The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZOA 94-3 SIGNS 1995 '_. ATI ' CA v r. ,a Abe/ �i i NEIL s OPEN 1 i- PASED TO; Palm Desert City Council FROM: El Paseo Business Association Board of Directors DATE: March 21, 1995 RE: City of Palm Desert Ordinance#772 At a Special Meeting of the El Paseo Business Improvement Area Board held on Friday, March 17, 1995, the Board approved the following guidelines for "Open" signs on El Paseo: 1. The signs must be no more than a maximum of 54" in height. 2. The signs must have no more tbap a maximum face area of 3 square feet. — 3. The signs must be square or Wift in shape, — 4. Said sins must be placed on private property in a location which does not impede pedestrian traffic flow. 5. The signs shal have "peen" or "Name of Business�1d Open" onl �,rwl=�— �4c� 9Ly� s6^—��f'o t..o w�: �N • 6. Said signs shall not include extraneous verbiage advertising he business, specials or sales events, �W 7. Said signs must be removed when the establishment is not open for business. 8. The signs must be two colors only, excluding fluorescent colors, and undecorated. 9. Black and white are two colors. For xample, if you have a wbilaackground, you can of hav red d ack letter . rVLVVk i ? 10. Logos are not allowed. ? 11. The signs shall be mounted on a pedestal which is undecorated. d� 12. The signs shall be professionally manufactured and well maintained at all times. Ai 13. The Board agreed to review the El Paseo sign ordinance in one year. The Ordi- \rT nance provides for the elimination of all "Open Signs" at the end of one year if violations occur. EL PASEO BUSINESS ASSOCIATION • P.O. BOX 6000 STE. 305• PALM DESERT,CA 92261 I ` ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 That section 25 .68. 340 Signs for pedestrian traffic be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25.68. 330 Sign for pedestrian traffic. A. Where the principal sign for a business is located so that it cannot be seen by pedestrian traffic, an identification sign, in addition to that otherwise allowed in this chapter, shall be permitted. Such a sign shall be no larger than three square feet (three feet on each side) and it shall be designed and located so as to not distract from the appearance of the building or violate the intent of this chapter. (Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A ss 25 . 38-12 . 05) B. Businesses in the commercial and industrial districts may place a pedestal mounted "open" sign with a maximum height of 54 inches and maximum face area of 3 square feet in front of their place of business . Said sign must be placed on private property in a location which does not impede pedestrian traffic flow. Said signs shall not include extraneous verbiage advertising the business , specials or sales events . Said signs must be removed when the business is not open for business . For businesses on E1 Paseo between Portola Avenue and Highway 74 , the following additional restrictions shall apply: 1 . Signs permitted under - this section shall be limited to the word "open" and the business name only. 2 . Letter style shall not be restricted; logos are not permitted. 3 . signs must be square or rectangular in shape. 4 . Signs must be in two colors only, excluding florescent colors; black and white will be considered colors and sign shall not contain extraneous decoration. 3 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5 . Signs shall be mounted on a monochromatic pedestal using one of the two sign colors. 6 . Signs shall be professionally manufactured and well maintained at all times . Section 2 That section 25 .68.350 Special event .signs be and the same is hereby amended as follows: 25 . 68. 350 Special event signs. A. With the approval of the director of community development, a business may erect one temporary sign, mounted on a wall facia or freestanding, advertising special events, promotions or sales. The director may approve up to thirty square feet of sign area depending upon the type of event, building design and right-of- way frontage for a period not to exceed thirty days per year. Signs approved under this section shall be compatible and harmonious with the color of the building and adjacent buildings . When improperly used, special event signs constitute a public nuisance and may be abated. Special event signs for periods in excess of thirty days may only be permitted pursuant to a resolution of the city council granting such approval which shall specify the period during which the sign may be displayed. (Ord. 587 ss 2 (Exhibit A ss 13) , 1989; Ord. 422 Exhibit A ss 7, 1985 : Ord. 272 (part) , 1981; Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975: Exhibit A ss 25 .28-12 .08) B. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce may designate, subject to city council affirmation, up to four (4) special events per year which its membership wishes to promote through the use of special event banners . Said chamber of commerce to design and make available to businesses in the city for a fee a special event banner which may be installed up to seven (7) days prior to the designated event, during the designated special event and for up to seven (7) days after the conclusion of the designated special event, for a total time period not to exceed 30 days. 4 S r I 'I a _ Qk� 7 I I f, i f„ 't I 1C -/Uoy C � i 1-F--a- 91 I SIGN TASK FORCE COMMITTEE Ml RS Rick Holden Sonia M. Campbell Holden & Johnson Architects Spectacular Shades 44-267 Monterey Avenue 73-910 E1 Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Buff Benson Meg Firestone Buff' s Pets N More Neil 's Apparel 75-100 Merle Drive 73-790 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92211 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Brad Perry Patrick Harkins Ilarshalls Glezi Harkins Collection 44-449 Town Center Way 73-425 E1 Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Bob Leo Linda Kirkendale Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce The Pasta House of Palm Desert 72-990 Highway 111 74-695 Highway 111 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Jim Engle, Jr. Jim Ginty Imperial Sign Co. , Inc. Cal Spas 46-120 Calhoun 72-750 Dinah Shore Drive Indio, CA 92201 Palm Desert, CA 92211 Bobbie Rosenberg Pat Bedrosian Supercuts Jean Benson Post Office Box 3571 Steve Smith Palm Desert, CA 92261 Sg �- ou City of Palm Desert 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TELEPHONE (619)346-0611 FAX(619)340-0574 February 2 , 1995 TO: EL PASEO BUSINESSES WITH EXTERIOR "OPEN" SIGNS RE: SIGN ORDINANCE REVIEW BY CITY COUNCIL January 26 , 1995 the Palm Desert City Council gave first reading to an amendment to the sign ordinance. Part of the proposal before city council was to legally permit the display of "open" signs . An E1 Paseo business district representative was present at the January 26 , 1995 council hearing and requested that the color of these signs be limited to black and white only and that logos not be permitted on the signs . Considering that there was no discussion to the contrary city council directed staff to so amend the proposed ordinance. The matter will go back before city council one last time Thursday, February 9, 1995 at 4 : 00 p.m. If you have concerns and comments on the color limits or the exclusion of logos on those "open" signs, you should attend the city council meeting of February 9, 1995, contact a city council member and/or the E1 Paseo Business District. Very truly yours, /k , �1 RAMON A. DI AZ ASSISTANT CITY NAGER/ DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /tm Pepx 5 Neil 's Aparrel Vision America Earth Spirits P.O. Box 59918 73-199 E1 Paseo, #G 73-130 E1 Paseo, #N Los Angeles, CA 90059 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 L'Affeur Boutique Scent Sational Nomads of the Desert 73-660 El Paseo, #B-2 73-199 E1 Paseo, #H 73-190 E1 Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Native Arts Silk Flowers and Trees JC's Patio Cafe 73-725 El Paseo, #24A 73-260 El Paseo, #3A 73-200 El Paseo, #1A Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Ted Lomel Char 123 N. Palm Canyon Dr. 73-151 E1 Paseo, #E Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Desert, CA 92262 Gold Shoppe Daily Grille 73-320 E1 Paseo 11661 San Vicente Palm Desert, CA 92260 Los Angeles, CA 90049 . Bead Store Martha's P.O. Box 1627 73-061 El Paseo, #S Palm Desert, CA 92261 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Doll Shop Club 74 73-386 E1 Paseo 73-061 E1 Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92262 Palm Desert, CA 92262 Icings The Vault 73-425 El Paseo, #C 73-080 El Paseo, #2 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 My Mother' s Garden Vallerie Miller Fine Art 73-425 E1 Paseo, #21A 73-100 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260-4263 Le Clothrere BG's Eclectic 73-445 El Paseo, #13D 73-100 El Paseo, #5 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Vision America Adasio Gallery 73-199 E1 Paseo, #G 193 S. Palm Canyon Palm a Palm Springs, CA 92262 Neil ' s Aparrel Vision America Earth Spirits P.O. Box 59918 73-199 E1 Paseo, #G 73-130 El Paseo, #N Los Angeles, CA 90059 Palm Deserts CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 L'Affeur Boutique Scent Sational Nomads of the Desert 73-660 E1 Paseo, #B-2 73-199 E1 Paseo, #H 73-190 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Native Arts Silk Flowers and Trees JC's Patio Cafe 73-725 E1 Paseo, #24A 73-260 E1 Paseo, #3A 73-200 E1 Paseo, #1A Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Ted Lomel Char 123 N. Palm Canyon Dr. 73-151 E1 Paseo, #E Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Desert, CA 92262 Gold Shoppe Daily Grille 73-320 E1 Paseo 11661 San Vicente Palm Desert, CA 92260 Los Angeles, CA 90049 Bead Store Martha's P.O. Box 1627 73-061 E1 Paseo, #S Palm Desert, CA 92261 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Doll Shop Club 74 73-386 E1 Paseo 73-061 E1 Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92262 Palm Desert, CA 92262 Icings The Vault 73-425 E1 Paseo, #C 73-080 E1 Paseo, #2 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 My Mother's Garden Vallerie Miller Fine Art 73-425 E1 Paseo, #21A 73-100 E1 Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260-4263 Le Clothi�ere BG's -Eclectic 73-445 El Paseo, #13D 73-100 El Paseo, #5 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Vision America Adasio Gallery 73-199 E1 Paseo, #G 193 S. Palm Canyon Palm - Palm Springs, CA 92262 J Reil 's Aparrel Vision America Earth Spirits P.O. Box 59918 73-199 El Paseo, #G 73-130 E1 Paseo, #N Los Angeles, CA 90059 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 L'Affeur Boutique Scent Sational Nomads of the Desert 73=660 E1 Paseo, #B-2 73-199 El Paseo, #H 73-190 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92'0 I Native Arts } Silk Flowers and Trees JC's Patio Cafe 73-725 E1 Paseo, #24A 73-260 E1 Paseo, #3A 73-200 E1 Paseo, #lA Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Ted Lomel Char 123 N. Palm Canyon Dr. 73-151 E1 Paseo; #E Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Desert, CA 92262 Gold Shoppe Daily Grille 73-320 E1 Paseo 11661 San Vicente Palm Desert, CA 92260 Los Angeles, CA 90049 Bead Store Martha's P.O. Box 1627 73-061 El Paseo, #S Palm Desert, CA 92261 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Doll I Shop Club 74 73-386El Paseo 73-061 E1 Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92262 Palm Desert, CA 92262 Icings The Vault 73-425 E1 Paseo, #C 73-080 E1 Paseo, #2 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 a My Mother's Garden Vallerie Miller Fine Art 73-425 E1 Paseo, #21A 73-100 E1 Paseo Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260-4263 I Le Clothiere _ BG's Eclectic 73-445 E1 Paseo, #13D 73-100 E1 Paseo, #5 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Vision America Adasio Gallery 73-199 E1 Paseo, #G 193 S. Palm Canyon Palm - Palm Springs, CA 92262 J I 3- aMOOD �� 515�18 5z , N /Q GCTs -7 3 061 t5-2 in s 73- '-SV A II ,a-fl 5 2.ZL9 -13 i < V l l U on F tAJP A� 73--lazy GQ/'a�a G `7 � b � C�• n3-y2 �1! -- v f - � p , -7 3-� 3 c TC.� ✓�a�ar� �-/1� 4�2 6QOc-a � 9vL6d ~ CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TRANSMITTAL LETTER I . TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council II . REQUEST: Consideration of approval of amendments to the sign ordinance as recommended by the planning commission. III . APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert IV. CASE NO: ZOA 94-3 V. DATE: January 26, 1995 VI . CONTENTS: A. Staff Recommendation B. Discussion C. Draft Ordinance No. D. Planning Commission Minutes involving Case No. ZOA 94-3 E. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1675 F. Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 3, 1995 G. Related maps and/or exhibits ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. to second reading. B. DISCUSSION: As directed by city council September 22, 1994, staff reconvened the sign task force. The task force met twice in November 1994 and its recommendations were forwarded to planning commission. The proposed sign ordinance amendments were presented to the planning commission Tuesday, January 3, 1995 . The planning commission heard from three members of the sign task force generally endorsing the amendments. There was discussion on how restrictive the provisions for "open signs" should be. Sonia Campbell argued for color control (black on white only) and the prohibition of logos on the open sign. In the end commission decided that since the size was only three square feet, that the colors used and whether or not a logo was placed on it should not be a concern. z . CITY COUNCIL ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 26 , 1995 Planning commission was concerned that the special event banners could be up for extended periods of time. Accordingly a clause was added limiting these special event banners to no more than 30 days. Staff also reported that several existing "open signs" on El Paseo were measured and found to be 54 inches in height. The height limit in section 1 subsection "B" was changed from 48 inches to 54 inches . As well, planning commission felt that the sunset clause in the ordinance would insure that the ordinance is not stretched beyond the acceptable level. Planning commission unanimously adopted its Resolution No. 1675 recommending approval of the proposed amendments . Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by: / SRS/tm 2 • ORDINANCE NO. v AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT RELATING TO SIGNS, SECTION 25 . 68 CASE NO. ZOA 94-3 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 26th day of January, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider Zoning Ordinance Section 25 . 68 relating to signs; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by Resolution No. 1675 , has recommended approval; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with requirements of the "City of. Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California . Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89, " in that the director of community development has determined the amendment to be a class 5 categorical exemption; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony arguments, if any, of all. interested persons desiring to be heard, said city council did find the following facts to justify its action as described below: 1. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the objectives of the .Zoning Ordinance. 2 . That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the adopted General Plan and affected specific plans. 3. That the Zoning Ordinance Amendment would better serve the public health, safety, and general welfare than the current regulations . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, as follows : 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the consideration of the council in this case. 2 . That it does hereby approve a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 94-3, provided in the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A"., to amend Municipal Code Section 25 . 68 . 3 . That these amendments are limited in their effect to regulating the construction of new on-premises advertising displays . A new on-premises advertising display means, for purposes of this section, a display whose structure or housing has not been affixed to its intended premises . Construction means, for purposes of this section, the manufacturing or creation of a new on-premises advertising display. ORDINANCE NO. 4 . That notwithstanding the above noted section limiting the effect of these amendments, any illegally installed signs may be abated pursuant to Section 25 .68. 5 . That the amendments contained in Exhibit "A" attached hereto shall be rescinded automatically and have no effect whatsoever one year after the effective date of this ordinance ( i .e. 30 days after second reading) unless the city council acts to extend this ordinance. 6 . The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby directed to publish this ordinance in the Palm Desert Post, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and effective thirty ( 30) days after its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this day of 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BUFORD A. CRITES, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California 2 ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Signs for pedestrian traffic be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68. 330 Sign for pedestrian traffic. A. Where the principal sign for a business is located so that it cannot be seen by pedestrian traffic, an identification sign, in addition to that otherwise allowed in this chapter, shall be permitted. Such a sign shall be no larger than three square feet (three feet on each side) and it shall be designed and located so as to not distract from the appearance of the building or violate the intent of this chapter. (Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A ss 25 . 38-12 .05) B. Businesses in the commercial and industrial districts may place a pedestal mounted "open" sign with a maximum height of 54 inches and maximum face area of 3 square feet in front of their place of business. Said sign must be placed on private property in a location which does not impede pedestrian traffic flow. Said signs shall not include extraneous verbiage advertising the business, specials or sales events . Said signs must be removed when the business is not open for business . Section 2 That section 25 .68 . 350 Special event signs be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs . A. With the approval of the director of community development, a business may erect one temporary sign, mounted on a wall facia or freestanding, advertising special events, promotions or sales . The director may approve up - to thirty square feet of sign area depending upon the type of event, building design and right-of- way frontage for a period not to exceed thirty days per year. 3 ORDINANCE NO. Signs approved under this section shall be compatible and harmonious with the color of the building and adjacent buildings . When improperly used, special event signs constitute a public nuisance and may be abated. Special event signs for periods in excess of thirty days may only be permitted pursuant to a resolution of the city council granting such approval which shall specify the period during which the sign may be displayed. (Ord. 587 ss 2 (Exhibit A ss 13) , 1989; Ord. 422 Exhibit A ss 7 , 1985: Ord. 272 (part) , 1981; Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975: Exhibit A ss 25 .28-12 .08) B. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce may designate, subject to city council affirmation, up to four (4) special events per year which its membership wishes to promote through the use of special event banners. Said chamber of commerce to design and make available to businesses in the city for a fee a special event banner which may be installed up to seven (7 ) days prior to the designated event, during the designated special event and for up to seven (7 ) days after the conclusion of the designated special event, for a total time period not to exceed 30 days . Said special event banners shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. Design of said special event banners shall be reviewed and approved by the city prior to distribution by the chamber. Once the design has been approved by the city, said special event banners may be installed on private property without further approval or permit from the city. Section 3 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Temporary signs within window areas be and the same is hereby amended as follows : A. On El Paseo between Portola Avenue and Highway 74 temporary informational signs not to exceed ten ( 10) square feet of the window area may be placed on the inside of said window and shall not require prior approval of the city. B. In the general commercial (other than the area described in section A above) , planned commercial and service industrial districts 4 ORDINANCE NO. businesses shall be entitled to a basic twenty (20) square feet of temporary informational window signage which may be placed on the inside of said windows without the prior approval of the city. C. Businesses falling under section "B" above, which have greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Businesses having greater than 150 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. D. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may double their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 600 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may triple their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. E. Notwithstanding the above sections A, B, C and D, in no event may temporary window signage exceed 40% of the window area of the business. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 and construct, they should just be required to design at this point, but not construct. In the event if it became necessary because of a loss of temporary spaces, then they must construct within a 30 day period. Action: Moved by Commissioner Spiegel, seconded by Commissioner Whitlock, by minute motion amending Plfting Commission Resolution No. 1659 and eliminating the w d d construct" from Department of Community Developme Condition No. 1. Carried 4-0 . (Commissioner Fernandez arrived at this time. ) B. Case No. ZOA 94-3 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant GB/� Request for recommendation to city council approval of an amendment to the sign ordinance. Mr. Smith explained that the city council in September asked staff to reconvene the sign task force which was originally constituted in 1989 . They got together 12 people from the business community and met initially November 7 . At that point in time, members of the task force outlined a series of changes, revisions and proposals they would like to accomplish that would be covered under the city's sign ordinance. Staff took that list of items and tried to pull it together. Some of the matters as outlined in the report were already permitted and they just needed to get together and do it; other matters did require amendment to the ordinance. That information was brought back to the task force on November 30 . Staff presented the information in a better from at that point and with a few exceptions, the task force unanimously recommended the changes be processed through the city council and planning commission. He explained that commission' s recommendation would be forwarded to the city council . He said the following issues were discussed: 1) The El Paseo Business Association requested that they be permitted to install offsite signs directing people to El Paseo; that could be done without an amendment to the ordinance. They did need to have them designed and the proposed locations specified. 