center freestanding monument sign (Sign #4) 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 #1. Sign 4a should not be allowed because it is not necessary. c.) The Milauskas Eye Institute sign (Sign #7 & #6) on Highway 111 and in the parking lot shall be permitted. The sign shall be constructed in a similar fashion to Sign #1. MISCELLANEOUS: 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. All signs shall conform to the City's adopted Sign Ordinance in effect at the time the sign permit is issued. 23. Underwriter Laboratories certification labels shall be affixed to all internally illuminated signs, thus assuring that the sign (or sign structure) meets industry specifications. 24. Signs #8 and "8a" shall be internally lit. The background for the signs shall be opaque. 25. All freestanding signs permitted shall include similar architectural elements to those of Sign #1, and the sign proportions shall be downsized accordingly (e.g., 12-foot high to 9-feet, and 6-feet) so that the smaller signs exemplify the sites main identification sign. 26. No attached building sign shall be greater than 50 square feet on the side of the building it serves. 27. The channel letter returns shall be painted to match the exterior color of the building on which it is affixed. 28. If deemed necessary by City, Applicant shall provide location for City entry sign in front and below main identification sign, as required by the Planning and Development Director. DRBST.089 5 29. The overall height of each freestanding sign shall be measured from the abutting street curb elevation height. RECOMMENDATION Staff is at the Design Review Board's pleasure on the matter and any new recommendations of the Design Review Board will be forwarded on to the Planning Commission for their review later this month. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Large exhibits (dated 4/26/93) 3. Master Sign Program (SA 93-210) 4. Previous Design Review Board report DRBST.089 0 021 Parkine Review 3. Medical offices (4-story) 68,600 sq. ft. - 200 = 343 4. Office (1-story) 5,413 sq. ft. - 250 = 22 5. *Restaurant (I -story) 8,000 sq. ft. - 50 = 80 or Bank (I -story) 8,000 sq. ft. - 250 = 32 * Note: 50% of the building counted as dining area. DRBST.089 TOTAL = 397 TO 445 7 STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: APRIL 7, 1993 CASE NO: PLOT PLAN 93-495 APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC. (PHILIP PEAD) PREVIOUS CASE: PLOT PLAN 91-466 (REVISED) (EXPIRED) OWNERS: 3S PARTNERSHIP AND POMONA FIRST FEDERAL BANK SUBJECT: REQUEST TO DEVELOP A MIXED USE COMMERCIAL PROJECT ON APPROXIMATELY 5.6 ACRES ZONED C-P-S COMMERCIAL. THE PROJECT WILL INCLUDE A FOUR STORY OFFICE BUILDING, A 44 LANE BOWLING ALLEY, A FITNESS CENTER, A RESTAURANT OR BANK, AN EYE INSTITUTE OR OFFICE, A FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE, AND RELATED AT -GRADE PARKING. LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND WASHINGTON STREET, BOTH MAJOR ARTERIALS. THE DEVELOPMENT, ON +5.6 ACRES OF LAND, IS LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP ON HIGHWAY 111. ARCHITECT: MERLIN J. BARTH EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MIXED/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WITH NON-RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS: NORTH: 111 LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER SOUTH: WASHINGTON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY (VACANT) EAST: EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP WEST: EXISTING PLAZA LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER DRBST.083 1 This project was reviewed by the City in 1992, as part of the review and approval of Plot Plan 91-466 (Revised). The project received approval by the Design Review Board on October 2, 1991, the Planning Commission on February 25, 1992, and the City Council on March 2, 1992. However, the final design approved changed from ±165,000 square feet to ±125,000 square feet and various buildings were shifted on the property to increase visibility into the project. The initial plan is attached for reference. The original Conditions of Approval required the applicant to begin construction of the project within one year or apply for a one year extension of time which required review by the Planning Commission. The original case expired on February 25, 1993. On March 11, 1993, the applicant refiled the original plans with Staff and paid the necessary fees to return the project through the necessary stages to have the project reviewed by the Design Review Board, Planning Commission, and City Council as a new application. DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The proposed ±5.6 acre site is comprised of seven parcels. The flat and undeveloped parcels were created by the division of land under Parcel Map 18418 in 1982. The property has frontage on three streets with 650 feet along Washington Street, 700 feet along Highway 111, and 180 feet along Simon Drive. The site elevation along Washington Street is approximately 60 feet above sea level. The site is improved with street improvements. However, additional widening is necessary on Washington Street to conform with the City's adopted Specific Plan Alignment Program and General Plan. A future raised median island is proposed for both Washington Street and Highway 111. The property was subdivided in the early 1980's for the development of Simon Motors Automobile Dealership as well as to establish commercial lots which could be sold or developed with commercial land uses. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: The development proposal will include a four story office building on Highway 111 which is attached to the three level parking structure abutting the Simon Motors property. On the southwest portion of the site (also attached to the parking structure) is the second story fitness center and one story 44 lane bowling alley. The other two buildings on the site are a restaurant/bank building at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street and a one story eye institute. The project is broken down in the following fashion: DRBST.083 2 n2 t Offices Restaurant Office/Eye Institute Fitness Center Bowling Alley ARCHITECTURE: 60,880 sq. ft. 8,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. 12,000 sq. ft. 40.531 sq. ft. 126,411 sq. ft. (550 parking spaces) The project architect, Mr. Merlin J. Barth, of Anaheim, has prepared a plan which proposes buildings around the outer portion of the site with at -grade parking in the center of the facility. A multiple level parking structure will be located on the east side of the property. CIRCULATION/PARKING: The developer has proposed access driveways on each respective public street. The two-way driveway on Highway I II and Washington Street will service the proposed courtyard guest parking lot (approximately 102 parking spaces). The driveways lead to the four level parking garage (two floors above grade with a roof top parking area and one subterranean level) located at the easterly property boundary of the site. The parking garage will house approximately 448 cars. The parking ratio for this project is (126,411/550) one on -site space for every 229 square feet of leasable floor area. IMAGE CORRIDOR: On October 6, 1992, the City updated its General Plan to include some new standards which are pertinent to all properties in the City. The new plan designates the frontage streets along the exterior portion of the site as "primary image corridor" thoroughfares, and the signalized intersection of Washington Street and Highway I I I as a "gateway" image intersection. A copy of the adopted material is attached. The primary function of the program is to provide boulevard streets with raised, landscaped medians and heavily landscaped areas within and contiguous to the street rights -of -way. The General Plan states that "primary image corridors shall include landscape themes which are reminiscent of La Quinta's agricultural past and desert environment". Overall, the applicant's request is generally consistent with the intent of the General Plan except for the intersection of Highway I I I and Washington Street. We would recommend that the applicant enhance the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street to include an area for a public art piece surrounded by palm trees. DRBST.083 3 BUILDING FLOOR AREA RATIO: The new General Plan for the City established new policy requirements for the City on the amount of building coverage a project could have on a site. Table LU-4 of the Land Use Element states 0.35 is the ratio for Mixed/Regional Commercial (M/RC) properties. This project proposes 126,411 square feet on approximately ±5.3 net acres or an F.A.R. of 0.54. This figure does not examine the parking structure as a building for this equation. The project should be downsized to meet this new building floor area to project site area ratio which is based on net land area (after street dedication) versus gross floor area (e.g., 82,000 sq. ft. - 230,868 = 0.35). STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant allowed the original case approval to expire in February, 1993. Therefore, the Design Review Board can request changes to the proposed resubmittal if you believe they are necessary. Staff would also like to point out to the Design Review Board that the applicant would like to maintain the past master sign program (SA 91-159 #3) which was approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission after the original review of Plot Plan 91-466 (Revised). A copy of the original approval is attached. The City's Zoning Code Standards have not changed since the last review of this case. Should changes occur to the structures, it may be necessary to revise the sign program. Staff would recommend that the Design Review Board reconsider the Planning Commission approval of the triangular freestanding sign at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street. The current approval allowed a twelve foot high sign with three sides each having 50 square feet of copy. It might be more appropriate to relocate a project sign to the east and south of its present location and provide a different type of sign (e.g., double sided sign). SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: 1. The General Plan policy standards for "Primary Gateway Treatment" as outlined in Chapter 3.0 (Circulation Element) should be met since this intersection is located on an image corridor of the City. 2. A project identification sign should not be installed at the intersection of Highway I II and Washington Street, since the area should be reserved for landscaping, public furniture, and a public art piece. No private property features such as a project identification sign should be permitted within 150 feet of the intersection. 3. The maximum F.A.R. for this project should be 0.35 as noted in Table LU-4 of the General Plan. DRBST.083 4 fi26 I' I 1 ►I.I • y #WI Staff is at the Design Review Board's pleasure on the matter and any new recommendations of the Design Review Board will be forwarded to the Planning Commission for their review later this month. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Large exhibits (dated 3/15/93) 3. Master Sign Approval (SA 91-159 #3) 4. Excerpts from the original Conditions for Plot Plan 91-466 (Revised) 5. Initial site plan design (superseded) 6. Excerpt from the General Plan DRBST.OB3 02 7 S,Jkaporo/wtv1 be V. go gaaals N f� �aaa4s swept' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - APPROVED EXHIBIT A SIGN APPLICATION 91-159, AMENDMENT N3 SIMON PLAZA - SIGN PROGRAM NOVEMBER 24, 1992 * Revised by the Planning Commission on November 24, 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 (N607-1GP 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. 