CC Resolution 1989-103^ : CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 89-103
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
ADOPTING DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 1st day of August, 1989, consider in a
public meeting the Design Review Standards recommended by the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, at said public meeting, upon hearing and
considering all comments and arguments, if any, of all
interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did
find the following facts to justify the adoption of the Design
Review Standards:
1. That the Planning Commission, after two study sessions and
one public meeting, has recommended this version of the
Design Review Standards to serve as review guidelines.
2. That the implementation of the Design Review Standards
will improve the design and appearance of buildings
constructed in La Quinta.
3. That, having adopted the Design Review Standards, persons
designing projects and buildings for La Quinta will have
available a written statement of what La Quinta expects
in design standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and
constitute the findings in this case;
2. That the attached Design Review Standards as recommended
by the Planning Commission are hereby adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
La Quinta City Council held on this 6th day of September, 1989,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Bohnenberger, Bosworth, Rushworth,
Sniff, Mayor Pena
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
1-
BJ/RESOCC. 025
BIB]
07-24-1998-U01
03:07:13PM-U01
ADMIN-U01
CCRES-U02
89-U02
103-U02
^ : City La Quinta, California
ATTE
UNDRA L. JUHOL City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/*J* /4**4*yll
DAWN HONEYWELL, City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
2-
BJ/RESOCC. 025
BIB]
07-24-1998-U01
03:07:13PM-U01
ADMIN-U01
CCRES-U02
89-U02
103-U02
^ : DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS
In keeping with the requirement in Chapter 9.183 Design
Review, Section 9.183.060 Design Review Standards, the
following standards shall be adopted and/or amended by a
Resolution of Council upon a recorrunendation of the Planning
Commission.
I. The review of the design of a proposed project plan shall
be conducted in comparison to an adopted set of standards
and criteria. Standards and criteria may be contained in
one or a combination of the following:
1. A Specific Plan for the area.
2. A manual of design standards for the area.
3. A manual of landscape standards for the area.
4. A *one or subzone requirement for the area.
5. The Building or Fire Codes or any other Municipal
Code.
6. Engineering standards.
7. The standards of another district or jurisdiction
applying to the area.
8. Basic design standards applying to all development
in the City, as described in the following section.
II. All development, construction, and use of land in the City
shall exhibit superior quality design, complying with the
following basic standards. The standards are phrased as
questions which may serve as a checklist for the use of
the Staff, Design Review Board, and Planning Commission,
and which are to be considered by applicants for City
approvals in the development of their plans.
A. Site Suitability:
1. Is the site suitable for the proposed use and
structures in terms of its size, shape,
configuration of structures, location, access,
or any other design consideration?
2. Has adequate consideration been given to the
slope characteristics of the site if any)?
3. Are there soils on the site which are not
suitable for the proposed development due to
instability, seismic risk, or other factors,
which must be given special design
consideration? Has the design resolved the
soil problems, if any?
1-
BJ/MEMOTB. 057
BIB]
07-24-1998-U01
03:07:13PM-U01
ADMIN-U01
CCRES-U02
89-U02
103-U02
^ : 4. Has the grading plan been adequately developed
so that on-site drainage is accommodated, and
off-site negative impacts are minimized?
5. Have any significant topographic features,
landmarks, or existing major plant materials
been preserved or incorporated into the design?
B. Site Design:
1. Does the site design show due consideration of
the site location with respect to its
surroundings:
a. Views toward the site and vistas behind
the site which development may obscure;
b. Vistas and views from the site;
C. Neighboring uses or open spaces?
2. Does the site design lessen or adequately
internalize on-site negative aspects of the
development?
3. Does the site design compensate for off-site
impacts?
4. Does the access pattern in the site design
show adequate consideration of the following:
a. Intersection spacing;
b. Well designed traffic flows using a
hierarchy of routes, each meeting the
engineering standards applicable;
c. Well conceived parking arrangements;
d. Safe and well placed pedestrian
arrangements;
e. Provisions for emergency access;
f. Provisions for refuse pick-up, general
loading and servicing;
g. Provisions for bikeways and bike routes;
h. Public transit?
5. Does each portion of the access system perform
its function without interfering with the
other portions and without creating a negative
influence?