2 ) The matter of open signs specifically for businesses on El Paseo, although it would apply citywide. Several businesses had been putting open signs out within the setback area along El Paseo and the ordinance right now did not permit that type of sign. It was 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 the feeling of the task force that these types of signs could be acceptable if the design criteria was restrictive enough. In the draft resolution on page 3, section 1 paragraph B was that they would create a section permitting pedestal mounted open signs . A maximum height of 48 inches was stipulated, but staff felt that 54 inches would be acceptable. Staff proposed that the 48 inch height be changed to 54 inches. The signs would have a maximum face area of three square feet. In measuring some of the signs along El Paseo, he said they were in the range of 15" by 22" and one was 18" by 18" . The three square foot limit would allow the ones that were there, which were around 2 and 2 1/2 square feet, and three square feet would allow slightly larger open signs . Commissioner Spiegel asked if these could be in windows . Mr. Smith stated that these would be out in the setback area; most buildings along El Paseo were five feet back from the property line and then there was a ten foot sidewalk between the curb and the property line. The open sign would be placed within that five foot setback area; typically it was placed in the landscaped area right on the corner of the sidewalk. The signs could not impede pedestrian traffic flow and they were not to contain extraneous verbiage advertising the business, specials or sales events . The sign had to be removed when the business was not open. Even with that criteria the task force discussed extensively whether there should be color control and whether or not the business name and/or logo should be allowed. Some people wanted just the word "open" , others wanted the business name. Staff took the position that considering the size of the signs, they did not want to regulate color; if the business community wanted to regulate color, there was an organized business association on El Paseo that could through their bylaws procedure create a more restrictive standard if the membership wanted it. He did not feel the city should be enforcing the fact that someone put in blue on white instead of black on white copy. As well, they discussed whether logos should be permitted on the signs . Considering the size, he felt any logo would be very small and they should not control whether someone put a logo on an open sign. He said that commission would receive some discussion on these issues because staff invited the members of the task force to be present to address the commission. 3) The restaurant industry specifically sought permission to identify special events and promote them and it would be done on a group basis . When the task force met the second time it was decided that the chamber would coordinate this effort and that it would be a citywide effort where they would identify various special events that they wished and 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 would design a special type of welcoming banner. In the draft ordinance staff suggested that up to four special events could be identified each year and then the chamber would coordinate it--the banners would all be the same size, color and copy. Commissioner Spiegel asked what kinds of events this would cover; Mr. Smith stated that the Bob Hope Classic was mentioned and various golf and tennis matches . Commissioner Spiegel asked if there was a time limit; Mr. Smith said that staff was suggesting that the event signs could be up one week prior to the event, during the time of the event, and one week after the event. Commissioner Spiegel noted that if the event was three months, they could be up all year round. Mr. Smith said that he was not aware of any event that lasted that long. Mr. Smith stated that the Cook Street area businesses suggested a need for directory signs at street entrances from Cook Street, as well as directory signs in front of the multi-tenant buildings in the industrial park. Mr. Smith noted there was already a provision allowing for multi-tenant identification. The provision for directory signs at the street entrances could be accomplished similar to the model home tour sign program in that these would be located on the public rights-of-way, so they needed to get together to design a sign and then through an encroachment procedure and the architectural review commission they could accomplish this if that was what was wanted out there, but it would have to be done on a group basis. No amendment to the ordinance would be necessary to accomplish that. Mr. Smith indicated that one of the major issues with the task force was available window signage. Currently there was a five square foot limit. That applied to a business with ten feet of frontage on El Paseo and also applied to Cal Spas; Cal Spas was located about 850 feet or more from the street and they had about 200 feet of window area, but they were still limited under the current ordinance to five square feet of temporary window signage. They were proposing a major change to that limit. Most of the people that requested the additional window signage were located in commercial centers where businesses were substantial distances from the street. He stated that they did propose to separate out E1 Paseo from other commercial areas . Their first thought was to leave the five square foot limit on El Paseo. They changed that position and were now suggesting a ten square foot limit for El Paseo. In the remainder of the 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 general commercial areas along Highway 111 specifically, they would increase the five square foot limit to a 20 square foot limit. That would apply to businesses with up to 50 feet of window exposure. With greater than 50 feet of linear window, they would get up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Greater than 100 feet of linear window exposure, other than on El Paseo, would be entitled up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. He noted that it sounded like a lot, but in the case of a 100 foot wide window area, typically they were eight feet high and 800 square feet of window glass, then they could have up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. He said that using Marshall ' s as an example on Town Center Way, they had weekly sales items that came in from corporate that they hoped to be able to advertise in the window. What they did now was hang the signs three feet in back of the glass, which was not deemed a sign under the ordinance. He said that put most of their advertising devices over the shopping carts, which was okay in the mornings, but later in the afternoon when most of the carts were out in the store or parking lot, there were people walking into signs in the store. He stated that they were looking at nine percent of the window area covered with signs . They called it temporary window signage, but in fact it could be fairly permanent. They also tried to take into consideration distance from the street. They created two sub-categories where if a business was greater than 250 feet from the street, then those businesses based on whatever window exposure they had, they could double their normal allotment--if they were otherwise entitled to 20 square feet of window signage which most of the smaller tenants would fall into that category, if the business was in a center like Marshall ' s or Mervyn' s, they would fall into the greater than 250 feet from a public street category and would be able to double their otherwise entitlement. He said there was a third category where if they were greater than 600 feet from a public street, which included the Desert Springs Marketplace center across from the Marriott, the Price Club/Home Base Center, and the Lucky' s center on Washington. They were suggesting that those business in those circumstances would be able to triple their basic allotment. Staff was comfortable with the above formula for temporary window signage. He said he looked at many businesses and even with the tripling of the basic entitlement staff didn' t see any situation where 40% of the window area would be exceeded. However, staff was proposing that this whole amendment would have a sunset clause in it. It must be revisited within one year and if it is felt that it is too lenient and the city does not want to continue the program, 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 then it would close on its own unless specifically (through planning commission and council) extended within that one year., He said that would be in the amendment to the ordinance. It would just be the amendments that were being enacted and the key one was the window signage amendment . He also noted that he did an extensive city survey with two members of the council and this was their way of making sure that the changes weren't taken too far. Commissioner Spiegel clarified that they were looking at three things : the open signs, the restaurant owners special event signs, and the window signs . Mr. Smith concurred, but noted that the special event signs while originating from the restaurant community, would apply to everyone. Mr. Diaz noted that they would have to have city council affirmation, which would prevent someone from having a year long special event. Chairperson Jonathan opened the public testimony and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . MS. SONIA CAMPBELL, 73-910 El Paseo, stated that she was a store owner and president of the E1 Paseo Business Association. As far as the open signs were concerned, they were in favor of the 54 inch height and the three square foot signage, but they would like to have the name of the business on it also, or if the name was too large, just the word open. She said they would rather have that then any type of logo, or a coffee shop sign depicting a cup of coffee. They would also like to have a clean, uniform sign on the street and as far as she would be concerned, she would not have an open sign. As far as their legislation was concerned, they could not amend their bylaws; their bylaws for the association were to promote and advertise the street, not to go ahead and make any laws, so they depended upon the city and code enforcement to enforce the signage. Commissioner Spiegel asked if Ms . Campbell was suggesting that they don' t have any controls that would supersede the city' s . Ms . Campbell replied no, they depended upon code enforcement to be out on the street. Commissioner Spiegel said that whatever was passed for window signage would apply to El Paseo and they would have no way of establishing other ground rules for the businesses on E1 Paseo; Ms . Campbell concurred. Commissioner Spiegel said that if they were to adopt an open sign that didn't require a logo for the rest of 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 the city, then E1 Paseo could not require that for E1 Paseo; Ms. Campbell said they would like to have the open sign, just a clean open sign for E1 Paseo to have a uniform street, not for the whole city. Commissioner Spiegel asked Mr. Diaz if E1 Paseo could have a separate rule from the rest of the city. Mr. Diaz replied yes. Ms. Campbell said they would also prefer to have the open signs in a standard color, just black on white so that it would be a standard sign for everyone. Commissioner Spiegel asked if Ms . Campbell was speaking for the entire E1 Paseo Business Association, and not just herself; Ms. Campbell said she was speaking for the whole street. Chairperson Jonathan noted that as the resolution exhibit A was written, it did not refer to E1 Paseo; he asked if it was staffs intent to create open signs for anywhere in the city. Mr. Smith replied that they were looking for a citywide standard, considering the size at three square feet, so the maximum would be 21" by 21" . He did not see the need to create differing standards; the size was very restrictive on its own. Commissioner Spiegel noted that the E1 Paseo merchants were asking for a specific color and way of identifying the merchant. Mr. Smith stated that he heard otherwise at the task force meetings--there were people who wanted the choice of color and hoped to have the business name on the sign. He said that whatever way the commission wanted to go was fine with staff. Code would go out and enforce what the city enacted. MR. ROBERT J. LEO, Executive Director of the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce and a resident of Palm Desert, stated that the task force was a study in efficiency and effectiveness . Never had he served on a task force that only had two meetings, that brought such diverse people together who walked away shaking hands and agreeing with everyone at the end of the second meeting. He felt the ordinance with the sunset clause would give the business people the opportunity to test the amendments to see if they worked. Palm Desert was changing and when the ordinance was passed, there wasn't as much growth or development as right now. He felt that overall the three areas identified as the open signs, special events, and window signage would give them the chance to see if this was the kind of signage that still maintains an aesthetic standard that they want to maintain in Palm Desert . 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 Commissioner Spiegel asked if Mr. Leo would have any objection to a specific time limit on special events, such as one week. Mr. Leo replied no, but he would not limit it to one week. He felt they were probably looking at a 30 day span. Commissioner Spiegel felt that if there was a special event, there should be a time limit on the event so that advertising was not up for long periods of time. Mr. Leo felt the suggestion was one week before, one week during, and one week after--24 to 30 days would work. He said they would like to have the signs down as quickly as possible also. Mr. Smith indicated that the section had a provision where the chamber would propose the special events to the city council, so if there was going to be a special event that would last longer, that was something the council would want to look at. Chairperson Jonathan said in the third category for the additional window signage, as he understood it, was for temporary signs and asked how "temporary" was being defined for this purpose. Mr. Smith replied on-going; the ordinance was not real specific. What code enforcement had been enforcing was that this was a sale sign or special sign for the window. Chairperson Jonathan asked Mr. Leo if the committee addressed the issue of what "temporary" meant for purposes of window signs . Mr. Leo replied no, not specifically. Mr. Diaz said that in other cities he had been with, they were by definition a sign painted on the window and thereby considered a temporary sign. There was no time limit placed on that sign and it did not require a permit. He felt otherwise they would be controlling it by size and reminded commission that there was the sunset clause. All the control there was size, 25% of the window in that case. Here there was a maximum of 40% when they were 600 feet away. In actuality everyone else was talking about 9% . Once they started defining signs on windows and putting time limits on them as window signs, then they would get into problems . Chairperson Jonathan said that he was not objecting to it, but as a point of clarification, when they said temporary, it was a different usage for that word. The sign that went on the window within the size limitation could be on year round. Mr. Diaz said that was correct and it might be able to last longer than the outside sign that was described as permanent, but by definition they said the sign inside the window was a temporary sign. Chairperson Jonathan closed the public testimony and asked for commission comments . 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 Commissioner Whitlock commended Mr. Smith and the task force for putting the proposal together so concisely. She felt the sunset clause was ideal and whomever deserved the credit for that she commended. Because of the sunset clause she would be prepared to make a motion for approval . Commissioner Spiegel agreed; he said that their objective was to make Palm Desert as successful as possible, not to hurt any of the merchants and with the sunset clause, if there was a lot of abuse to any of the amendments, it would become quite obvious within 12 months . The only thing he wanted to add was the 30 day limit on special events . He would not like to see them go on forever. With that addition he was in favor. Chairperson Jonathan added that he had some significant reservations about some of the sizes, particularly when they could be tripled, but the sunset provision was innovative and he seconded Commissioner Whitlock' s commendations and that was persuasive to him and he was willing to give it a one year try. He asked Commissioner Whitlock if she was willing to amend her recommendation to include the 30 day limit for special event signage. She replied yes. Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Spiegel, approving the findings as presented by staff . Carried 5-0 . Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Spiegel, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1675, recommending to city council approval of 20A 94-3, subject to the amendments . Carried 5-0 . VIII . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. X. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE UPDATE None. 13 �I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO SIGNS. CASE NO. ZOA 94-3 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 3rd day of January, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the amendment of the zoning ordinance section 25 . 68 relating to signs; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89, " in that the director of community development has determined the amendment to be a class 5 categorical exemption; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of the zoning ordinance text amendment: 1 . The proposed amendment relating to signs are consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance and protect the community health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2 . That it does hereby recommend approval to the city council of ZOA 94-3 as provided in the attached exhibit labeled. Exhibit "A" . 3 . That the planning commission recommends to city council that the ordinance which implements this resolution should contain a provision that the amendments contained therein shall be rescinded automatically and have no effect whatsoever one year after the effective date of the city council approval ( i .e. 30 days after second reading) unless the city council acts to extend the ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 3rd day of January, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: BEATY, FERNANDEZ, SPIEGEL, WHITLOCK, JONATHAN NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE SABBY JONATHAN, Chairperson ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Signs for pedestrian traffic be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68 . 330 Sign for pedestrian traffic . A. Where the principal sign for a business is located so that it cannot be seen by pedestrian traffic, an identification sign, in addition to that otherwise allowed in this chapter, shall be permitted. Such a sign shall be no larger than three square feet (three feet on each side) and it shall be designed and located so as to not distract from the appearance of the building or violate the intent of this chapter. (Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A ss 25 . 38-12 .05) B. Businesses in the commercial and industrial districts may place a pedestal mounted "open" sign with a maximum height of 54 inches and maximum face area of 3 square feet in front of their place of business . Said sign must be placed on private property in a location which does not impede pedestrian traffic flow. Said signs shall not include extraneous verbiage advertising the business, specials or sales events . Said signs must be removed when the business is not open for business . Section 2 That section 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs . A. With the approval of the director of community development, a business may erect one temporary sign, mounted on a wall facia or freestanding, advertising special events, promotions or sales . The director may approve up to thirty square feet of sign area depending upon the type of event, building design and right-of- way frontage for a period not to exceed thirty days per year. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 Signs approved under this section shall be compatible and harmonious with the color of the building and adjacent buildings. When improperly used, special event signs constitute a public nuisance and may be abated. Special event signs for periods in excess of thirty days may only be permitted pursuant to a resolution of the city council granting such approval which shall specify the period during which the sign may be displayed. (Ord. 587 ss 2 (Exhibit A ss 13) , 1989; Ord. 422 Exhibit A ss 7, 1985 : Ord. 272 (part) , 1981; Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A ss 25 . 28-12 . 08) B. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce may designate, subject to city council affirmation, up to four (4) special events per year which . its membership wishes to promote through the use of special event banners. Said chamber of commerce to design and make available to businesses in the city for a fee a special event banner which may be installed up to seven (7) days prior to the designated event, during the designated special event and for up to seven (7 ) days after the conclusion of the designated special event, for a total time period not to exceed 30 days . Said special event banners shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. Design of said special event banners shall be reviewed and approved by the city prior to distribution by the chamber. Once the design has been approved by the city, said special event banners may be installed on private property without further approval or permit from the city. Section 3 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Temporary signs within window areas be' and the same is hereby amended as follows : A. On E1 Paseo between Portola Avenue and Highway 74 temporary informational signs not to exceed ten ( 10) square feet of the window area may be placed on the inside of said window and shall not require prior approval of the city. B. In the general commercial (other than the area described in section A above) , planned commercial and service industrial districts 4 PLANNING COMMISSION nZSOLUTION NO. 1675 businesses shall be entitled to a basic twenty (20) square feet of temporary informational window signage which may be placed on the inside of said windows without the prior approval of the city. C. Businesses falling under section "B" above, which have greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Businesses having greater than 150 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. D. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may double their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 600 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may triple their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. E. Notwithstanding the above sections A, B, C and D, in no event may temporary window signage exceed 40% of the window area of the business . 5 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMF-4T STAFF TO: Planning Commission DATE: January 3, 1995 ` CASE NO: ZOA 94-3 REQUEST: Approval of amendments to the sign ordinance. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert I, BACK_CRC onse to business community September 22, 1994 city council in resp requests for adjustments to the sign ordinance directed staff to reconvene the sign task force which had been formed when the sign ordinance was last updated in 1989 - The sign task force is comprised of 12 persons representing various business interests, the architectural review commission and the chamber of commerce. The task force what t hoped could be met November 7 , 1994 and outlined areas of concern and resented a report to achieved. Staff reviewed the requests a1994. the task force when it met November 30, With a few exceptions, which will be delineated later, the task force unanimously recommended that the changes .be processed through city council and planning commission. II . ANALYSIS: At the November 7 , 1994 task force meeting the following issues were discussed: permitted A. E1 Paseo Business Association requested that totEbePaseo. to install off-site signs directing people Response: can be accomplished without This type of sign request amendment to the ordinance. Paso ested t the B. Several business owners on Elneate small uexterior a open" ordinance be amended to permit signs . Response: Y While these signs have existed for several years, in fact the does not permit exterior located "open ordinance currently of the draft resolution would allow signs. Section 1 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 pedestal-mounted "open" signs with a maximum height of 48 inches and maximum face area of three square feet. These would be pedestrian sized signs and would only indicate that a business is "open" . No extraneous verbiage would be . permitted ( i .e. sales, 40% off, etc. ) . These signs could not be located in the public right-of-way. Signs could include business name and/or logo, but the primary purpose would be indicate that the particular business is "open" . These signs would be removed when the business is not open. The E1 Paseo business representatives, while they concurred that these signs should be permitted, were split on whether the signs should include the business name or logo. As well, they could not agree on whether the colors should be limited or should be left to the individual business. Staff is proposing that the city establish a provision which would allow the basic sign subject to height and size limits, and would leave any further restrictions ( i.e. color and whether business names or logos could be included) up to the recognized E1 Paseo Business Association. The group could so amend it bylaws and then the members would adhere to the standards which they voted to accept. C. Representatives of the restaurant industry asked that the ordinance be amended to permit various business groups to band together to promote special events . Response: We proposed to amend the ordinance to allow various business interests to determine which special events they, as a group, would like to promote as special events . As an example, the restaurant industry group would meet and determine that they would like to promote three special events throughout the year which they would identify. They would design special banners for those events . The city would permit the banners to go up one week before the event, and require that they be taken down one week after the event concludes. These banners would meet certain criteria, i.e. all the same colors, all the same size, must be mounted on buildings and on privAte _property. We don't want them tied between two palm trees . 