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. Upper case lettering shall be used for all signs except for the medical complex building. 9. All attached building signs shall have 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 ADJUST1 W2M: The Fitness Center signs (Sign N7 & #8) located on the second story elevation of the building shall not be permitted as depicted in the attached drawings. At this time, the Applicant shall wait until the building is under construction to ascertain CONAPRVL.065 1 _ __. whether or not a sign(s) should be installed at the proposed location(s). The matter shall be reviewed in the future by the Board at the request of the Applicant. 'b.) Signs k3, and 814B, 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 q6) 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 I I I shall be permitted. The sign shall be constructed in a similar fashion to Sign #2, with height lowered and logo on top reduced in size to be proportional with main center sign (maximum height 7 feet). f.) The 'Fine Dining Restaurant" sign (Sign #18) shall be permitted provided the sign faces the parking lot and is constructed in a similar fashion to Sign #2. One side of copy is permitted. One attached building sign shall be installed at the entrance of the restaurant for patron identification. The size of the sign shall be approved by Staff. •g.) Sign p2 (Main identification sign) shall be three -sided, and include three sides of sign copy. 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 CONAPRVL.065 2 signs, thus assuring that the sign (or sign structure) meets industry specifications. 017. Signs p14A and "Cu shall be internally lit. The background for the signs shall be opaque. *18. The freestanding parking signs (p16, and 017) shall not be permitted because they are not necessary to the success of the commercial center. Sign #15 is allowed provided the directional sign states 'Entrance'. 19. All freestanding signs permitted shall include similar architectural elements to those of Sign #2, and the sign proportions shall be downsized accordingly (e.g., 12-foot high to 9-feet, 7 feet, and 6-feet) so that the smaller signs exemplify the sites main identification sign. 20. No attached building sign shall be greater than 50 square feet on the side of the building it serves. 21. The channel letter returns shall be painted to match the exterior color of the building on which it is affixed. 22. If deemed necessary by City, Applicant shall provide location for City entry sign in front and below main identification sign, as required by the Planning and Development Director. 23. The overall height of each freestanding sign shall be measured from the abutting street curb elevation height. CONAPRVL.065 M n31 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - APPROVED PLOT PLAN 91-466 - REVISION FEBRUARY 25, 1992 SIMON PLAZA • Amended by Planning Commission on 2-25-92 Added by Planning Commission on 2-25-92 GENERAL 1. The development of the property shall be generally be in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 91-466 Revision, unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. 2. The approved plot plan shall be used within one year of the final approval date; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and off-street parking requirements. 5. Adequate masonry trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The Applicant shall contact the local waste management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fences) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code and State requirements. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the CONAPRVL.037 032 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-466, Revision February 25, 1992 proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers, (berming, landscaping and walls, etc.) and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing off street parking requirements including but not limited to shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 11. Decorative screen walls (i.e., berms with landscaping, masonry walls, etc. ) provided adjacent to street shall be high enough to screen parking lot surfaces and a majority of parked cars from view of the street. Determination of height of walls shall be made after review of landscaping and grading plans by City. 12. Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. *13. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinance. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee. A public easement shall be offered to the City for the site any art piece may occupy which has been established by the Art in Public Places Committee. 14. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist, with the Developer to pay costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior to archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall have retained a qualified cultural resources management firm and completed the testing and data recovery as noted in the plan. The management firm shall monitor the grading activity as required by the plan or testing results. A list of the qualified archaeological monitor(s), cultural resources management firm employees , and any assistant (s) / representative (s) , shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. The list shall provide the current address and phone number for each monitor. The designated CONAPRVL.037 0�v Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-466, Revision February 25, 1992 monitors may be changed from time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail on the Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby areas reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Upon completion of the data recovery, the Developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 15. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the Applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: o City Fire Marshal o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o City of La Quinta Planning & Development Department o Coachella Valley Water District o Desert Sands Unified School District o Imperial Irrigation District o Caltrans (District 11) Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 16. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in affect at the time of issuance of building permits. 17. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 18. A bus waiting shelter and bus turnout shall be provided as requested by Sunline Transit on Highway 111 when said street improvements are re- installed or unless other site locations are permitted by the transit authority (e.g., Simon Drive) and the City Engineering Department. 19. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-466, Revision February 25, 1992 site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a.) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b.) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c.) provision of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing, and or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 20. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in affect at time of issuance of building permit as determined by the Building Official. 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining conditions of approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. 22. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. 23. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 24. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only". 25. That all conditions of the Design Review Board shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the Applicant / Developer. B. The landscape program for Washington Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., Palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle Trees, and Washington Robusta Palms should be encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle, and CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-466, Revision February 25, 1992 Dwarf Oleander should be utilized. Native (low water use) plants should be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway Ill. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watt). C . Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to building plan check. A photometric study should be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off -Street Parking). The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. •D. A one story building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns, etc.). E. Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two-way driveways into the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Design Review Board during a final plan check review. F. The final plans shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to the submission of the plans to the Building Department for final check consideration. The final plans should include but not be limited to landscaping and irrigation, building, signs, mechanical, etc. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50 parking spaces shall be provided as noted in the Off -Street Parking Code. H. The landscape setback on Washington Street shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. A master sign program shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of a building permit for any of the proposed building structures. CONAPRVL.037 03© 'j� C/7 a c�---+,.,� 45 SY1 O DTI vH .e '� we_ c F,, CC- VlTi $. Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-466, Revision February 25, 1992 58. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 59. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 60. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. SPECIAL 61. The Environmental Fees of the State Fish and Game Department and the County of Riverside shall be paid to the Planning and Development Department within 24 hours after approval/review of the proposed by the Planning Commission and/or City Council. 62. The final working drawings shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to building permit issuance. Said plans shall include landscaping, irrigations, signing, addressing, street, mechanical, lighting, utility plans and materials. 63. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development. 64. The parking structure shall not exceed 20 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway ill. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed six feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. 65. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91-211 shall be met. 66. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 67. Prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Program, so adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. *68. Landscaping shall be incorporated into parking structures design features. This shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. 69. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance of parking spaces provided based on Urban Land Institute Guidelines. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. CONAPRVL.037 10 037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-466, Revision February 25, 1992 70. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off -Street Parking Code. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. 71. The existing one story office building portions of the four story building complex shall be increased to a two story height. *72. All buildings shall include window shading features. The program may include the use of roof overhangs, window tinting, recessed windows, plant-ons, or other elements as approved by the Design Review Board. 