2-
BJ/ME*OTB. 057
BIB]
07-24-1998-U01
03:07:13PM-U01
ADMIN-U01
CCRES-U02
89-U02
103-U02
^ : 6. Does the site design show adequate
consideration of the placement of structures
in terms of:
a. Structural orientation;
b. Structural configuration;
c. Setbacks;
d. Walls and gates;
e. Security concerns;
f. Internalizing negative aspects of the use;
g. Emergency/disaster response concerns such
as earthquake, fire, flood, public panic,
emergency access, etc.?
C. Structural Design:
1. Do the structures appear to belong in its
environment, in terms of:
a. Architectural style/period;
b. Colors;
C. Materials?
2. Are the structures compatible in all major
respects with:
a. The character of adjacent and surrounding
developments3
b. The character of development in the City
as a whole?
3. Does the architectural style constitute an
example of excessive variety in the context of
the City1 5 existing developments?
4. Does the architectural style constitute an
example of monotonous repetition of existing
developments within the City?
5. Does the architectural design adhere to
thematic requirements of a particular area
and/or general community criteria for
acceptability of design?
6. Does the architectural design show adequate
consideration and consistency of the following
matters:
3-
I * *
BIB]
07-24-1998-U01
03:07:13PM-U01
ADMIN-U01
CCRES-U02
89-U02
103-U02
^ : a. Scale;
b. Proportions, height, shapes, bulk, and
masses;
C. Exposed and shaded forms;
d. Open areas;
e. Roof form;
f. Openings in the building such as doors,
windows, entry ways;
g. Features, details, ornamentation;
h. Parts of structures, such as walls,
screens, towers;
i. Accessory structures;
j. Integration of signage.
7. Does the overall design exhibit a consistency
of:
a. Composition;
b. Treatment;
C. Harmony of materials;
d. Harmony of colors;
e. Consistent treatment of those sides of a
structure which are visible at the same
time?
8. Does the design show an honesty of
presentation, with consistency between the
uses of the structure and its forms.
9. Does the design demonstrate design integrity?
Or does the design rely on significant use of
any of the following:
a. Artifice, false fronts or facades;
b. Veneers or simulated materials;
C. Imitation nonstructurally related)
features or contrivances such as addon,
stickon, or popout;
d. Other unnecessary, non-genuine or
unauthentic embellishment?
4-
n 7
BIB]
07-24-1998-U01
03:07:13PM-U01
ADMIN-U01
CCRES-U02
89-U02
103-U02
^ : D. Construction Design:
1. Has adequate attention been given to the
longevity of the design?
2. Have maintenance considerations been taken
into account?
3. Are the choices of the following items
suitable for their application?
a. External facade treatment;
b. Quality and durability of materials;
c. Colors and the form of coloration e.g.,
integrally colored materials versus paint
and matte colors versus glaring and shiny
surfaces)?
E. Setting:
1. Are the following external features
appropriate in terms cf their concept,
selection, location, orientation, scale,
materials, functions, and impacts:
a. Landscaping and its water efficiency;
b. Irrigation to properly maintain the long
term health and appearance of landscaping;
C. Paved surfaces1
d. Use of water features;
e. External furnishings such as lights,
benches, signs, hydrants;
f. Shade with regard to desert climate
conditions, especially for a portion of
the parking and for pedestrians;
g. Lighting and shielding adjacent areas
from glare;
h. Signage program and external use of
graphics;
1. External equipment, utilities, and their
screening;
5-
BJ/MEMOTB. 057
BIB]
07-24-1998-U01
03:07:13PM-U01
ADMIN-U01
CCRES-U02
89-U02
103-U02
^ : j. Fences, walls1 and other screening or
buffering measures;
k. Optimum use of opportunities for views or
vistas inward or outward?
F. Overall:
1. Is the design of the development one which the
residents of our City both today and future
generations can be proud of?
2. Does the design of the development provide an
environment conducive to the health, safety,
and welfare of its occupants and visitors?
6-
BJ/MEMOTB. 057
BIB]
07-24-1998-U01
03:07:13PM-U01
ADMIN-U01
CCRES-U02
89-U02
103-U02