2 STAFF REPORT - ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 Currently the grand opening banners are limited to 30 square feet in size. We would suggest that these special event banners be limited to 20 square feet--that would still allow 2 feet by 10 feet. A business would be allowed one special event banner per street frontage. ' So a corner business would be entitled to two. We would suggest that in order to maintain consistency of quality and color that the group would order the banners from the manufacturer rather than each individual member of the group going to his own supplier. In discussing this matter with the task force, it was decided to allow this type of special event promotion subject to it being coordinated through the chamber of commerce. It is expected that the chamber will identify various "special events" . It will design banners and make them available to businesses for a fee. The identified special events and the design of the banners is subject to affirmation by the city. In the draft ordinance staff suggests that up to four (4�ecial events could be identified per year. D. The representative for the Cook Street business area suggested a need for business directory signs at street entrances from Cook Street, as well as directory signs in front of multi-tenant buildings in the industrial park. Response: The directory signs in front of individual multi-tenant industrial buildings are permitted under the ordinance section 25.68 . 335 . The business directory sign at the street entrance points from Cook Street could be done as the model home tour program signs . The businesses in that area should agree upon a design for the directory sign, present it to the city and when approved, have it/them installed. These signs will be located on part of the public right-of-way and as such, following approval by architectural review commission, will require an encroachment permit from public works department. No amendment to the ordinance is required. E. SeverAl_,Fnembers of the task force indicated that additional window signage was needed to promote sales beyond the five (5) square feet permitted in section 25 . 68 . 340 . AV 3 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 Response: Most of the people requesting additional window signage were located in commercial centers where businesses are a substantial distance back from public streets. It was staff ' s proposal to retain the existing five square foot limit for E1 Paseo between Portola and Highway 74 . Other general commercial, planned commercial and service industrial zoned areas would get a basic 20 square feet of window signage. Businesses with greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure, other than on E1 Paseo, would be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Greater than 100 feet of linear window exposure, other than on E1 Paseo, would be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. Most business windows are 8 feet high or greater. Therefore, a 100 foot wide window would have an area of at least 800 square feet ( 100 ' x 8 ' ) . The window sign(s) then would amount to 9 .3% (i.e. 75 square feet of sign in an 800 square foot window area) . In a 60 foot wide window the percentage covered by sign(s) would be 10 . 4% ( i .e. 50 square foot sign in a 480 square foot window) . In a 16 foot wide window store front on Highway 111, the 20 square feet of window sign(s) would amount to 13 . 9% (i .e. 20 square foot sign(s) in 144 square feet of window) . Now we also recognize that in certain centers (i.e. Price Club Center, Ralphs at Country Club and Cook, Luckys on Washington Street, Desert Crossing, Palms to Pines and Waring Plaza) businesses are located a substantial distance back from the public streets. In these instances, we propose to expand upon the basic entitlement established above. If a business is located more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way, its basic entitlement would be doubled. A 60 foot wide window more than 250 feet from a public right-of- way could then have up to 100 square feet of signage, but this _tyould still only amount to about 21% of the window area. A 200 foot wide window 250 feet back from a public right-of- way could have up to 150 square feet of signage (75 square 4 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3 , 1995 feet by 2) . This would amount to 9 .4% of the window covered by sign(s) . In the case of businesses with extreme setbacks ( i.e. Home Base area, the Ralphs center at Country Club and Cook, both over 600 feet from a public street) we propose to allow these businesses to triple their basic entitlement. Cal Spas, located between Price Club and Home Base, is located more than 600 feet from Dinah Shore Drive and has 52 feet of frontage. Under this proposal it would be entitled to 150 feet of window signage ( i.e. 50 square feet by 3) . This would amount to 36% of the window area. The Bazaar, located next to Cal Spas, has 137 feet of linear window exposure. It would be entitled to 225 square feet of window signage which would amount to 20.5% of its window area (i .e. 225 : 1096 = 20 .5%) . The task force for the most part endorsed this proposal. The E1 Paseo representatives differed with some people urging an increase in the basic entitlement while others wished to retain the existing five square foot maximum. Considering that we are proposing to increase the basic entitlement in most business areas from five (5) square feet to twenty (20) square feet, then staff feels that an increase for E1 Paseo businesses from 5 to 10 square feet for temporary window signs is reasonable. Of course, if the E1 Paseo Business Association wishes it could amend its bylaws to require a more restrictive standard (i.e. 5 square feet) . While staff is comfortable with the above formula for temporary window signage, we feel that a certain maximum percentage of the window area which may be used for temporary window signage should be prescribed. We are suggesting that in no event may temporary window signage exceed 40% of the window area of the business. III . SUNSET CLAUSE: Many in the community consider amendments to be major changes in city policy (i.e. open signs, special event banners and increased size of window signs) . As a safety net we propose to include a sunset clause' in this ordinance. The ordinance will automatically expire one ( 1) year after its approval by city council unless it is extended by the city council . Assuming the ordinance is 5 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 approved by February or March 1995, then it would be staff 's intention to revisit the issue in November or December 1995 to consider the pros and cons of these changes . IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the planning commission recommend to city council approval of an amendment to the sign ordinance. V. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution B. Exhibits distributed to task force C. Update report to city council Prepared by / Z� .Li' �- <-cam Reviewed and Approved by SRS/tm w 6 I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO SIGNS . CASE NO. ZOA 94-3 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 3rd day of January, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the amendment of the zoning ordinance section 25 . 68 relating to signs; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89, " in that the director of community development has determined the amendment to be a class 5 categorical exemption; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of the zoning ordinance text amendment: 1 . The proposed amendment relating to signs are consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance and protect the community health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows : 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2 . That it does hereby recommend approval to the city council of ZOA 94-3 as provided in the attached exhibit labeled Exhibit "A" . 3 . That the planning commission recommends to city council that the ordinance which implements this resolution should contain a provision that the amendments contained therein shall be rescinded automatically and have no effect whatsoever one year after the effective date of the city council approval ( i .e. 30 days after second reading) unless the city council acts to extend the ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on .this 3rd day of January, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : BEATY, FERNANDEZ, SPIEGEL, WHITLOCK, JONATHAN NOES : NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE SABBY JONATHAN, Chairperson ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 That section 25.68 . 340 Signs for pedestrian traffic be and the same is hereby amended as follows: 25 . 68 . 330 Sign for pedestrian traffic. A. Where the principal sign for a business is located so that it cannot be seen by pedestrian traffic, an identification sign, in addition to that otherwise allowed in this chapter, shall be permitted. Such a sign shall be no larger than three square feet (three feet on each side) and it shall be designed and located so as to not distract from the appearance of the building or violate the intent of this chapter. (Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975: Exhibit A ss 25 . 38-12 .05) B. Businesses in the commercial and industrial districts may place a pedestal mounted "open" sign with a maximum height of 54 inches and maximum face area of 3 square feet in front of their place of business. Said sign must be placed on private property in a. location which does not impede pedestrian traffic flow. Said signs shall not include extraneous verbiage advertising the business, specials or sales events . Said signs must be removed when the business is not open for business . Section 2 That section 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs . A. With the approval of the director of community development, a business may erect one temporary sign, mounted on a wall facia or freestanding, advertising special events, promotions or sales . The director may approve up to thirty square feet of sign area depending upon the type of event, building design and right-of- way frontage for a period not to exceed thirty days per year. 3 J PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 Signs approved under this section shall be compatible and harmonious with the color of the building and adjacent buildings . When improperly used, special event signs constitute a public nuisance and may be abated. Special event signs for periods in excess of thirty days may only be permitted pursuant to a resolution of the city council granting such approval which shall specify the period during which the sign may be displayed. (Ord. 587 ss 2 (Exhibit A ss 13) , 1989; Ord. 422 Exhibit A ss 7, 1985: Ord. 272 (part) , 1981; Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A ss 25 .28-12 . 08) B. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce may designate, subject to city council affirmation, up to four (4) special events per year which its membership wishes to promote through the use of special event banners . Said chamber of commerce to design and make available to businesses in the city for a fee a special event banner which may be installed up to seven (7) days prior to the designated event, during the designated special event and for up to seven (7 ) days after the conclusion of the designated special event, for a total time period .not to exceed 30 days . Said special event banners shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. Design of said special event banners shall be reviewed and approved by the city prior to distribution by the chamber. Once the design has been approved by the city, said special event banners may be installed on private property without further approval or permit from the city. Section 3 That section 25 . 68. 340 Temporary signs within window areas be and the same is hereby amended as follows : . A. On El Paseo between Portola Avenue and Highway 74 temporary informational signs not to exceed ten ( 10) square feet of the window area may be placed on the inside of said window and shall not require prior approval of the city. B. In the general commercial (other than the area described in section A above) , planned commercial and service industrial districts 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 businesses shall be entitled to a basic twenty (20) square feet of temporary informational window signage which may be placed on the inside of said windows without the prior approval of the city. C. Businesses falling under section "B" above, which have greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Businesses having greater than 150 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. D. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may double their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 600 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may triple their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. E. Notwithstanding the above sections A, B, C and D, in no event may temporary window signage exceed 40% of the window area of the business . 5 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS FROM: STEVE SMITH, ASSOCIATE PLANNER DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 1994 SUBJECT: SUGGESTED CODE DEMB 7 CH GE FROM FIRST TASK FORCE MEETING OF Date of Next Meeting: Wednesday, November 30, 1994 8:30 a.m. - Community Services Conference Room The following items were discussed at the meeting and our responses follow: i) Sonya Campbell indicated that E1 Paseo needed off-site sign(s) directing people to E1 Paseo. Resp�e: E1 Paseo Business Improvement District should have signs) designed and select desired locations for installation. Plans would then go to worksitectural department Review for Commission for review, public encroachment permit (assuming council.is to bAnlamendment toobthe property) and finally to city ordinance is not required to accomplish this request. ested t the ii) Several business on ordinance be amendedners to permit ln at eOsmallu exterior a"open" signs . Response: Mr. Diaz indicated that he would work on this matter immediately to permit these signsame aaheadt the of the actual code amendment. He will report on As welA,-tee _mill include an amendment to actually permit "open" signs . The criteria we would request would be to allow- pedestal mounted "open" signs with a maximum height of 42 inches and maximum area of 3 square feet. SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 These would be pedestrian sized signs and would only indicate that a business is "open" . No extraneous verbiage would be permitted (i.e. Sales, 40% Off, Etc. ) . These signs could not be located in the public right of way. Signs could include business name and/or logo, but the primary purpose would be to indicate that the particular business is "open" . These signs would be removed when the business is not open. iii) Linda Kirkendale requested that the restaurant industry be permitted to decide as a group to promote certain special events through the use of banners. Response: We propose to amend the ordinance to allow various business interests to determine which special events they, as a group, would like to promote as special events . As an example, the restaurant industry group would meet and determine that they would like to promote 3 special events throughout the year which they would identify. They would design special banners for those events. The city would permit the banners to go up one week before the event, and require that they be taken down one week after the event concludes . These banners would meet certain criteria, i.e. all the same colors, all the same size, must be mounted on buildings and on private property. We don't want them tied between two palm trees . Currently the grand opening banners are limited to 30 square feet in size. We would suggest the these special event banners be limited to 20 square feet - that would still allow 2 feet by 10 feet. A business would be allowed one special event banner per street frontage. So a corner business would be entitled to two. We would suggest that in order to maintain consistency of quality and color that the group would order the banners from the manufacturer rather than each individual member of the group going to his own supplier. iv) Buff Benson representing the Cook Street business area suggested a need for business directory signs at street entrances from Cook Street as well as directory signs in front of multi-tenant buildings in the industrial park. 2 SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 - The directory tenants signs individual industrial buildings permitted permit d under the ordinance. The business directory sign at the street entrance points from Cook Street could be done as the model home tour program signs . The businesses in that area should agree upon a design for the directory sign, present it to the city and when approved have it/them installed. v) Several members of the group indicated that additional window signage was needed to promote sales . Response: Most of the people requesting additional window were located in commercial centers where businesses signage streets public from are a substantial distance back fr p It is our proposal to retain the existing 5 square foot limit 3 for E1 Paseo between Portola and Highway 74 • aT` Other general commercial and planned commercial toned areas would get a basic 20 square feet of window signage. Businesses with greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure, other than on E1 Paseo, would be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Greater than 100 feet of linear window exposure, re hfeeth n o El Paseo, temporary window would be entitled to up to 75 squ signage. Most business windows are 8 feet high or greater. Therefore a 100 foot wide window would have an area of t least amount 800 square feet ( 100 ' x 8 ' ) . The window sign(s) then to 9 . 3% (i .e. 75 square feet of sign in an 800 square foot window area. In a 60 foot wide window the percentage covered by signs(s) would be 10 .4% (i.e. 50 square foot sign in .480 square foot window) . In a 16 ' wide window store front on Highway 111, the 20 square feet of window signs(s) would amount to 13.9% (i .e. 20 square foot sign(s) in 144 square feet of window) . Now, we,aj6o recognize that in certain centers ( Luckys Price onClub Center, Ralphs at Country Club and Cook, Washington Street, Desert Crossing, Palms to Pines and Waring Plaza businesses are located a substantial distance back from 3 SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 the public streets . In these instances, we propose to expand upon the basic entitlement established above. If a business is located more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way its basic entitlement would be doubled. A 60 ' wide window more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way could then have up to 100 square feet of signage, but this would still only amount to about 21% of the window area. A 200 ' wide window 250 feet back from a public right-of-way could have up to 150 square feet of signage (75 square feet X 2) . This would amount to 9 .4% of the window covered by sign(s) . In the case of businesses with extreme setbacks (i .e. Home Base area, the Ralphs center at Country Club and Cook, both over 600 feet from a public street, we propose to allow these businesses to triple their basic entitlement. Cal Spas, located between Price Club and Home Base, is located more than 600 feet from Dinah Shore Drive and has 52 feet of frontage. Under this proposal it would be entitled to 150 feet of window signage (i.e. 50 square feet X 3) . This would amount to 36% of the window area. The Bazarre, located next to Cal Spas, has 137 feet of linear window exposure. It would be entitled to 225 square feet of window signage which would amount to 20.5% of its window area ( i.e. 225 : 1096 = 20 .5%) . While we feel comfortable with the formula outlined above, it may be that in order to assure that some unexpected situation doesn't pop up that we want to establish a maximum percentage of the window area that can be covered with temporary window signs . The Task Force can discuss this issue and see if it wishes to establish such a maximum, and if so, what the limit should be. STEV-E SMITH � ASSOCIATE PLANNER SS/db 4 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Crites and City Council FROM: Ramon A. Diaz, Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Development and Planning DATE: December 8, 1994 SUBJECT: Sign Task Force Report Please be advised that the sign task force was convened pursuant to the direction of the city council at its September 22, 1994 meeting. The task force met on November 7, 1994 with 12 representatives of various businesses representing a broad geographic area of 'the city. Issues brought up at the November 7 , 1994 meeting included: 1) Open signs 2) The need for additional window signs 3) Directional signs for the industrial area 4 ) Directory signs for the industrial area 5) Restaurant owners wished the ability to promote certain special events through use of banners November 14 , 1994 Mayor Crites, Councilmember Benson, Jim Engle Jr. of Imperial Sign Company and Steve Smith of the planning staff conducted an extensive tour of the city reviewing signs and other issues . Following the November 14 , 1994 tour, and based on comments received from the task force members, staff prepared proposed amendments which were then presented to the sign task force on November 30, 1994 . Due to the required lead time to have this appear on your agenda, this report was prepared prior to November 30 , 1994 meeting. We will report on the outcome of the task force meeting orally at the December 8, 1994 meeting. It is our intention, if the proposed amendments are deemed satisfactory to the task force, to set the matter for hearing by planning commission early in January 1995 . When the planning commission is satisfied, it will recommend the amendments to the city council which should be set for hearing in February or March 1995 . RAMON A. DIAZ ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING CITY OF PALM DESERT COUNCIL AGENDA REQUEST MEETING OF January 26, 1995 Consent Calendar Item 1 . TO BE CONSIDERED AS : — Public Hearing Item Regular Item 2 . REQUEST: (Agenda Item Wording ) Consideration of appruji] of amendments to tha ciga ordinance ag recnmmended by the planning commission. 