73. The Washington Street side of the bowling alley building shall include a minimum 24 inch arcade treatment along the entire frontage of the building. *74. A tile roof element shall be designed into the design of the parking structure for those areas of the building which are highly visible from Highway 111. (Front, west side to office building and east side to 47 feet southerly to the point where the parking level ramp transition to the second level starts.) 75. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State requirements. 76. Preliminary landscaping, grading and parking lot screening plans shall be approved by the Design Review Board prior to submission of the final working drawings. •'77. Plot Plan 91-466 shall become null and void by the approval of Plot Plan 91-466 (Revision) . CONAPRVL.037 11 0 3 8 v ro i ro C7 V O N O3.g ram.. Policy 3-4.12 Prirmary image corridors shall be defined as streets In the roadway network whrch are tihe major urban design statements of the City. Primary image corridors shad consist of boulevard streets with raised, landscaped medians and heavily landscaped areas within and contiguous to the street nghts-of--way. Primary image corridors shalt include landscape Games which are reminiscent of to Ouinta s agricultural past and desert environment Primary image corridors may include vertical landscape elements such as pain trees complemented with a shade-produdng toderstory of canopy treessuch as indigenous, drought tolerant desert species. More water intensive understory canopy trees, such as various dtrus species, should be used sparingy in nodes at key kkations as highlights and reminders of past agricufhural activities. Ground piano landscape materials shook! evoke a lush image through the use of drought tolerant low maintenance plant spades. Turf should be used in a manner consistent with citrus trees—sparkVIY and in high visibility locations. Primary image corridors shad include street traffic signals, street fighting systems, street furniture, bus shatters, street name signs, and noise berms1bamers which are designed in a coor- dnated and consistent theme unique to La Ouinta. At key intersections primary image corridors shad include treatments which may include special roadway paving, hardscape/saeen wad arrangements and dsplays of public art. Policy 3-4.1.3 Primary image corridors shall include the following roadways: • Washington Street • Jefferson Street ®• Highway 111 • Fred Waring Drive • We Tampico • Eisenhower Drive (from Cage Tampico to Washington Street) Policy 3-4.1.4 Secondary image corridors shelf be defined as streets in tine roadway network which are the secondary urban design statements of the City. Secondary knege cord- dors shag consist of streets with raised, landscaped medans and landscaped areas within and contiguous to the street right-of-way. Secondary Image corridors shall be consistent with primary image corridors relative to similar landscape materials, street traffic signals, street fighting systems, street Aimiture, bus shelters and street name signs. However, secondary BRW, Inc. L• Va AI a• street knage conidas shall emphasize the use of lover proft indigenous canopy trees, accentuated with the use of citrus trees In various nodes. The use of fader, vertical landscape elements shall be de-emphasized and shad occur In nodes, psnargy at street twersectba Policy 3-4.1.5 Secondary image corridors shad include the following roadways: • Miles Avenue • Dune Pains Road (south of the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channeq • Adams Street (south of the Coachella Valley Stormwater ChanneO • Avenue 48 • Avenue 50 • Avenue 52 • Eisenhower Drive (south of Calla Tampico to Avenida Bermudas) Policy 3-4.1.6 Agrarian image corridors shall be defined as streets in Me roadway network which are designed to evoke a rural ambiance and to provide a strong linkage to Me Chy's agricultural past These corridors are to be located in dose proximity to areas designated 'Rural Residential' on fine Land Use Policy Diagram in the Land Use Element Agrarian image corridors shad incorporate equestrian trails and shad include design 'themes representative of rural areas, such as shaded country lanes which utilize lower profile indigenous canopy trees accentuated with various citrus species. The use of fader, vertical landscape elements, such as palm trees, shed be de-emphasized. More possible, Ma use of vertical curbs on the outside lane of Me roadway shad be minimized. Street traffic signals, street lighting systems, street furniture, bus shelters and street name signs shad be sinular to primary and secondary image corridors, but ff possible, shag incorporate more of a rural character. Policy 3-4.1.7 Agrarian Image corridors shad include the following roadways: • Mattson Street • Avenue 54 pram Jefferson Street to Monroe Street) Policy 3-4.1.8 Primary gateway t"atmd inn shag be defined as street- scape treatments at key intersections leading into the City and into the Village area Primary gateway treatments may include special paving, street furniture, Chapter 3 - Circulation Element 3-21 City of La Quints General Plan herdscep0creen wall arrangements, displays of public sit, monument signage, Landscaping and street fighting. Primary gateways are intended as dramatic design statements indicating ft entrance to the City and the Village area Primary gateway treatments Shall occur at the following street intersections: • Fred Waring Drive and Washington Street Washington Street and Highway 111 • Jefferson Street and Highway 111 • Cade Tampico and Washington Street • Eisenhower Drive and Cade Tampico Policy 3-4.1.9 Secondary gateway treatments shad be defined as streetscape treatments which are similar to primary gateway treatments except that an emphasis is placed on a less dramatic entry statement For axample, secondary gateway treatments may not Include special paving, street furndure or hardscap"creen wall arrangements. The secondary gateway treatment may rey more on the use of landscaping, street fighting and monument signage as the major elements of design. 