3 . FINANCIAL : (Complete if Necessary) (a) Acct/Prof . # (b) Amount Requested (c ) Current Budget? (d) Appropriation? Apprvd : Finance Director 4. SUBMAA L� APPR✓Dparment Head City Manager 6/ 13/88 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Jean Benson, Council Person FROM: Steve Smith, Associate Planner DATE: January 4, 1995 SUBJECT: Sign Ordinance Revisions The proposed sign ordinance amendments were presented to the planning commission Tuesday, January 3, 1995. The planning commission heard from three members of the sign task force generally endorsing the amendments . There was discussion on how restrictive the provisions for "open signs" should be. Sonia Campbell argued for color control (black on white only) and the prohibition of logos on the open sign. In the end commission decided that since the size was only three square feet, that the colors used and whether or not a logo was placed on it should not be a concern. As well, planning commission felt that the sunset clause in the ordinance would insure that the ordinance is not stretched beyond the acceptable level . The proposed ordinance will be scheduled for city council consideration January 26 , 1995 . i STEPHEN R. SMITH ASSOCIATE PLANNER /tm off NAM Dc� 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. ZOA 94-3 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert City Council to consider amendments to the sign ordinance, Section 25 . 68 of the municipal code. - 1 pate pages ' port-it!Fax Note 767 To From V e S � 1''l � co. G - colDePt. Phone# �66 phone# Fax# p Fax# '�,3 �,��cn SAID public hearing will be held on Thursday, January 26, 1995, at 7 : 00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons, are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the department of community development/ planning at the above address between the hours of 8 : 00 a.m. and 5 : 00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk January 11, 1995 City of Palm Desert, California �� J City of Palm Desert 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TELEPHONE (619)346-0611 FAX(619)340-0574 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOTICE OF ACTION Date: January 4, 1995 City of Palm Desert Re: ZOA 94-3 The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken the following action at its meeting of January 3, 1995 . PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF ZOA 94-3 TO CITY COUNCIL BY ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 1675, SUBJECT TO AMENDMENTS. CARRIED 5-0 . Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the Director of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, within fifteen ( 15 ) days of the date of the decision. RAM N A. DIAZ, S C RY PALM DESERT PLANNI COMMISSION RAD/tm cc: Coachella Valley Water District Public Works Department Building & Safety Department Fire Marshal fle�cb0 Pepei iL PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO SIGNS. CASE NO. ZOA 94-3 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 3rd day of January, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the amendment of the zoning ordinance section 25 . 68 relating to signs ; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89, " in that the director of community development has determined the amendment to be a class 5 categorical exemption; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of the zoning ordinance text amendment: 1 . The proposed amendment relating to signs are consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance and protect the community health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows : 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2 . That it does hereby recommend approval to the city council of ZOA 94-3 as provided in the attached exhibit labeled Exhibit "A" . 3 . That the planning commission recommends to city council that the ordinance which implements this resolution should contain a provision that the amendments contained therein shall be rescinded automatically and have no effect whatsoever one year after the effective date of the city council approval ( i .e. 30 days after second reading) unless the city council acts to. extend the ordinance. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 + f PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 3rd day of January, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: BEATY, FERNANDEZ , SPIEGEL, WHITLOCK, JONATHAN NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE SA*JONA Chairperson ATTEST: �v ' RAMON A. DIAZ , ec ary Palm Desert Planni Commission 2 a 'PLANNING COMMISSION' RESOLUTION NO. 1675 EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Signs for pedestrian traffic be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68 . 330 Sign for pedestrian traffic. A. Where the principal sign for a business is located so that it cannot be seen by pedestrian traffic, an identification sign, in addition to that otherwise allowed in this chapter, shall be permitted. Such a sign shall be no larger than three square feet (three feet on each side) and it shall be designed and located so as to not distrac t from the appearance of the building or violate the intent of this chapter. (Ord. 129 ss 4 (part ) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit ) , A ss 25 . 38-12 . 05) B. Businesses in the commercial and industrial districts may place a pedestal mounted "open" sign with a maximum height of 54 inches and maximum face area of 3 square feet in front of their place of business . Said sign must be placed on private property in a location which does not impede pedestrian traffic flow. Said signs shall not include extraneous verbiage advertising the business, specials or sales events . Said signs must be removed when the business is not open for business . Section 2 That section 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs. A. With the approval of the director of community development, a business may erect one temporary sign, mounted on a wall facia or freestanding, advertising special events, promotions or sales . The director may approve up to thirty square feet of sign area depending upon the type of event, building design and right-of- way frontage ,_for a period not to exceed thirty days per year. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 Signs approved under this section shall be compatible and harmonious with the color of the building and adjacent buildings . When improperly used, special event signs constitute a public nuisance and may be abated. Special event signs for periods in excess of thirty days may only be permitted pursuant to a resolution of the city council granting such approval which shall specify the period during which the sign may be displayed. (Ord. 587 ss 2 (Exhibit A ss 13) , 1989; Ord. 422 Exhibit A ss 7, 1985 : Ord. 272 (part) , 1981; Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A ss 25 .28-12 .08) B. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce may designate, subject to city council affirmation, up to four (4 ) special events per year which its membership wishes to promote through the use of special event banners . Said chamber of commerce to design and make available to businesses in the city for a fee a special event banner which may be installed up to seven (7) days prior to the designated event, during the designated special event and for up to seven (7) days after the conclusion of the designated special event, for a total time period not to exceed 30 days. y Said special event banners shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. Design of said special event banners shall be reviewed and approved by the city prior to distribution by the chamber. Once the design has been approved by the city, said special event banners may be installed on private property without further approval or permit from the city. Section 3 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Temporary signs within window areas be and the same is hereby amended as follows: A. On El Paseo between Portola Avenue and Highway 74 temporary informational signs not to exceed ten ( 10) square feet of the window area may be placed on the inside of said window and shall not require prior approval of the city. B. In the rgeneral commercial (other than the area described in section A above) , planned commercial and service industrial districts 4 .,PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1675 x businesses shall be entitled to a basic twenty (20) square feet of temporary informational window signage which may be placed on the inside of said windows without the prior approval of the city. C. Businesses falling under section "B" above, which have greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Businesses having greater than 150 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. D. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may double their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 600 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may triple their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. E . Notwithstanding the above sections A, B, C and D, in no event may temporary window signage exceed 40% of the window area of the business . 5 ,e MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 and construct, they should just be required to design at this point, but not construct. In the event if it became necessary because of a loss of temporary spaces, then they must construct within a 30 day period. Action: Moved by Commissioner Spiegel, seconded by, Commissioner Whitlock, by minute motion amending Planning Commission Resolution No. 1659 and eliminating the words "and construct" from Department of Community Development Special Condition No. 1 . Carried 4-0 . (Commissioner Fernandez arrived at this time. ) Case No . ZOA 94-3 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant Request for recommendation to city council approval of an amendment to the sign ordinance. Mr. Smith explained that the city council in September asked staff to reconvene the sign task force which was originally constituted in 1989 . They. got together 12 people from the business community and met initially November 7 . At that point in time, members of the task force outlined a series of changes, revisions and proposals they would like to accomplish that would be covered under the, city' s sign ordinance. Staff took that list of items and tried to pull it together. Some of the matters as outlined in the report were already permitted and they just needed to get together and do it; other matters did require amendment. to the ordinance. That information was brought back to the task force on November 30 . Staff presented the information in a better from at that point and with a few exceptions, the task force unanimously recommended the changes be processed through the city council and planning commission. He explained that commission' s recommendation would be forwarded to the city council . He said the following issues were discussed: 1) The El Paseo Business Association requested that they be permitted to install offsite signs directing people to El Paseo; that could be done without an amendment to the ordinance. They did need to have them designed and the proposed locations specified. 2) The matter of open signs specifically for businesses on E1 Paseo, although it would apply citywide. Several businesses had been putting open signs out within the setback area along El Paseo and the ordinance right now did not permit that type of sign. It was 6 MINUTES ` PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 the feeling of the task force that these types of signs could be acceptable if the design criteria was restrictive enough. In the draft resolution on page 3, section 1 paragraph B was that they would create a section permitting pedestal mounted open signs . A maximum height of 48 inches was stipulated, but staff felt that 54 inches would be acceptable. Staff proposed that the 48 inch height be changed to 54 inches . The signs would have a maximum face area of three square feet. In measuring some of the signs along E1 Paseo, he said they were in the range of 15" by 22" and one was 18" by 18" . The three square foot limit would allow the ones that were there, which were around 2 and 2 1/2 square feet, and three square feet would allow slightly larger open signs . Commissioner Spiegel asked if these could be in windows . Mr. Smith stated that these would be out in the setback area; most buildings along E1 Paseo were five feet back from the property line and then there was a ten foot sidewalk between the curb and the property line. The open sign would be placed within that five foot setback area; typically it was placed in the landscaped area right on the corner of the sidewalk. The signs could not impede pedestrian traffic flow and they were not to contain extraneous verbiage advertising the business, specials or sales events . The sign had to be removed when the business was not open. Even with that criteria the task force discussed extensively whether there should be color control and whether or not the business name and/or logo should be allowed. Some people wanted just the word "open" , others wanted the business name. Staff took the position that considering the size of the signs, they did not want to regulate color; if the business community wanted to regulate color, there was an organized business association on E1 Paseo that could through their bylaws procedure create a more restrictive standard if the membership wanted it. He did not feel the city should be enforcing the fact that someone put in blue on white instead of black on white copy. As well, they discussed whether logos should be permitted on the signs . Considering the size, he felt any logo would be very small and they should not control whether someone put a logo on an open sign. He said that commission would receive some discussion on these issues because staff invited the members of the task force to be present to address the commission. 3) The restaurant industry specifically sought permission to identify special events and promote them and it would be done on a group basis . When the task force met the second time it was decided that the chamber would coordinate this effort and that it would be a citywide effort where they would identify various special events that they wished and 7 i MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 would design a special type of welcoming banner. In the draft ordinance staff suggested that up to four special events could be identified each year and then the chamber would coordinate it--the banners would all be the same size, color and copy. Commissioner Spiegel asked what kinds of events this would cover; Mr. Smith stated that the Bob Hope Classic was mentioned and various golf and tennis matches . Commissioner Spiegel asked if there was a time limit; Mr. Smith said that staff was suggesting that the event signs could be up one week prior to the event, during the time of the event, and one week after the event . Commissioner Spiegel noted that if the event was three months, they could be up all year round. Mr. Smith said that he was not aware of any event that lasted that long. Mr. Smith stated that the Cook Street area businesses suggested a need for directory signs at street entrances from Cook Street, as well as directory signs in front of the multi-tenant buildings in the industrial park. Mr. Smith noted there was already a provision allowing for multi-tenant identification. The provision for directory signs at the street entrances could be accomplished similar to the model home tour sign program in that these would be located on the public rights-of-way, so they needed to get together to design a sign and then through an encroachment procedure and the architectural review commission they could accomplish this if that was what was wanted out there, but it would, have to be done on a group basis . No amendment to the ordinance would be necessary to accomplish that . Mr. Smith indicated that one of the major issues with the task force was available window signage. Currently there was a five square foot limit. That applied to a business with ten feet of frontage on El Paseo and also applied to Cal Spas; Cal Spas was located about 850 feet or more from the street and they had about 200 feet of window area, but they were still limited under the current ordinance to five square feet of temporary window signage. They were proposing a major change to that limit. Most of the people that requested the additional window signage were located in commercial centers where businesses were substantial distances from the street. He stated that they did propose to separate out E1 Paseo from other commercial areas . Their first thought was to leave the five square foot limit on El Paseo. They changed that position and were now suggesting a ten square foot limit for El Paseo. In the remainder of the 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 general commercial areas along Highway 111 specifically, they would increase the five square foot limit to a 20 square foot limit. That would apply to businesses with up to 50 feet of window exposure. With greater than 50 feet of linear window, they would get up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Greater than 100 feet of linear window exposure, other than on E1 Paseo, would be entitled up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. He noted that it sounded like a lot, but in the case of a 100 foot wide window area, typically they were eight feet high and 800 square feet of window glass, then they could have up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. He said that using Marshall ' s as an example on Town Center Way, they had weekly sales items that came in from corporate that they hoped to be able to advertise in the window. What they did now was hang the signs three feet in back of the glass, which was not deemed a sign under the ordinance. He said that put most of their advertising devices over the shopping carts, which was okay in the mornings, but later in the afternoon when most of the carts were out in the store or parking lot, there were people walking into signs in the store. He stated that they were looking at nine percent of the window area covered with signs . They called it temporary window signage, but in fact it could be fairly permanent. They also tried to take into consideration distance from the street. They created two sub-categories where if a business was greater than 250 feet from the street, then those businesses based on whatever window exposure they had, they could double their normal allotment--if they were otherwise entitled to 20 square feet of window signage which most of the smaller tenants would fall into that category, if the business was in a center like Marshall ' s or Mervyn' s, they would fall into the greater than 250 feet from a public street category and would be able to double their otherwise entitlement. He said there was a third category where if they were greater than 600 feet from a public street, which included the Desert Springs Marketplace center across from the Marriott, the Price Club/Home Base Center, and the Lucky' s center on Washington. They were suggesting that those business in those circumstances would be able to triple their basic allotment. Staff was comfortable with the above formula for temporary window signage. He said he looked at many businesses and even with the tripling of the basic entitlement staff didn't see any situation where 40% of the window area would be exceeded. However, staff was proposing that this whole amendment would have a sunset clause in it. It must be revisited within one year and if it is felt that it is too lenient and the city does not want to continue the program, 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 then it would close on its own unless specifically (through planning commission and council) extended within that one year. He said that would be in the amendment to the ordinance. It would just be the amendments that were being enacted and the key one was the window signage amendment. He also noted that he did an extensive city survey with two members of the council and this was their way of making sure that the changes weren't taken too far. Commissioner Spiegel clarified that they were looking at three things : the open signs, the restaurant owners special event signs, and the window signs . Mr. Smith concurred, but noted that the special event signs while originating from the restaurant community, would apply to everyone. Mr. Diaz noted that they would have to have city council affirmation, which would prevent someone from having a year long special event. Chairperson Jonathan opened the public testimony and asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal . MS . SONIA CAMPBELL, 73-910 E1 Paseo, stated that she was a store owner and president of the E1 Paseo Business Association. As far as the open signs were concerned, they were in favor of the 54 inch height and the three square foot signage, but they would like to have the name of the business on it also, or if the name was too large, just the word open. She said they would rather have that then any type of logo, or a coffee shop sign depicting a cup of coffee. They would also like to have a clean, uniform sign on the street and as far as she would be concerned, she would not have an open sign. As far as their legislation was concerned, they could not amend their bylaws; their bylaws for the association were to promote and advertise the street, not to go ahead and make any laws, so they depended upon the city and code enforcement to enforce the signage. Commissioner Spiegel asked if Ms . Campbell was suggesting that they don't have any controls that would supersede the city's . Ms . Campbell replied no, they depended upon code enforcement to be out on the street. Commissioner Spiegel said that whatever was passed for window signage would apply to El Paseo and they would have no way of establishing other ground rules for the businesses on El Paseo; Ms . Campbell concurred. Commissioner Spiegel said that if they were to t an open sign that didn't require a logo o for the rest of p g q 9 10 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 the city, then E1 Paseo could not require that for E1 Paseo; Ms . Campbell said they would like to have the open sign, just a clean open sign for El Paseo to have a uniform street, not for the whole city. Commissioner Spiegel asked Mr. Diaz if El Paseo could have a separate rule from the rest of the city. Mr. Diaz replied yes . Ms . Campbell said they would also prefer to have the open signs in a standard color, just black on white so that it would be a standard sign for everyone. Commissioner Spiegel asked if Ms . Campbell was speaking for the entire E1 Paseo Business Association, and not just herself; Ms . Campbell said she was speaking for the whole street. Chairperson Jonathan noted that as the resolution exhibit A was written, it did not refer to E1 Paseo; he asked if it was staff ' s intent to create open signs for anywhere in the city. Mr. Smith replied that they were looking for a citywide standard, considering the size at three square feet, so the maximum would be 21" by 21" . He did not see the need to create differing standards; the size was very restrictive on its own. Commissioner Spiegel noted that the E1 Paseo merchants were asking for a specific color and way of identifying the merchant. Mr. Smith stated that he heard otherwise at the task force meetings--there were people who wanted the choice of color and hoped to have the business name on the sign. He said that whatever way the commission wanted to go was fine with staff. Code would go out and enforce what the city enacted. MR. ROBERT J. LEO, Executive Director of the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce and a resident of Palm Desert, stated that the task force was a study in efficiency and effectiveness . Never had he served on a task force that only had two meetings, that brought such diverse people together who walked away shaking hands and agreeing with everyone at the end of the second meeting. He felt the ordinance with the sunset clause would give the business people the opportunity to test the amendments to see if they worked. Palm Desert was changing and when the ordinance was passed, there wasn't as much growth or development as right now. He felt that overall the three areas identified as the open signs, special events, . and window signage would give them the chance to see if this was the kind of signage that still maintains an aesthetic standard that they want to maintain in Palm Desert. 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 Commissioner Spiegel asked if Mr. Leo would have any objection to a specific time limit on special events, such as one week. Mr. Leo replied no, but he would not limit it to one week. He felt they were probably looking at a 30 day span. Commissioner Spiegel felt that if there was a special event, there should be a time limit on the event so that advertising was not up for long periods of time. Mr. Leo felt the suggestion was one week before, one week during, and one week after--24 to 30 days would work. He said they would like to have the signs down as quickly as possible also. Mr. Smith indicated that the section had a provision where the chamber would propose the special events to the city council , so if there was going to be a special event that would last longer, that was something the council would want to look at. Chairperson Jonathan said in the third category for the additional window signage, as he understood it, was for temporary signs and asked how "temporary" was being defined for this purpose. Mr. Smith replied on-going; the ordinance was not real specific. What code enforcement had been enforcing was that this was a sale sign or special sign for the window. Chairperson Jonathan asked Mr. Leo if the committee addressed the issue of what "temporary" meant for purposes of window signs. Mr. Leo replied no, not specifically. Mr. Diaz said that in other cities he had been with, they were by definition a sign painted on the window and thereby considered a temporary sign. There was no time limit placed on that sign and it did not require a permit. He felt otherwise they would be controlling it by size and reminded commission that there was the sunset clause. All the control there was size, 25% of the window in that case . Here there was a maximum of 40% when they were 600 feet away. In actuality everyone else was talking about 9% . Once they started defining signs on windows and putting time limits on them as window signs, then they would get into problems . Chairperson Jonathan said that he was not objecting to it, but as a point of clarification, when they said temporary, it was a different usage for that word. The sign that went on the window within the size limitation could be on year round. Mr. Diaz said that was correct and it might be able to last longer than the outside sign that was described as permanent, but by definition they said the sign inside the window was a temporary sign. Chairperson Jonathan closed the public testimony and asked for commission comments . 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1995 Commissioner Whitlock commended Mr. Smith and the task force for putting the proposal together so concisely. She felt the sunset clause was ideal and whomever deserved the credit for that she commended. Because of the sunset clause she would be prepared to make a motion for approval . Commissioner Spiegel agreed; he said that their objective was to make Palm Desert as successful as possible, not to hurt any of the merchants and with the sunset clause, if there was a lot of abuse to any of the amendments, it would become quite obvious within 12 months . The only thing he wanted to add was the 30 day limit on special events . He would not like to see them go on forever. With that addition he was in favor. Chairperson Jonathan added that he had some significant reservations about some of the sizes, particularly when they could be tripled, but the sunset provision was innovative and he seconded Commissioner Whitlock' s commendations and that was persuasive to him and he was willing to give it a one year try. He asked Commissioner Whitlock if she was willing to amend her recommendation to include the 30 day limit for special event signage. She replied yes . Action: Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Spiegel, approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0 . Moved by Commissioner Whitlock, seconded by Commissioner Spiegel, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1675, recommending to city council approval of ZOA 94-3, subject to the amendments . Carried 5-0 . VIII . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. IX. MISCELLANEOUS None. X. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE UPDATE None. 13 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: January 3, 1995 CASE NO: ZOA 94-3 REQUEST: Approval of amendments to the sign ordinance. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert I . BACKGROUND: September 22, 1994 city council in response to business community requests for adjustments to the sign ordinance directed staff to reconvene the sign task force which had been formed when the sign ordinance was last updated in 1989 . The sign task force is comprised of 12 persons representing various business interests, the architectural review commission and the chamber of commerce. The task force met November 7 , 1994 and outlined areas of concern and what they hoped could be achieved. Staff reviewed the requests and presented a report to the task force when it met November 30, 1994 . With a few exceptions, which will be delineated later, the task force unanimously recommended that the changes be processed through city council and planning commission. II . ANALYSIS: At the November 7, 1994 task force meeting the following issues were discussed: A. El Paseo Business Association requested that it be permitted to install off-site signs directing people to E1 Paseo. Response: This type of sign request can be accomplished without amendment to the ordinance. B. Several business owners on El Paseo requested that the ordinance be amended to permit neat, small exterior "open" signs . Response: While these signs have existed for several years, in fact the ordinance currently does not permit exterior located "open" signs . Section 1 of the draft resolution would allow STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 pedestal-mounted "open" signs with a maximum height of 48 inches and maximum face area of three square feet. These would be pedestrian sized signs and would only indicate that a business is "open" . No extraneous verbiage would be permitted (i .e. sales, 40% off, etc. ) . These signs could not be located in the public right-of-way. Signs could include business name and/or logo, but the primary purpose would be indicate that the particular business is "open" . These signs would be removed when the business is not open. The E1 Paseo business representatives, while they concurred that these signs should be permitted, were split on whether the signs should include the business name or logo. As well, they could not agree on whether the colors should be limited or should be left to the individual business . Staff is proposing that the city establish a provision which would allow the basic sign subject to height and size limits, and would leave any further restrictions (i .e. color and whether business names or logos could be included) up to the recognized El Paseo Business Association. The group could so amend it bylaws and then the members would adhere to the standards which they voted to accept. C. Representatives of the restaurant industry asked that the ordinance be amended to permit various business groups to band together to promote special events . Response: We proposed to amend the ordinance to allow various business interests to determine which special events they, as a group, would like to promote as special events . As an example, the restaurant industry group would meet and determine that they would like to promote three special events throughout the year which they would identify. They would design special banners for those events . The city would permit the banners to go up one week before the event, and require that they be taken down one week after the event concludes . These banners would meet certain criteria, i .e. all the same colors, all the same size, must be mounted on buildings and on private property. We don't want them tied between two palm trees . 2 i STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 Currently the grand opening banners are limited to 30 square feet in size. We would suggest that these special event banners be limited to 20 square feet--that would still allow 2 feet by 10 feet. A business would be allowed one special event banner per street frontage. So a corner business would be entitled to two. We would suggest that in order to maintain consistency of quality and color that the group would order the banners from the manufacturer rather than each individual member of the group going to his own supplier. In discussing this matter with the task force, it was decided to allow this type of special event promotion subject to it being coordinated through the chamber of commerce. It is expected that the chamber will identify various "special events" . It will design banners and make them available to businesses for a fee. The identified special events and the design of the banners is subject to affirmation by the city. In the draft ordinance staff suggests that up to four (4) special events could be identified per year. D. The representative for the Cook Street business area suggested a need for business directory signs at street entrances from Cook Street, as well as directory signs in front of multi-tenant buildings in the industrial park. Response: The directory signs in front of individual multi-tenant industrial buildings are permitted under the ordinance section 25 . 68 . 335 . The business directory sign at the street entrance points from Cook Street could be done as the model home tour program signs . The businesses in that area should agree upon a design for the directory sign, present it to the city and when approved, have it/them installed. These signs will be located on part of the public right-of-way and as such, following approval by architectural review commission, will require an encroachment permit from public works department. No amendment to the ordinance is required. E. Several members of the task force indicated that additional window signage was needed to promote sales beyond the five (5) square feet permitted in section 25 . 68 . 340 . 3 I STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 Response: Most of the people requesting additional window signage were located in commercial centers where businesses are a substantial distance back from public streets . It was staff ' s proposal to retain the existing five square foot limit for El Paseo between Portola and Highway 74 . Other general commercial, planned commercial and service industrial zoned areas would get a basic 20 square feet of window signage. Businesses with greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure, other than on El Paseo, would be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Greater than 100 feet of linear window exposure, other than on E1 Paseo, would be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. Most business windows are 8 feet high or greater. Therefore, a 100 foot wide window would have an area of at least 800 square feet ( 100 ' x 8 ' ) . The window sign(s) then would amount to 9 . 3% ( i .e. 75 square feet of sign in an 800 square foot window area) . In a 60 foot wide window the percentage covered by sign(s) would be 10 .4% (i .e. 50 square foot sign in a 480 square foot window) . In a 16 foot wide window store front on Highway 111, the 20 square feet of window sign(s) would amount to 13 .9% (i .e. 20 square foot sign(s) in 144 square feet of window) . Now we also recognize that in certain centers ( i .e. Price Club Center, Ralphs at Country Club and Cook, Luckys on Washington Street, Desert Crossing, Palms to Pines and Waring Plaza) businesses are located a substantial distance back from the public streets . In these instances, we propose to expand upon the basic entitlement established above. If a business is located more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way, its basic entitlement would be doubled. A 60 foot wide window more than 250 feet from a public right-of- way could then have up to 100 square feet of signage, but this would still only amount to about 21% of the window area. A 200 foot wide window 250 feet back from a public right-of- way could have up to 150 square feet of signage (75 square 4 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 feet by 2) . This would amount to 9 . 4% of the window covered by sign(s) . In the case of businesses with extreme setbacks (i .e. Home Base area, the Ralphs center at Country Club and Cook, both over 600 feet from a public street) we propose to allow these businesses to triple their basic entitlement. Cal Spas, located between Price Club and Home Base, is located more than 600 feet from Dinah Shore Drive and has 52 feet of frontage. Under this proposal it would be entitled to 150 feet of window signage (i .e. 50 square feet by 3) . This would amount to 36% of the window area. The Bazaar, located next to Cal Spas, has 137 feet of linear window exposure. It would be entitled to 225 square feet of window signage which would amount to 20.5% of its window area ( i .e . 225 : 1096 = 20 .5%) . The task force for the most part endorsed this proposal . The El Paseo representatives differed with some people urging an increase in the basic entitlement while others wished to retain the existing five square foot maximum. Considering that we are proposing to increase the basic entitlement in most business areas from five (5) square feet to twenty (20) square feet, then staff feels that an increase for El Paseo businesses from 5 to 10 square feet for temporary window signs is reasonable. Of course, if the El Paseo Business Association wishes it could amend its bylaws to require a more restrictive standard (i .e. 5 square feet) . While staff is comfortable with the above formula for temporary window signage, we feel that a certain maximum percentage of the window area which may be used for temporary window signage should be prescribed. We are suggesting that in no event may temporary window signage exceed 40% of the window area of the business . III . SUNSET CLAUSE: Many in the community consider amendments to be major changes in city policy (i .e. open signs, special event banners and increased size of window signs) . As a safety net we propose to include a sunset clause in this ordinance . The ordinance will automatically expire one ( 1) year after its approval by city council unless it is extended by the city council . Assuming the ordinance is 5 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 approved by February or March 1995, then it would be staff ' s intention to revisit the issue in November or December 1995 to consider the pros and. cons of these changes . IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the planning commission recommend to city council approval of an amendment to the sign ordinance. V. ATTACHMENTS : A. Draft resolution B. Exhibits distributed to task force C. Update report to city council Prepared by I", Reviewed and Approved by SRS/tm 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO SIGNS. CASE NO. ZOA 94-3 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 3rd day of January, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the amendment of the zoning ordinance section 25 . 68 relating to signs; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89 , " in that the director of community development has determined the amendment to be a class 5 categorical exemption; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of the zoning ordinance text amendment: 1 . The proposed amendment relating to signs are consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance and protect the community health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows : 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2 . That it does hereby recommend approval to the city council of ZOA 94-3 as provided in the attached exhibit labeled Exhibit "A" 3. That the planning commission recommends to city council that the ordinance which implements this resolution should contain a provision that the amendments contained therein shall be rescinded automatically and have no effect whatsoever one year after the effective date of the city council approval ( i .e. 30 days after second reading) unless the city council acts to extend the ordinance. i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of December, 1994 , by the following vote, to wit: AYES : NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SABBY JONATHAN, Chairperson ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ , Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Signs for pedestrian traffic be and the same is hereby amended as follows : . 25 . 68 . 330 Sign for pedestrian traffic. A. Where the principal sign for a business is located so that it cannot be seen by pedestrian traffic, an identification sign, in addition to that otherwise allowed in this chapter, shall be permitted. Such a sign shall be no larger than three square feet (three feet on each side) and it shall be designed and located so as to not distract from the appearance of the building or violate the intent of this chapter. (Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A ss 25 . 38-12 . 05) B. Businesses in the commercial and industrial districts may place a pedestal mounted "open" sign with a maximum height . of 48 inches and maximum face area of 3 square feet in front of their place of business . Said sign must be placed on private property in a location which does not impede pedestrian traffic flow. Said signs shall not include extraneous verbiage advertising the business, specials or sales events . Said signs must be removed when the business is not open for business . Section 2 That section 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs . A. With the approval of the director of community development, a business may erect one temporary sign, mounted on a wall facia or freestanding, advertising special events, promotions or sales . The director may approve up to thirty square feet of sign area depending upon the type of event, building design and right-of- way frontage for a period not to exceed thirty days per year. 3 I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Signs approved under this section shall be compatible and harmonious with the color of the building and adjacent buildings . When improperly used, special event signs constitute a public nuisance and may be abated. Special event signs for periods in excess of thirty days may only be permitted pursuant to a resolution of the city council granting such approval which shall specify the period during which the sign may be displayed. (Ord. 587 ss 2 (Exhibit A ss 13) , 1989; Ord. 422 Exhibit A ss 7, 1985 : Ord. 272 (part) , 1981; Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975: Exhibit A ss 25 . 28-12 . 08) B. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce may designate, subject to city council affirmation, up to four ( 4) special events per year which its membership wishes to promote through the use of special event banners . Said chamber of commerce to design and make available to businesses in the city for a fee a special event banner which may be installed up to seven (7) days prior to the designated event, during the designated special event and for up to seven ( 7) days after the conclusion of the designated special event. Said special event banners shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. Design of said special event banners shall be reviewed and approved by the city prior to distribution by the chamber. Once the design has been approved by the city, said special event banners may be installed on private property without further approval or permit from the city. Section 3 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Temporary signs within window areas be and the same is hereby amended as follows : A. On E1 Paseo between Portola Avenue and Highway 74 temporary informational signs not to exceed ten ( 10) square feet of the window area may be placed on the inside of said window and shall not require prior approval of the city. B. In the general commercial (other than the area described in section A above) , planned commercial and service industrial districts businesses shall be entitled to a basic twenty 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. (20) square feet of temporary informational window signage which may be placed on the inside of said windows without the prior approval of the city. C. Businesses falling under section "B" above, which have greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Businesses having greater than 150 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. D. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may double their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 600 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may triple their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. E. Notwithstanding the above sections A, B, C and D, in no event may temporary window signage exceed 40% of the window area of the business . 5 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Crites and City Council FROM: Ramon A. Diaz, Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Development and Planning DATE: December 8, 1994 SUBJECT: Sign Task Force Report Please be advised that the sign task force was convened pursuant to the direction of the city council at its September 22, 1994 meeting. The task force met on November 7, 1994 with 12 representatives of various businesses representing a broad geographic area of the city. Issues brought up at the November 7, 1994 meeting included: 1) Open signs 2 ) The need for additional window signs 3) Directional signs for the industrial area 4 ) Directory signs for the industrial area 5) Restaurant owners wished the ability to promote certain special events through use of banners November 14, 1994 Mayor Crites, Councilmember Benson, Jim Engle Jr. of Imperial Sign Company and Steve Smith of the planning staff conducted an extensive tour of the city reviewing signs and other issues . Following the November 14 , 1994 tour, and based on comments received from the task force members, staff prepared proposed amendments which were then presented to the sign task force on November 30, 1994 . Due to the required lead time to have this appear on your agenda, this report was prepared prior to November 30, 1994 meeting. We will report on the outcome of the task force meeting orally at the December 8, 1994 meeting. It is our intention, if the proposed amendments are deemed satisfactory to the task force, to set the matter for hearing by planning commission early in January 1995 . When the planning commission is satisfied, it will recommend the amendments to the city council which should be set for hearing in February or March 1995 . RAMON A. DIAZ ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS FROM: STEVE SMITH, ASSOCIATE PLANNER DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 1994 SUBJECT: SUGGESTED CODE CHANGES FROM FIRST TASK FORCE MEETING OF/ NOVEMBER 7 , 1994 Date of Next Meeting: Wednesday, November 30, 1994 8 : 30 a.m. - Community Services Conference Room The following items were discussed at the meeting and our responses follow: i) Sonya Campbell indicated that E1 Paseo needed off-site sign(s) . directing people to E1 Paseo. Response: El Paseo Business Improvement District should have sign(s) designed and select desired locations for installation. Plans would then go to Architectural Review Commission for review, public works department for encroachment permit (assuming it is to be located on public property) and finally to city council. An amendment to the ordinance is not required to accomplish this request. ii) Several business owners on El Paseo requested that the ordinance be amended to permit neat, small exterior "open" signs . Response: Mr. Diaz indicated that he would work on this matter immediately to permit these signs ahead of the actual code amendment. He will report on same at the next meeting. As well, we will include an amendment to actually permit "open" signs . The criteria we would request would be to allow pedestal mounted "open" signs with a maximum height of 42 inches and maximum area of 3 square feet. SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 These would be pedestrian sized signs and would only indicate that a business is "open" . No extraneous verbiage would be permitted (i .e. Sales, 40% Off, Etc. ) . These signs could not be located in the public right of way. Signs could include business name and/or logo, but the primary purpose would be to indicate that the particular business is "open" . These signs would be removed when the business is not open. iii) Linda Kirkendale requested that the restaurant industry be permitted to decide as a group to promote certain special events through the use of banners . Response: We propose to amend the ordinance to allow various business interests to determine which special events they, as a group, would like to promote as special events . As an example, the restaurant industry group would meet and determine that they would like to promote 3 special events throughout the year which they would identify. They would design special banners for those events . The city would permit the banners to go up one week before the event, and require that they be taken down one week after the event concludes . These banners would meet certain criteria, i.e. all the same colors, all the same size, must be mounted on buildings and on private property. We don't want them tied between two palm trees . CutrentlY g opening the rand o enin banners are limited to 30 square feet in size. We would suggest the these special event banners be limited to 20 square feet - that would still allow 2 feet by 10 feet. A business would be allowed one special event banner per street frontage. So a corner business would be entitled to two. We would suggest that in order to maintain consistency of quality and color that the group would order the banners from the manufacturer rather than each individual member of the group going to his own supplier. iv) Buff Benson representing the Cook Street business area suggested a need for business directory signs at street entrances from Cook Street as well as directory signs in front of multi-tenant buildings in the industrial park. 2 SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 Response: The directory signs in front of individual multi- tenant industrial buildings is permitted under the ordinance. The business directory sign at the street entrance points from Cook Street could be done as the model home tour program signs . The businesses in that area should agree upon a design for the directory sign, present it to the city and when approved have it/them installed. V) Several members of the group indicated that additional window signage was needed to promote sales . Remise: Most of the people requesting additional window signage were located in commercial centers where businesses are a substantial distance back from public streets . It is our proposal to retain the existing 5 square foot limit for El Paseo between Portola and Highway 74 . 