3-4.1.10 Along primary, secondary and agrarian image corridors the City shad establish appropriate building height limits to ensure a low density character and appearance. Policy 3-4.1.11 Landscaped setbacks are necessary to ensure a high quality and attractive appearance on major streets. Setbacks for wadsbuildmgs and parking areas may vary, If properly designed, but shad generally be as follows: ®.• Highway 111 - 50 feet • Other Major Arterials - 20 feet • Primary Arterials - 20 feet • Secondary Arterials - 10 feet • Collector Streets - 10 feet Landscaping within these setback areas shad be consistent with the appropriate image corridor designation, if applicable. Policy 3-4.1.12 Special fight -of -way width and design treatments will be idenfdied for streets within the Village Aran4 recognizing established set -backs of adjacent developments and the maturity of existing landscaping materials. flee following streets will be pemdtted to remain at maximum Nly (50) foot tight -of -way widit .. 6) Cadiz b) Barcelona c) Amigo Policy 3-4.1.13 Well openings to allow views into projects ftm image corridors are desirable and should be required where appropriate as one means of minimizing negative visual impacts of continuous watts. This can also be accomplished by varying setbacks. Policy 3-4.1.14 Tine City may require adequate parkways, vistas kto waded oommunhties, and other features as appropriate. Policy 3-4.1.15 Where desirable, the use of existing natural vegetation Including citrus trees, date palm groves, eucalyptus windrows, and oleander hedges should be considered for retention in Image corridor landscape designs. Policy 3-4.1.16 Special design treatments for major elements of the Guys street system shad be considered in all approvals for related development Policy 3-4.1.17 The Chy's streetscape quality shad be improved by undergrounding of utilities wherever possible. Policy 3-4.1.18 Prevention of visual blight shad be enhanced by the admmustration of a comprehensive sign ordinance. Public Transit Policies Background - The provision of public transit is an integral pail of La OuintWs multi -modal circulation system. Increased use of public transit in the future will provide tenefits such as reduced congestion and improved air quardy. For transit to be successful, it should be properly planned so that it is oomrenient and accessible to users and operates in a timely fashion. The following poticies are Intended to provide guidance in estabrishing an expanded transit system to serve the needs of the City and region. BRW, Ina Chapter 3 - Circulation Element City of Le Ouinta �IWLAO 3-22 - General Plan J J to f M 15 s r o a • Y � _ Z N N 1 $� �� sim �$ g IL E EEi E E� E E E E�' s' ICE n42 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 April 7, 1993 I. CALL TO ORDER 5:30 P.M. A. Chairman Harbison brought the meeting to order at 5:38 P.M. and Boardmember Rice led the flag salute. II. ROLL CALL A. Present: Boardmembers Fred Rice, John Curtis, Randall Wright, Planning Commission Representative Marrs, and Chairman Harbison. Boardmember Anderson arrived at 6:03 P.M. B. Boardmember Curtis moved to excuse Boardmember Campbell. Boardmember Wright seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. C. Staff present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Department Secretary Betty Anthony. III. BUSINESS SESSION A. Boardmember Curtis moved to reorganize the agenda placing Item #C, Sign Approval 93-203 for Anchovie's Pizzeria after Item #G. Boardmember Rice seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. B. Continued 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. DRB4-7 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. Staff informed the Board that they had not received any communication from the Hospital and the Board's options were to approve the project, continue the project, or deny the project. r - "x3 Design Review Board Minutes April 7, 1993 2. Boardmember Rice stated he felt the sign proposal was too tall and should be redesigned. 3. Following a brief discussion, Boardmember Curtis moved and Boardmember Rice seconded a motion to deny Sign Approval 93-197 as submitted. Unanimously approved. C. Continued Sign Approval 92-190; a request of Simon Motors for approval to install a new freestanding sign for the existing Simon Motors Car Dealership. 1. Chairman Harbison stated a request had been received from the applicant for a continuance. Boardmember Curtis moved and Boardmember Wright seconded a motion to continue the matter and it was unanimously approved. D. Plot Plan 93-495; a request of Simon Plaza to develop a mixed use commercial project on approximately 5.6 acres zoned C-P-S commercial. 1. Chairman Harbison stated a request had been received from the applicant for a continuance. Boardmember Curtis moved and Boardmember Wright seconded a motion to continue the matter and it was unanimously approved. E. Sign Application 93-207; a request of Clothestime for a deviation from the sign program for the One Eleven La Quinta Center to allow corporate signage. DRB4-7 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 Wright asked Staff if a picture was available of the proposed sign. Members discussed with Staff the present and proposed sign, the location, and size of the sign. 3. Mr. Bruce Morningstar, representing Clothestime, answered questions for the Board concerning the above items. 