6Qr�,,, crsr� 9 L other general commercial and planned commercial oned areas would get a basic 20 square feet of window signage. Businesses with greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure, other than on El Paseo, would be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Greater than 100 feet of linear window exposure, other than on E1 Paseo, would be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. Most business windows are 8 feet high or greater. Therefore a 100 foot wide window would have an area of at least 800 square feet ( 100 ' x 8 ' ) . The window sign(s) then would amount to 9 . 3% (i .e. 75 square feet of sign in an B00 square foot window area. In a 60 foot wide window the percentage covered by signs(s) would be 10 .4% ( i.e. 50 square foot sign in ,480 square foot window) . In a 16 ' wide window store front on Highway 111, the 20 square feet of window signs(s) would amount to 13 . 9% (i .e. 20 square foot sign(s) in 144 square feet of window) . Now, we also recognize that in certain centers (i.e. Price Club Center, Ralphs at country Club and Cook, Luckys on Washington Street, Desert Crossing, Palms to Pines and Waring Plaza businesses are located a substantial distance back from 3 SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 the public streets . In these instances, we propose to expand upon the basic entitlement established above. If a business is located more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way its basic entitlement would be doubled. A 60 ' wide window more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way could then have up to 100 square feet of signage, but this would still only amount to about 21% of the window area. A 200 ' wide window 250 feet back from a public right-of-way could have up to 150 square feet of signage (75 square feet X 2) . This would amount to 9 .4% of the window covered by sign(s) . In the case of businesses with extreme setbacks (i .e. Home Base area, the Ralphs center at Country Club and Cook, both over 600 feet from a public street, we propose to allow these businesses to triple their basic entitlement. Cal Spas, located between Price Club and Home Base, is located more than 600 feet from Dinah Shore Drive and has 52 feet of proposal frontage. Under ro this osal it would be entitled to 150 feet of window signage ( i .e. 50 square feet X 3) . This would amount to 36% of the window area. The Bazarre, located next to Cal Spas, has 137 feet of linear window exposure. It would be entitled to 225 square feet of window signage which would amount to 20 .5% of its window area ( i .e. 225 : 1096 = 20 . 5%) . While we feel comfortable with the formula outlined above, it may be that in order to assure that some unexpected situation doesn' t pop up that we want to establish a maximum percentage of the window area that can be covered with temporary window signs . The Task Force can discuss this issue and see if it wishes to establish such a maximum, and if so, what the limit should be. STEVE SMITH ASSOCIATE PLANNER SS/db 4 7 73- 119S �j0:E10 fo 5=� T�nesc�ay� CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: January 3, 1995 CASE NO: ZOA 94-3 REQUEST: Approval of amendments to the sign ordinance. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert I . BACKGROUND: September 22, 1994 city council in response to business community requests for adjustments to the sign ordinance directed staff to reconvene the sign task force which had been formed when the sign ordinance was last updated in 1989 . The sign task force is comprised of 12 persons representing various business interests, the architectural review commission and the chamber of commerce. The task force met November 7 , 1994 and outlined areas of concern and what they hoped could be achieved. Staff reviewed the requests and presented a report to the task force when it met November 30, 1994 . With a few exceptions, which will be delineated later, the task force unanimously recommended that the changes be processed through city council and planning commission. II . ANALYSIS : At the November 7, 1994 task force meeting the following issues were discussed: A. El Paseo Business Association requested that it be permitted to install off-site signs directing people to E1 Paseo. Response: This type of sign request can be accomplished without amendment to the ordinance. B. Several business owners on E1 Paseo requested that the ordinance be amended to permit neat, smal'1 exterior "open" signs . Response: While these signs have existed for several years, in fact the ordinance currently does not permit exterior located "open" signs . Section 1. of the draft resolution would allow STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 pedestal-mounted "open" signs with a maximum height of 48 inches and maximum face area of three. square feet. These would be pedestrian sized signs and would only indicate that a business is "open" . No extraneous verbiage would be permitted ( i .e. sales, 40% off, etc. ) . These signs could not be located in the public right-of-way. Signs could include business name and/or logo, but the primary purpose would be indicate that the particular business is "open" . These signs would be removed when the business is not open. The E1 Paseo business representatives, while they concurred that these signs should be permitted, were split on whether the signs should include the business name or logo. As well, they could not agree on whether the colors should be limited or should be left to the individual business. Staff is proposing that the city establish a provision which would allow the basic sign subject to height and size limits, and would leave any further restrictions ( i.e. color and whether business names or logos could be included) up to the recognized E1 Paseo Business Association. The group could so amend it bylaws and then the members would adhere to the standards which they voted to accept. C. Representatives of the restaurant industry asked that the ordinance be amended to permit various business groups to band together to promote special events . Response: We proposed to amend the ordinance to allow various business interests to determine which special events they, as a group, would like to promote as special events . As an example, the restaurant industry group would meet and determine that they would like to promote three special events throughout the year which they would identify. They would design special banners for those events . The city would permit the banners to go up one week before the event, and require that they be taken down one week after the event concludes . These banners would meet certain criteria, i .e. all the same colors, all the same size, must be mounted on buildings and on private property. We don' t want them tied between two palm trees . 2 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 Currently the grand opening banners are limited to 30 square feet in size. We would suggest that these special event banners be limited to 20 square feet--that would still allow 2 feet by 10 feet. A business would be allowed one special event banner per street frontage. So a corner business would be entitled to two. We would suggest that in order to maintain consistency of quality and color that the group would order the banners from the manufacturer rather than each individual member of the group going to his own supplier. In discussing this matter with the task force, it was decided to allow this type of special event promotion subject to it being coordinated through the chamber of commerce. It is expected that the chamber will identify various "special events" . It will design banners and make them available to businesses for a fee. The identified special events and the design of the banners is subject to affirmation by the city. In the draft ordinance staff suggests that up to four (4) special events could be identified per year. D. The representative for the Cook Street business area suggested a need for business directory signs at street entrances from Cook Street, as well as directory signs in front of multi-tenant buildings in the industrial park. Response: The directory signs in front of individual multi-tenant industrial buildings are permitted under the ordinance section 25 . 68 .335 . The business directory sign at the street entrance points from Cook Street could be done as the model home tour program signs . The businesses in that area should agree upon a design for the directory sign, present it to the city and when approved, have it/them installed. These signs will be located on part of the public right-of-way and as such, following approval by architectural review commission, will require an encroachment permit from public works department. No amendment to the ordinance is required. E . Several members of the task force indicated that additional window signage was needed to promote sales beyond the five (5) square feet permitted in section 25 . 68 . 340 . 3 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 Response: Most of the people requesting additional window signage were located in commercial centers where businesses are a substantial distance back from public streets . It was staff ' s proposal to retain the existing five square foot limit for E1 Paseo between Portola and Highway 74 . Other general commercial, planned commercial and service industrial zoned areas would get a basic 20 square feet of window signage. ' Businesses with greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure, other than on E1 Paseo, would be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Greater than 100 feet of linear window exposure, other than on E1 Paseo, would be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. Most business windows are 8 feet high or greater. Therefore, a 100 foot wide window would have an area of at least 800 square feet ( 100 ' x 8 ' ) . The window sign(s) then would amount to 9 . 3% ( i .e. 75 square feet of sign in an 800 square foot window area) . In a 60 foot wide window the percentage covered by sign(s) would be 10 . 4% (i .e. 50 square foot sign in a 480 square foot window) . In a 16 foot wide window store front on Highway 111, the 20 square feet of window sign(s) would amount to 13 . 9% ( i .e. 20 square foot sign(s) in 144 square feet of window) . Now we also recognize that in certain centers ( i .e. Price Club Center, Ralphs at Country Club and Cook, Luckys on Washington Street, Desert Crossing, Palms to Pines and Waring Plaza) businesses are located a substantial distance back from the public streets . In these instances , we propose to expand upon the basic entitlement established above. If a business is located more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way, its basic entitlement would be doubled. A 60 foot wide window more than 250 feet from a public right-of- way could then have up to 100 square feet of signage, but this would still only amount to about 21% of the window area: A 200 foot wide window 250 feet back from a public right-of- way could have up to 150 square feet of signage ( 75 square 4 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 feet by 2 ) . This would amount to 9 .4% of the window covered by sign(s) . In the case of businesses with extreme setbacks ( i .e. Home Base area, the Ralphs center at Country .Club and Cook, both over 600 feet from a public street) we propose to allow these businesses to triple their basic entitlement. Cal Spas, located between Price Club and Home Base, is located more than 600 feet from Dinah Shore Drive and has 52 feet of . frontage. Under this proposal it would be entitled to 150 feet of window signage ( i.e. 50 square feet by 3) . This would amount to 36% of the window area. The Bazaar, located next to Cal Spas, has 137 feet of linear window exposure. It would be entitled to 225 square feet of window signage which would amount to 20.5% of its window area (i.e. 225 : 1096 = 20 .5%) . The task force for the most part endorsed this proposal . The El Paseo representatives differed with some people urging an increase in the basic entitlement while others wished to retain the existing five square foot maximum. Considering that we are proposing to increase the basic entitlement in most business areas from five (5) square feet to twenty (20) square feet, then staff feels that an increase for El Paseo businesses from 5 to 10 square feet for temporary window signs is reasonable. Of course, if the El Paseo Business Association wishes it could amend its bylaws to require a more restrictive standard (i .e. 5 square feet) . While staff is comfortable with the above formula for temporary window signage, we feel that a certain maximum percentage of the window area which may be used for temporary window signage should be prescribed. We are suggesting that in no event may temporary window signage exceed 40% of the window area of the business . III . SUNSET CLAUSE: Many in the community consider amendments to be major changes in city policy ( i .e. open signs , special event banners and increased size of window signs) . As a safety net we propose to include a sunset clause in this ordinance. The .ordinance will automatically expire one ( 1) year after its approval by city council unless it is extended by the city council. Assuming the ordinance is 5 STAFF REPORT ZOA 94-3 JANUARY 3, 1995 approved by February or March 1995, then it would be staff ' s intention to revisit the issue in November or December 1995 to consider the pros and cons of these changes . IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the planning commission recommend to city council approval of an amendment to the sign ordinance. V. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution S. Exhibits distributed to task force C. Update report to city council Prepared by Reviewed and Approved by SRS/tm 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO SIGNS. CASE NO. ZOA 94-3 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 3rd day of January, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the amendment of the zoning ordinance section 25 . 68 relating to signs; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 80-89 , " in that the director of community development has determined the amendment to be a class 5 categorical exemption; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments , if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said planning commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval of the zoning ordinance text amendment: 1 . The proposed amendment relating to signs are consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance and protect the community health, safety and general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2 . That it does hereby recommend approval to the city council of ZOA 94-3 as provided in the attached exhibit labeled Exhibit "A.. 3 . That the planning commission recommends to city council that the ordinance which implements this resolution should contain a provision that the amendments contained therein shall be rescinded automatically and have no effect whatsoever one year after the effective date of the city council approval ( i .e. 30 days after second reading) unless the city council acts to extend the ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of December, 1994 , by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES : ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SABBY JONATHAN, Chairperson ATTEST: RAMON A. DIAZ , Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT "A" Section 1 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Signs for pedestrian traffic be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68 . 330 Sign for pedestrian traffic. A. Where the principal sign for a business is located so that it cannot be seen by pedestrian traffic, an identification sign, in addition to that otherwise allowed in this chapter, shall be permitted. Such a sign shall be no larger than three square feet (three feet on each side) and it shall be designed and located so as to not distract from the appearance of the building or violate the intent of this chapter. (Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975 : Exhibit A ss 25 . 38-12 . 05) B. Businesses in the commercial and industrial . districts may place a pedestal mounted "open" sign with a maximum height of 48 inches and maximum face area of 3 square feet in front of their place of business . Said sign must be placed on private property in a location which does not impede pedestrian traffic flow. Said signs shall not include extraneous verbiage advertising the business, specials or sales events . Said signs must be removed when the business is not open for business . Section 2 That section 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs be and the same is hereby amended as follows : 25 . 68 . 350 Special event signs . A. With the approval of the director of community development, a business may erect one temporary sign, mounted on a wall. facia or freestanding, advertising special events, promotions or sales . The director may approve up to thirty square feet of sign area depending upon the type of event, building design and right-of- way frontage for a period not to exceed thirty days per year. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Signs approved under this section shall be compatible and harmonious with the color of the building and adjacent buildings . When improperly used, special event signs constitute a public nuisance and may be abated. Special event signs for periods in excess of thirty days may only be permitted pursuant to a resolution of, the city council granting such approval which shall specify the period during which the sign may be displayed. (Ord. 587 ss 2 (Exhibit A ss 13) , 1989; Ord. 422 Exhibit A ss 7 , 1985 : Ord. 272 (part) , 1981; Ord. 129 ss 4 (part) , 1977 : Ord. 98 ss 1 (part) , 1975: Exhibit A ss 25 .28-12 .08) B. The Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce may designate, subject to city council affirmation, up to four (4) special events per year which its membership wishes to promote through the use of special event banners. Said chamber of commerce to design and make available to businesses in the city for a fee a special event banner which may be installed up to seven (7) days prior to the designated event, during the designated special event and for up to seven ( 7) days after the conclusion of the designated special event. Said special event banners shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. Design of said special event banners shall be reviewed and approved by the city prior to distribution by the chamber. Once the design has been approved by the city, said special event banners may be installed on private property without further approval or permit from the city. Section 3 That section 25 . 68 . 340 Temporary signs within window areas be and the same is hereby amended as follows : A. On El Paseo between Portola Avenue and Highway 74 temporary informational signs not to exceed ten ( 10) square feet of the window area may be placed on the inside of said window and shall not require prior approval of the city. B. In the general commercial (other than the area described in section A above) , planned commercial and service industrial ' districts businesses shall be entitled to a basic twenty 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ( 20) square feet of temporary informational window signage which may be placed on the inside of said windows without the prior approval of the city. C. Businesses falling under section "B" above, which have greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Businesses having greater than 150 feet of linear window exposure shall be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. D. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may double their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. Businesses falling under section "B" and "C" above which are set back more than 600 feet from a public right-of-way (street) may triple their otherwise entitled temporary window signage. E. Notwithstanding the above sections A, B, C and D, in no ,event may temporary window signage exceed 40% of the window area of the business . 