4. Boardmember Rice questioned the typeface style as being different from their logo on their business card. Mr. Morningstar explained they were the same except for the stencil effect on the business card. 2 Design Review Board Minutes April 7, 1993 5. Following discussion regarding the typeface style, Boardmember Wright moved and Boardmember Rice seconded a motion to approve Sign Application 93-207 as recommended by Staff. Unanimously approved. F. Conditional Use Permit 93-006; a request of Taco Bell for approval to construct and operate a fast food restaurant with a drive-thru. DRB4-7 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Boardmember Curtis questioned Staff about the north side parking area. He was concerned that cars would be backing into the interior two-way east/west drive aisle for the shopping center. Staff stated that the Engineering Department had been notified and they had no objections. It was felt that 30 feet for a parking space was enough distance to make the maneuver. Chairman Harbison questioned the stop sign backing traffic up and blocking the cars from backing out. Members discussed the private two-way aisle, the parking space widths, and distance needed for a turn maneuver. 3. Boardmember Rice asked if the satellite dish could be screened and asked what the purpose of the dish would be. Mr. Scott Duffner, representing Fancher Development, stated the dish was a corporate link to monitor all the on -site mechanical equipment. He further stated it was small in size (4'4") and would not be seen from the street because it will be behind a four -foot high equipment well. 4. Mr. Duffner stated his concern with the Conditions of Approval. In particular ail regarding the screen wall. He asked that the Board allow a combination of berming and landscaping. Discussion followed between Mr. Duffner, the Board, and Staff regarding the height of the berms and the different grade levels. The Boardmembers expressed their concern that the drive-thru be screened from Highway 111. They would prefer landscaping and berming rather than a wall if this could be accomplished. 5. Commissioner Marrs asked Mr. Duffner if any of the other Taco Bells had the dual windows. Mr. Duffner stated there were but they were discovering the windows were ineffective unless enough distance was allowed to have one car at the pick-up window, one at the pay window and one between. Otherwise it was ineffective. He went on to explain their process for speeding up service. 3 Design Review Board Minutes April 7, 1993 6. Boardmember Wright asked Mr. Duffner how the screen wall will relate to the street level (i.e., Highway 111). Discussion followed again regarding the height of the berm. Mr. Duffner stated their preference for hiding the pickup window would be to build a planter that would screen that portion. 7. Following the discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Anderson and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to approve Conditional Use Permit 93- 006, subject to the Staff conditions and requiring a minimum of 4-feet of vertical screening of the drive-thru lane (e.g., a combination of berming, and landscaping), and by installing a raised planter between the covered trellises columns. the Board also agreed to permit the freestanding menu - board sign and the 4.5 square foot directional signs. Unanimously approved. G. Sian Program Amendment (SP 89-014); a request of TDC for a deviation from the approved sign program. 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. Staff pointed out this was in part a sign location modification to be located between Taco Bell and McDonalds. 2. Mr. Colm Macken, representing TDC Development, explained to the Board the reason for the request and answered questions of the Board. 3. Boardmember discussed with Staff and Mr. Macken which tenants would be identified on each of the signs. 4. Following the discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Rice and seconded by Boardmember Anderson to approve the amendment to the Sign Program for the One Eleven La Quinta Center as submitted. Unanimously approved. Chairman Harbison called for a five minute break to give the Boardmembers an opportunity to view the sign at Anchovie's Pizzeria before discussing the sign approval. H. Sign Approval 93-203; a request of Anchovie's Pizzeria for final approval of an awning and sign. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. DRB4-7 4 1'46 Design Review Board Minutes April 7, 1993 2. Boardmember Anderson stated he would still like to see the alternative lighting before deciding. He strongly felt the external bullet lighting would be more attractive than the internal lighting. Members discussed the effects of the different lighting types. 3. Following the discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Anderson and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to approve the awning as built but continue the lighting to the next meeting and ask the applicant to have both temporary external and internal lighting available for viewing at that time. Unanimously approved. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR Boardmember Anderson asked that the Minutes be amended on Page 5, Item #D.4. to read "...external illumination instead of fluorescent lighting. There being no further corrections, it was moved by Boardmember Anderson and seconded by Boardmember Curtis to approve the Minutes of March 3, 1993, as corrected. Unanimously approved. V. OTHER Boardmember Wright asked that Staff if something could be done about the number of signs advertising houses in the Cove. Staff stated this was a function of the Code Enforcement Department and if addresses were supplied to that Department, Staff would pursue the matter. VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Boardmember Curtis and seconded by Planning Commissioner Marrs to adjourn to a regular meeting of the Design Review Board on May 5, 1993, at 5:30 P.M. This meeting of the La Quinta Design Review Board was adjourned at 7:39 P.M., April 7, 1993. DRB4-7 5