5 CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Crites and City Council FROM: Ramon A. Diaz, Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Development and Planning DATE: December 8, 1994 SUBJECT: Sign Task Force Report Please be advised that the sign task force was convened pursuant to the direction of the city council at its September 22, 1994 . meeting. The task force met on November 7 , 1994 with 12 representatives of various businesses representing a broad geographic area of the city. Issues brought up at the November 7, 1994 meeting included: 1) Open signs 2 ) The need for additional window signs 3) Directional signs for the industrial area 4) Directory signs for the industrial area 5 ) Restaurant owners wished the ability to promote certain special events through use of banners November 14 , 1994 Mayor Crites, Councilmember Benson, Jim Engle Jr. of Imperial Sign Company and Steve Smith of the planning staff conducted an extensive tour of the city reviewing signs and other issues . Following the November 14, 1994 tour, and based on comments received from the task force members, staff prepared proposed amendments which were then presented to the sign task force on November 30, 1994 . Due to the required lead time to have this appear on your agenda, this report was prepared prior to November 30, 1994 meeting. We will report on the outcome of the task force meeting orally at the December 8, 1994 meeting. It is our intention, if the proposed amendments are deemed satisfactory to the task force, to set the matter for hearing by planning commission early in January 1995 . When the planning commission is satisfied, it will recommend the amendments to the city council which should be set for hearing in February or March 1995 . RAMON A. DIAZ ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS FROM: STEVE SMITH, ASSOCIATE PLANNER DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 1994 SUBJECT: SUGGESTED CODE CHANGES FROM FIRST TASK FORCE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 7, 1994 Date of Next Meeting: Wednesday, November 30, 1994 8 : 30 a.m. - Community Services Conference Room The following items were discussed at the meeting and our responses follow: i) Sonya Campbell indicated that E1 Paseo needed off-site sign(s) directing people to E1 Paseo. Response: E1 Paseo Business Improvement District should have sign(s) designed and select desired locations for installation. Plans would then go to Architectural Review commission for review, public works department for encroachment permit (assuming it is to be located on public property) and finally to city council . An amendment to the ordinance is not required to accomplish this request. ii) Several business owners on E1 Paseo requested that the ordinance be amended to permit neat, small exterior "open" signs . Response: Mr. Diaz indicated that he would work on this matter immediately to permit these signs ahead of the actual code amendment. He will report on same at the next meeting. As well, we will include an amendment to actually permit "open" signs . The criteria we would request would be to allow pedestal mounted "open" signs with a maximum height of 42 inches and maximum area of 3 square feet. SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 These would be pedestrian sized signs and would only indicate that a business is "open" . No extraneous verbiage would be permitted (i .e. Sales, 40% Off, Etc. ) . These signs could not be located in the public right of way. Signs could include business name and/or logo, but the primary purpose would be to indicate that the particular business is "open" . These signs would be .removed when the business is not open. iii) Linda Kirkendale requested that the restaurant industry be permitted to decide as a group to promote certain special events through the use of banners . Response: We propose to amend the ordinance to allow various business interests to determine which special events they, as a group, would like to promote as special events. As an example, the restaurant industry group would meet and determine that they would like to promote 3 special events throughout the year which they would identify. They would design special banners for those events . The city would permit the banners to go up one week before the event, and require that they be taken down one week after the event concludes . These banners would meet certain criteria, i.e. all the same colors, all the same size, must be mounted on buildings and on private property. We don't want them tied between two palm trees. Currently the grand opening banners are limited to 30 square feet in size. We would suggest the these special event banners be limited to 20 square feet - that would still allow 2 feet by 10 feet. A business would be *allowed one special event banner per street frontage. So a corner business would be entitled to two. We would suggest that in order to maintain consistency of quality and color that the group would order the banners from the manufacturer rather than each individual member of the group going to his own supplier. iv) Buff Benson representing the Cook Street business area suggested a need for business directory signs at street entrances from Cook Street as well as directory signs in front of multi-tenant buildings in the industrial park. 2 SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 Response: The directory signs in front of individual multi- tenant industrial buildings is permitted under the ordinance. The business directory sign at the street entrance points from Cook Street could be done as the model home tour program signs . The businesses in that area should agree upon a design for the directory sign, present it to the city and when approved have it/them installed. v) Several members of the group indicated that additional window signage was needed to promote sales . Response: Most of the people requesting additional window signage were .located in commercial centers where businesses are a substantial distance back from public streets. It is our proposal to retain the existing 5 square foot limit for El Paseo between Portola and Highway 74 . Other general commercial and planned commercial `toned areas would get a basic 20 square feet of window signage. Businesses with greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure, other than on El Paseo, would be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Greater than 100 feet of linear window exposure, other than on El Paseo, would be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. Most business windows are 8 feet high or greater. Therefore a 100 foot wide window would have an area of at least 800 square feet ( 100 ' x 8 ' ) . The window sign(s) then would amount to 9 . 3% ( i .e. 75 square feet of sign in an 800 square foot window area. In a 60 foot wide window the percentage covered by signs (s) would be 10 . 4% (i.e. 50 square foot sign in .480 square foot window) . In a 16 ' wide window store front an Highway 111, the 20 square feet of window signs(s) would amount to 13 .9.E (i .e. 20 square foot sign(s) in 144 square feet of window) . Now, we also recognize that in certain centers (i .e. Price Club Center, Ralphs at Country Club and Cook, Luckys on Washington Street, Desert Crossing, Palms to Pines and Waring Plaza businesses are located a substantial distance back from 3 11 SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 the public streets . In these instances, we propose to expand upon the basic entitlement established above. If a business is located more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way its basic entitlement would be doubled. A 60 ' wide window more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way could then have up to 100 square feet of signage, but this would still only amount to about 21% of the window area. A 200 ' wide window 250 feet back from a public right-of-way could have up to 150 square feet of signage (75 square feet X 2) . This would amount to 9 .4% of the window covered by sign(s) . In the case of businesses witli extreme setbacks ( i .e. Home Base area, the Ralphs center at Country Club and Cook, both over 600 feet from a public street, we propose to allow these businesses to triple their basic entitlement. Cal Spas, located between Price Club and Home Base, is located more than 600 feet from Dinah Shore Drive and has 52 feet of frontage. Under this proposal it would be entitled to 150 feet of window signage (i.e. 50 square feet X 3) . This would amount to 36% of the window area. The Bazarre, located next to Cal Spas, has 137 feet of linear window exposure. It would be entitled to 225 square feet of window signage which would amount to 20 .5% of its window area ( i .e. 225 : 1096 = 20.5%) . While we feel comfortable with the formula outlined above, it may be that in order to assure that some unexpected situation doesn't pop up that we want to establish a maximum percentage of the window area that can be . covered with temporary window signs . The Task Force can discuss this issue and see if it wishes to establish such a maximum, and if so, what the limit should be. Elm STEVE SMITH -- ' ASSOCIATE PLANNER SS/db 4 73.510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. ZOA 94-3 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider amendments to the sign ordinance, Section 25 . 68 of the municipal code. Post-it'Fax Note 7671 Date/ pages 02 To From Co./Dept �•f- Co. Phone# Phone#3 Fax# .,- 7 s zn�_o Fax# { 's* SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, January 3, 1995, at 7 : 00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and/or negative declaration is available for review in the department of community development/ planning at the above address between the hours of 8 : 00 a.m. and 5 : 00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Post RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary December 21, 1994 Palm Desert Planning Commission ITY OF PALM DESERT UUUNCIL AGENDA REQUEST MEETING OF December 8 1994 Consent Calendar Item Public Hearing Item I . TO BE CONSIDERED AS : Regular Item X Continued Business 2 REQUEST :date on Sian(Agenda task force meeti Wording)3 , FINANCIALS (Complete If Necessary) (c) o Current Budget?---- (b) Amount Requested Apprvd : (d) Appropriation? Finance Director 4, SUBMITTED BY : APPROVAL : City Manager pepXrtment Head 6/ 13/88 w___ CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Crites and City Council FROM: Ramon A. Diaz, Assistant City Manager/Director of Community Development and Planning J DATE: December 8, 1994 SUBJECT: Sign Task Force Report Please be advised that the sign task force was convened pursuant to the direction of the city council at its September 22, 1994 meeting. The task force met on November 7, 1994 with 12 representatives of various businesses representing a broad geographic area of the city. Issues brought up at the November 7 , 1994 meeting included: 1) Open signs 2) The need for additional window signs 3) Directional signs for the industrial area 4 ) Directory signs for the industrial area November 14 , 1994 Mayor Crites , Councilmember Benson, Jim Engle Jr. of Imperial Sign Company and Steve Smith of the planning staff conducted an extensive tour of the city reviewing signs and other issues . Following the November 14, 1994 tour, and based on comments received from the task force members, staff prepared proposed amendments which were then presented to the sign task force on November 30, 1994 . Due to the required lead time to have this appear on your agenda, this report was prepared prior to November 30, 1994 meeting. We will report on the outcome of the task force meeting orally at the December 8, 1994 meeting. It is our intention, if the proposed amendments are deemed satisfactory to the task force, to set the matter for hearing by planning commission early in January 1995 . When the planning commission is satisfied, it will recommend the amendments to the city council which should be set for hearing in February or March 1995 .'1 RAMON A. DIAZ ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING RAD/SS/db C�! 1e DESERT. 73-510 FRED WARINGRfW&R f4I NESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2576 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 FAX(619)340-0574 TO: Mayor Crites FROM: Steve Smith, Associate Planner DATE: November 17, 1994 SUBJECT: Sign Task Force Site Visits Pursuant to your comments on Monday, November 14, 1994, I spoke to Tom Bassler in Public Works Department regarding the trash cans on E1 Paseo and the height of the signs in the park. He indicated he would bring these matters to Dick Folkers ' attention. I spoke to Pat Bedrosian in Code Compliance regarding the unkept landscaping at Marriott along the north side of Hovley Lane. Pat advised me today that he met with Marriott representatives and they will take care of the problem. I anticipate reconvening the sign task force group during the week after Thanksgiving. You will be advised of the time and date. STEVE SMITH ASSOCIATE PLANNER SRS/db Ppppl CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS FROM: STEVE SMITH, ASSOCIATE PLANNER DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 1994 SUBJECT: SUGGESTED CODE CHANGES FROM FIRST TASK FORCE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 7 , 1994 Date of Next Meeting: Wednesday, November 30, 1994 8 : 30 a.m. - Community Services Conference Room The following items were discussed at the meeting and our responses follow: i) Sonya Campbell indicated that El Paseo needed off-site sign(s) directing people to E1 Paseo. Response: E1 Paseo Business Improvement District should have sign(s ) designed and select desired locations for installation. Plans would then go to Architectural Review Commission for review, public works department for encroachment permit (assuming it is to be located on public property) and finally to city council . An amendment to the ordinance is not required to accomplish this request. ii) Several business owners on El Paseo requested that the ordinance be amended to permit neat, small exterior "open" signs . Response: Mr. Diaz indicated that he would work on this matter immediately to permit these signs ahead of the actual code amendment. He will report on same at the next meeting. As well, we will include an amendment to actually permit "open" signs . The criteria we would request would be to allow pedestal mounted "open" signs with a maximum height of 42 inches and maximum area of 3 square feet. SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 These would be pedestrian sized signs and would only indicate that a business is "open" . No extraneous verbiage would be permitted ( i .e. Sales, 40% Off, Etc. ) . These signs could not be located in the public right of way. Signs could include business name and/or logo, but the primary purpose would be to indicate that the particular business is "open" . These signs would be removed when the business is not open. iii) Linda Kirkendale requested that the restaurant industry be permitted to decide as a group to promote certain special events through the use of banners . Response: We propose to amend the ordinance to allow various business interests to determine which special events they, as a group, would like to promote as special events . As an example, the restaurant industry group would meet and determine that they would like to promote 3 special events throughout the year which they would identify. They would design special banners for those events . The city would permit the banners to go up one week before the event, and require that they be taken down one week after the event concludes . These banners would meet certain criteria, i .e. all the same colors, all the same size, must be mounted on buildings and on private property. We don' t want them tied between two palm trees . Currently the grand opening banners are limited to 30 square feet in size. We would suggest the these special event banners be limited to 20 square feet - that would still allow 2 feet by 10 feet. A business would be allowed one special event banner per street frontage. So a corner business would be entitled to two. We would suggest that in order to maintain consistency of quality and color that the group would order the banners from the manufacturer rather than each individual member of the group going to his own supplier. iv) Buff Benson representing the Cook Street business area suggested a need for business directory signs at street entrances from Cook Street as well as directory signs in front of multi-tenant buildings in the industrial park. 2 i l SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 Response: The directory signs in front of individual multi- tenant industrial buildings is permitted under the ordinance. The business directory sign at the street entrance points from Cook Street could be done as the model home tour program signs . The businesses in that area should agree upon a design for the directory sign, present it to the city and when approved have it/them installed. v) Several members of the group indicated that additional window signage was needed to promote sales . Response: Most of the people requesting additional window signage were located in commercial centers where businesses are a substantial distance back from public streets . It is our proposal to retain the existing 5 square foot limit for E1 Paseo between Portola and Highway 74 . Other general commercial and planned commercial zoned areas would get a basic 20 square feet of window signage. Businesses with greater than 50 feet of linear window exposure, other than on El Paseo, would be entitled to up to 50 square feet of temporary window signage. Greater than 100 feet of linear window exposure, other than on El Paseo, would be entitled to up to 75 square feet of temporary window signage. Most business windows are 8 feet high or greater. Therefore a 100 foot wide window would have an area of at least 800 square feet ( 100 ' x 81 ) . The window sign(s) then would amount to 9 . 3% (i .e. 75 square feet of sign in an 800 square foot window area. In a 60 foot wide window the percentage covered by signs(s) would be 10 . 4% (i .e. 50 square foot sign in 480 square foot window) . In a 16 ' wide window store front on Highway 111, the 20 square feet of window signs (s) would amount to 13 . 9% ( i .e. 20 square foot sign(s) in 144 square feet of window) . Now, we also recognize that in certain centers (i .e. Price Club Center, Ralphs at Country Club and Cook, Luckys on Washington Street, Desert Crossing, Palms to Pines and Waring Plaza businesses are located a substantial distance back from 3 SIGN TASK FORCE MEMBERS NOVEMBER 21, 1994 the public streets . In these instances, we propose to expand upon the basic entitlement established above. If a business is located more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way its basic entitlement would be doubled. A 60 ' wide window more than 250 feet from a public right-of-way could then have up to 100 square feet of signage, but this would still only amount to about 21% of the window area. A 200 ' wide window 250 feet back from a public right-of-way could have up to 150 square feet of signage (75 square feet X 2) . This would amount to 9 .4% of the window covered by sign(s) . In the case of businesses with extreme setbacks (i .e. Home Base area, the Ralphs center at Country Club and Cook, both over 600 feet from a public street, we propose to allow these businesses to triple their basic entitlement. Cal Spas, located between Price Club and Home Base, is located more than 600 feet from Dinah Shore Drive and has 52 feet of frontage. Under this proposal it would be entitled to 150 feet of window signage (i .e. 50 square feet X 3) . This would amount to 36% of the window area. The Bazarre, located next to Cal Spas, has 137 feet of linear window exposure. It would be entitled to 225 square feet of window signage which would amount to 20 . 5% of its window area ( i .e. 225 : 1096 = 20 .5% ) . While we feel comfortable with the formula outlined above, it may be that in order to assure that some unexpected situation doesn't pop up that we want to establish a maximum percentage of the window area that can be covered with temporary window signs . The Task Force can discuss this issue and see if it wishes to establish such a maximum, and if so, what the limit should be. STE E SMITH ASSOCIATE PLANNER SS/db 4 o '�I � � � � �--, � k i f 'QI A � / r G t i (ice - �l�,r.9 s'n iYlL2� 12 ` - W - -_ II III II' - I I emu' 'y t I' b I f' f: SIGN ✓s�51C � r - � s I A) Ji 1. �� V14 X J ---- - 3� I �1�� MA RAW WHO �_ .A,..a la / � m�a. �� Lam.. �L � rI /�✓ d� fu � ♦ / r .�.-a Ala .1 1� r:L= ,/ i /�� . ,a[- �. _ . it: - �a cis• ■ /` ./1 . i . .ate Mill, / y � ► gyp' ,� � � � /- �. • I 1 n - v Ci PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL PASEO BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA BOARD THURSDAY, JULY 21, 1994' I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Sonia Campbell, President, at 8: 17 a.m. II. ROLL CALL Board Members Present: Sonia Campbell Sandra Harvey Monica Kelly Board Members Absent: Meg Firestone Bob Mayo, Jr. Members Present: Edith Morre Also Attending: Paul Shillcock, City of Palm Desert Steve Smith, City of Palm Desert (Present Regarding Item E under New Business only) III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of the Regular Board Meeting of June 16, 1994 . Sandra Harvey moved to approve the June 16 , 1994 Minutes of the Regular Board Meeting, Monica Kelly seconded and the motion was unanimously passed. B. Claims and Demands Against Treasury. Sonia asked that this item be removed and make it Item A under Section V. , Consent Items Held Over on today's agenda. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS A. Edith Morre indicated to the Board that her main statement is her concern about keeping E1 Paseo upgraded as an exclu- sive, _first-class street. Among other things, she's worried about the following: EPBA - 2 - July 21, 1994 1. Parades and other street activities on E1 Paseo 2. The music which was presented last season 3 . The quality of the shops A brief discussion ensued and Sonia thanked Ms. Morre for her comments. B. None V. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER Sonia indicated a clerical error had been made on the May Finan- cial Statement which has now been corrected. Sandra Harvey then distributed the corrected May statement and the June statement. Monica Kelly moved to approved the May and June Financial State- ments as presented. Sandra Harvey seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. VI . NEW BUSINESS A. Nomination and Election of New Officers Sonia called for nominations for the following officers: President, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer. Sandra Harvey nominated Sonia Campbell as President and Monica Kelly seconded the motion. It was unanimously passed and Sonia accepted the position of President. Sonia opened the nominations for Vice President. Sandra Harvey nominated Meg Firestone, Monica Kelly seconded the nomination and it was unanimously approved. Sonia opened the nominations for Secretary. Sandra Harvey nominated Monica Kelly as Secretary and Sonia Campbell sec- onded the nomination. It was unanimously passed and Monica Kelly accepted the position of Secretary. Sonia opened the nominations for. Treasurer. Monica Kelly nominated Sandra Harvey as Treasurer and Sonia Campbell sec- onded the nomination. It was unanimously passed and Sandra Harvey accepted the position of Treasurer. B. Appointment of Patrick Harkins to the Board of Directors Sonia read a letter from Mr. Harkins of the Glez & Harkins Gallery introducing himself and indicating his desire to serve on the EPBA Board. Sonia explained that if Board Members accept the appointment of Mr. Harkins to the EPBA Board, a letter must be sent to the City Council asking for their approval . After a brief discussion, Sandra Harvey moved to accept Mr. Harkins appointment .and write a letter to the City Council request- ing their approval . Monica Kelly seconded the motion and it EPBA - 3 - July 21, 1994 was unanimously passed. Sonia agreed to write a letter to the City Council. C. Authorization for Letter Requesting Compliance with El Paseo Assessment 1. Union Bank 2 . Lucky's Supermarket It was noted that neither of the above were on the City's Code Enforcement list and therefore they were not cur- rently paying any assessment. A discussion ensued and it was agreed that each should be sent a letter regarding their assessments with a copy being sent to the City's Code Enforcement Department. Monica Kelly moved to send out these two letters, Sandra Harvey seconded the motion and it was unanimously passed. Sonia agreed to send the letters . D. Authorization for Letter to Code Enforcement Requesting Con- sistent Enforcement It was noted that during the summer months the Code . Enforce- ment Department becomes lax in enforcing the regulations on E1 Paseo and several complaints have been received by the merchants. Sonia suggested the Board send a letter regard- ing this matter to the City. After further discussion, San- dra Harvey moved to send a letter to the City's Code Enforcement Department requesting year-around, consistent enforcement on E1 Paseo. Monica Kelly seconded the motion and it was unanimously passed. Sonia agreed to prepare the letter. E. Authorization for Letter as Requested by City Council Re: Pink Awning Sonia explained that at the last City Council Meeting, Vision America Optometry appealed the Architectural Review Commission's denial of a request for the awning as installed at 73=199 El Paseo, Suite E. Mr. Smith from the City's Planning Department joined the meeting at this point and distributed copies of the City Council's action. Councilman Crites moved to continue the matter and refer the matter to EPBA Board for review and comment including a comparison of the color originally requested and approved and the color actually installed. He also suggested that Vision America Optometry conduct a door- to-door canvass of their neighbors on E1 Paseo for their indication of approval or disapproval of the awning. A discussion ensued breaking the matter into two parts: 1. The Vision America awning in particular. 7- A PRELI IINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Wilson convened the meeting at 4:00 p.m. IL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Councilmember Jean M. Benson III. INVOCATION - Councilman Walter H. Snyder IV. ROLL CALL Present: Excused Absence: Councilmember Jean M. Benson Councilman Richard S. Kelly Mayor Pro-Tempore Buford A. Crites (arrived at 5:10 p.m.) Councilman Walter H. Snyder Mayor S. Roy Wilson Also Present: Ramon A. Diaz, Acting City Manager David J. Erwin, City Attorney Sheila R. Gilligan, Deputy City Clerk David Yrigoyen, Acting Director of Redevelopment Agency Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works Paul Gibson, Director of Finance Wayne Ramsey, Acting Director of Code Compliance Catherine Sass, Community Arts Manager Ken Weller, Emergency Services Coordinator Lisa Constande, Environmental Conservation Manager V. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meetings of August 25 and September 8, 1994. Rec: Approve as presented. r PRELIlVIINARY A1INUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 229 1994 s B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant No. 13. Rec: Approve as presented. C. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Carl A. Cox and Jan A. Cox for Palm Desert Shell, 73-051 Highway 111, Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. D. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#246) by Ann Marie Pedersen in the Amount of$150,000. Rec: By Minute Motion, deny the claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. E. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#265) by Gary Lange in an Amount in Excess of $2,500,000. Rec: By Minute Motion, deny the claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. F. REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT SECURITY for Parcel Map 27400 (Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, accept the subdivision improvements as complete and authorize the City Clerk to release the subject improvement securities. G. MINUTES of the Finance Committee Meeting of July 14, 1994. Rec: Receive and file. H. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF BID for Contract Sweeping Services (Contract No. C08980). Rec: By Minute Motion, award the bid for contract sweeping services to Interstate Sweeping, Inc. in the amount of$127,810.80 (Contract No. C08980). I. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF BID to Purchase Grass Seed for Annual Overseeding. Rec: By Minute Motion, accept updated staff report and recommendation for the purchase of grass seed as a result of the September 20, 1994, bid opening. 2 PRELIlIIINARY 14II7qJTFS REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCII, MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s J. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for Construction of Street Widening and Landscaping of Highway 74 Adjacent to Bighorn Development, Assessment District 94-1, Bighorn (Contract No. C09060). Rec: By Minute Motion,award the contract to E.L. Yeager Construction Company for the construction of street widening and landscaping of Highway 74 adjacent to Bighorn Development, Assessment District 94-1 (Bighorn), in the Amount of $782,685.00 plus a ten percent contingency of$78,269.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. K. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for the 1995 Community Calendar(Contract No. C090501. Rec: By Minute Motion, award Contract No. C09050 to Wilkinson &Parlan Advertising in the amount of $28,538.19'plus an 8% contingency for the production of the City's 1995 Community Calendar. L. CONSIDERATION OF LETTER from Southern California Edison Company Requesting Palm Desert's Support of AB1879 and SB1632 to Help Coachella Valley Citizens Lower Their Electric Costs. Rec: By Minute Motion, direct staff to prepare a letter for the Mayor's signature in support of the legislation. M. CONSIDERATION OF LETTER from the Desert Chapter of the Building Industry Association of Southern California, Inc., Requesting that the City of Palm Desert Adopt a Policy Relative to Provide an Incentive for Local Businesses who Bid on Public Works Projects. Rec: Refer to staff for report and recommendation. N. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Purchase of a New Battery Set for the Electric Bus. Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Authorize the purchase of a new battery set for the electric bus from Specialty Vehicles Manufacturing Corporation; 2) make a finding pursuant to Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 3.32.090 that the purchase of shuttle bus batteries is unique and therefore exempt from bidding; 3) authorize the City to utilize AB2766 Mobile Source Reduction funds in an amount not to exceed $6,000.00 to purchase the shuttle batteries. Mayor Wilson noted that Councilman Crites had requested that Item K be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion under Section DX, Consent Items Held Over. He also asked that Item L be removed. He noted that with regard to Item M, he had taken the liberty of 3 PRELI[ IINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s sending the requested letter, and if there were no objections from the Council, the requested action was not necessary. Council concurred. Councilman Snyder moved to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 3-0-2 vote with Councilmen Crites and Kelly ABSENT. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A MR. RICHARD IMMENHAUSEN, 73-466 Goldflower Street, stated he had sent a letter to the Council on August 30, 1994, relative to a problem he was experiencing with his home. He gave a history of the situation, noting that he had entered into a contract in July, 1994, to have his roof done. There was no problem until August 26, 1994, on which date there was half an inch of rain which caused severe water damage to his home. He came to the City and discussed the matter with Director of Building and Safety Pat Conlon. He said Mr. Conlon and inspector Joe Conway inspected his roof and were amazed at the Building Code violations and the fact that he did not really have a roof but instead had blue shingles and rotten plywood. He noted he paid $3,800 to the contractor and that a different roofing expert had advised that it would cost another $3,000 to fix the roof. He asked for Council's assistance. Mayor Wilson noted that the Council had received Mr. Immenhausen's letter and had subsequently received a report from the Building and Safety Department. He said the Council was in the process of going through that report and would get back to Mr. Immenhausen as soon as possible. He noted that his understanding was that one of the problems with this situation dealt with the fact that Mr. Immenhausen had put a stop order on the contractor, and he could not, therefore, go in and correct some of the problems. Mr. Immenhausen agreed he had placed a stop order upon the specific instruction of the City. Upon question by Mayor Wilson relative to recent contact with Mr. Conlon, he stated he had been advised that Mr. Conlon was on vacation but that he had left messages requesting a complete report on what they found on the roof. Mr. Diaz stated that he had heard of this situation just prior to the Council meeting but that he intended to call a meeting with the contractor, building inspector, Director of Building and Safety, himself, and Mr. Immenhausen early next week to sit down and attempt to resolve the matter. He added that a report would be prepared for the Council. MS. LINDA KIRKENDALE, resident of Palm Desert, asked that Council consider revising its sign ordinance relative to temporary signs for special events. Mayor Wilson asked that staff look into this and provide Council with a report and recommendation. 4 r PRELIlIIINARY NIINUTES • REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 Councilmember Benson noted that she had asked that a similar item be listed on the Agenda under Council Reports and Remarks, and she felt staff could look at Ms. Kirkendale's request at the same time a report is prepared for her item. Council agreed. VIL RESOLUTIONS None VUL ORDINANCES For Introduction: A. ORDINANCE NO. 762 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 8.32 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO VEHICLE PARKING AND REPAIRS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. Mr. Ramsey reviewed the staff report, noting that this was basically to change Chapter 8.32 to assist in the removal of vehicles not owned by property owners. Councilman Snyder moved to waive further reading and pass to second reading. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 3-0-2 vote with Councilmen Crites and Kelly ABSENT. For Adoption: None IX. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER K. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for the 1995 Community Calendar(Contract No. C09050 . Mayor Wilson stated that Councilman Crites had expressed concern with this item and wanted a better presentation from staff as to why the City should go with Wilkinson and Parlan. He also wondered whether the rest of the Councilmembers had had an opportunity .to view the proposals and indicated he felt the proposal from ALZ was the best. He noted that Council could either hold this item to be discussed upon his arrival or, if the rest of the Councilmembers agreed with staffs recommendation, it could go ahead and approve the contract with Wilkinson and Parlan. Councilmember Benson stated she had looked at all of the proposals and thought Wilkinson and Parlan was good. She added that suggestions that had been made relative to cover design and pictures were going to be made by Wilkinson and Parlan. 5 PRELEMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 Councilman Snyder stated he had just seen some of the proposals; however, it seemed to him that Wilkinson and Parlan were going in the right direction. Mr. McAllister addressed Council and stated that six proposals had been received. He noted that the City had implemented a new promotional program, and the Calendar Committee had unanimously agreed that the design submitted by Wilkinson and Parlan embodied that new theme. He said the Committee particularly liked the way the calendar pages had been redesigned to include upcoming City events in addition to the regular meetings. He added that the Promotion Committee had also met and agreed with staff s recommendation. Councilman Snyder moved to, by Minute Motion, award Contract No. C09050 to Wilkinson & Parlan Advertising in the amount of $28,538.19 plus an 8% contingency for the production of the City's 1995 Community Calendar. Motion was seconded by Benson. Mayor Wilson stated for the record that he had not seen any of the proposals this year. He said he had agreed with last year's choice because he had seen all of the proposals; however, based on the fact that the Promotion Committee had seen the proposals and agreed with staffs recommendation, he said he would vote in favor. Mayor Wilson called for the vote. Motion carried by a 340-2 vote, with Councilmen Crites and Kelly ABSENT. M. CONSIDERATION OF LETTER from the Desert- Chapter of the Building Industry Association of Southern California, Inc., Requesting that the City of Palm Desert Adopt a Policy Relative to Provide an Incentive for Local Businesses who Bid on Public Works Projects. Mayor Wilson stated that he recalled asking staff for this very same thing about a year ago, and staff had advised at that time that the City could not do this. Mr. Erwin responded that the City cannot do this in the bidding process. However, in the purchasing procedures, the possibility does exist that the City can make some distinction. Mayor Wilson stated that if the recommendation to refer the matter to staff was approved by Council, he would strongly urge staff to try and find a way for the City to give preference to local businesses wherever legally possible. He also questioned the resolution from the City of Rancho Mirage and asked why they were able to do something that Palm Desert staff said could not be done. He added that he would like for Palm Desert to be able to do the same as Rancho Mirage. Mr. Diaz stated that this issue had come up at the Chamber Board meeting yesterday, at which Councilman Crites was present. He said one of the things that would be looked at in terms of bidding procedures and local contractors, not only for Palm Desert but Valley-wide, was the issue of bonding and ways to provide that bonding. 6 PRELIM NARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s .s s s Mayor Wilson moved to refer this matter to staff for report and recommendation. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 3-0-2 vote, with Councilmen Crites and Kelly ABSENT. X. NEW BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FROM TARGET IN THE DESERT CROSSING PROJECT FOR APPROVAL OF BANNERS. Mr. Diaz stated that a letter had been faxed to the City requesting continuance of this item. Councilman Snyder moved to continue this matter to the meeting of October 13, 1994. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 3-0-2 vote with Councilmen Crites and Kelly ABSENT. B. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 1. Colony CableVision of California Update. Mr. Diaz noted the report in the packets of cable complaints received for the period from August 29 - September 12, 1994. XI. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF CIVIC CENTER PARK AQUATIC CENTER (Continued from the Meetings of July 14 and August 25, 1994). Mr. Erwin stated that his office was preparing the contract that Council previously authorized to be prepared. He asked that Council take this matter off the Agenda and reschedule it when the contract is ready. Councilman Snyder moved to remove this item from the Agenda to be brought back when contracts, are ready. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 3-0-2 vote, with Councilmen Crites and Kelly ABSENT. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL TO A DECISION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION DENYING A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AN AWNING AS INSTALLED AT 73-199 EL PASEO, SUITE E, VISION AMERICA OPTOMETRY, Case No. 4248SA, (Continued from the Meetings of July 14 and August 25, 1994). Mr. Diaz reviewed the staff report, noting that Council had continued this matter in order to allow the applicant an opportunity to personally appear before the El Paseo Business Association Board to present his case. He said it was his understanding (although he had just received this information today and had not been able to confirm it) that although the Board PRELEW NARY NM'4UTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s did meet, there were only two Board members present, and the action taken by those two members was to recommend to the City Council that the appeal be denied. MS. VIRGINIA BROWN, Manager of Vision America Optometry, stated she had had nothing but good reports relative to the awning except from the President of the El Paseo Business Association Board who is also in the optical business. She added that she had previously submitted 15 letters in support of the awning. Upon question by Councilmember Benson relative to the El Paseo Business Association Board and the lack of a quorum at its meeting, Mr. Erwin stated that this was the second time the matter had gone to the Board. He added that Council had asked for a recommendation that it technically did not need and that Council was free to act on the matter. However, if Council so wished, it could continue the item. Councilmember Benson stated she had gone out and looked at all the awnings along the street and had found others that were made of shiny material. She then checked and found that some of the approvals specified what material would be used and some did not. She said she did not find the awning objectionable. Although she realized the awning company made a mistake, she said she did not think it was such a glaring mistake that we couldn't go ahead and leave it up and have a condition on future approvals that the awning companies must sign and agree that any deviations from the original approval must come back to the City, and if they do not do so, they will be liable for any costs incurred in removing the awning. Councilmember Benson moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Grant the appeal and allow the awning to remain as installed; 2) direct that all future approvals include a condition that the awning company must sign and agree that any deviations from the original approval must come back to the City, and if they do not do so, they will be liable for any costs incurred in removing said awning. Motion was seconded by Wilson. Councilman Snyder expressed concern with the representative of the awning company disregarding proper procedures. Councilmember Benson stated that Mr. Brooks had used his own best judgment in selecting an alternate color when the color originally approved had been discontinued. Mr. Diaz stated he had a suggestion for a way to make sure a similar situation does not occur in the future. He said the City could require that a sample of the awning material be included with all awning applications. When the applicant comes in to secure a building permit for the awning, the City could require that whoever is installing the awning bring in a sample of the material; both the material and the permit could then be brought over to the Planning Department for approval and to compare the two materials. Councilmember Benson asked that the applicant also be required to sign a statement of responsibility. Mr. Diaz agreed. 8 PRELIMINARY NE NUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s * s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s Mayor Wilson asked if Councilmember Benson's motion was to grant the appeal, allowing the awning to remain as installed, and direct that staff tighten up the regulations so this type of situation does not happen again. Benson agreed. Motion carried by a 3-0-2 vote, with Councilmen Crites and Kelly ABSENT. XII. OLD BUSINESS A. PROGRESS REPORT RELATIVE TO REQUEST FROM RESIDENTS OF BELMONTE ESTATES RELATIVE TO ADOPTION OF A RESIDENTIAL COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCE SIMILAR TO ONE ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF LA QUINTA. Mr. Diaz stated that he had met with representatives of Century Homes as well as the Building Industry Association. He said Mr. Steve Smith of his office pointed out to him that the City's current Architectural Review Commission ordinance had a provision to ensure compatibility. He said his concern with this provision was that it was not specific in terms of square footage, etc. and did not give us the opportunity to tell individuals how big or small the homes must be. He said he had advised the developer that the current City ordinance might be more restrictive than the La Quinta ordinance; however, they indicated they wished to attempt resolution of this matter under the City's ordinance. He noted that the new elevations would be before the Architectural Review Commission at its next meeting and that homeowners of Belmonte Estates had been notified of this meeting. He said the Commission would make a decision based on the current findings set forth within the City of Palm Desert ordinance; if an agreement cannot be reached, the matter would then be appealed to the Council. He recommended that at this time the La Quinta ordinance be held in abeyance and that resolution of the matter attempt to be achieved under Palm Desert's present ordinance. He added that this was the first time this type of situation had occurred and, therefore, the first time this particular ordinance would be used. Upon question by Mayor Wilson, Mr. Diaz stated that no Council action was necessary at this time. MR. TOM O'NEAL, resident of Belmonte Estates, stated he had not heard about the meeting between staff, the developer, and the Building Industry Association. Mr. Diaz explained the meeting and noted that under the City's current ordinance, we can aci ieve more than under the La Quinta ordinance. MRS. GIEGLING addressed the Council with regard to elevation plans. She said at the original meeting, Century Homes did have pictures; however,'they indicated that they had brought the wrong ones. This same thing happened' in a second meeting, and the homeowners do not, therefore, really know what they are building. Mr. Diaz stated that when this matter is before the Architectural Review Commission, whatever the developer presents will be approved or denied, and they will not be able to change it. 9 PRELEW NARY NIINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 229 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s Upon question by Mayor Wilson, Mr. Erwin stated that to the extent there is a problem, it will automatically be placed on the City Council Agenda and that no Council action was necessary at this time. B. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH RALPH ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES FOR CLASSIFICATION STUDY (CONTRACT NO. C09070). Mr. Diaz noted the memorandum in the packets and offered to answer any questions. Upon question by Councilmember Benson, Mr. McAllister responded that the City had used this same firm for its first classification study in 1978. Councilman Snyder moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve a contract with Ralph Andersen & Associates to complete a classification study for the City of Palm Desert; 2) authorize the appropriation of $20,000 from unobligated general fund reserves for this purpose. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 3-0-2 vote, with Councilmen Crites and Kelly ABSENT. C. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF ACTIONS WITH REGARD TO PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR SUNTERRACE - ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 94-2. Mr. Diaz reviewed the staff report and offered to answer any questions. Councilman Snyder moved to: 1) Waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 94-101 appointing and designating assessment engineer, bond counsel, appraiser, and underwriter with respect to the formation of and the issuance and sale of bonds for proposed Assessment District No. 94-2 (Sunterrace), and approving and authorizing execution of agreement regarding formation of said assessment district; 2) waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 94-102 adopting map describing proposed boundaries of assessment district and ordering filing of map; 3) waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 94-103 designating newspaper to be used for assessment district proceedings; 4) waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 4-104 declaring intention to order the acquisition and construction of certain improvements within and for a proposed assessment district and the payment of certain expenses incidental thereto pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, describing the assessment district to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and determining that bonds shall be issued in the amount of the unpaid assessments pursuant to the Improvement Bond Act of 1915; 5) waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 94-105 approving assessment engineer's report and appointing time and place for hearing protests to the proposed acquisition and construction of public improvements. Councilmember Benson seconded the motion, and it carried by a 3-0-2 vote, with Councilmen Crites and Kelly ABSENT. XIII. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER Mr. Diaz reported that trenching was underway for the new Library and that things were moving along well. He said the proposed groundbreaking celebration was scheduled for 10 i y PRELEMINARY MINUTES RtGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 October 21st and that there might be a need for City contribution for that celebration. He noted that the total cost, according to Mr. Terry Green, would be approximately $6,000, and the City would be asked to contribute $3,000. With Council concurrence, staff was directed to place this item on the next City Council Agenda. B. CITY ATTORNEY None C. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action: 1. Review of Existing Sign Ordinance Provisions (Councilmember Jean M. Benson). Councilmember Benson stated she felt it was time for the City to look at its sign ordinance in view of all the shopping centers and businesses that are expanding. With Council concurrence, staff was directed to convene the former committee to look at the City's sign ordinance. NOTE: COUNCILMAN CRITES ARRIVED AT 5:10 P.M. 2. Low Power Radio (Councilman Buford A. Crites). Councilman Crites stated that he had attended a National League of Cities Conference in Boston.in 1986 and had brought back an idea at that time relative to low power radio systems that the City can purchase and place at locations such as the McCallum Theatre and the Marriott that would have a range of five miles. The City could then install signs at entrances to the City which advise people where they can tune their radios to receive information relative to the City. He said the message could be recycled every three minutes or so. He added that he felt with one or two repeaters, this could handle the entire City. He asked that staff prepare a report for the Council to consider and vote on such a system. Council concurred. 3. Councilman Crites stated that he had gone out yesterday to look at the Civic Center Ballfields and got a report that we are close to being able to use the lights. He asked for the status of the pennants that were planned for the area on both sides of the catcher artwork. 11 1 PRELIlIDNARY MINUTES ` REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s Mr. Yrigoyen responded that it was his understanding that the pennant aspect of the program was put on hold. He said staff would look into this and report back to Council. 4. Councilman Crites asked if there was anything that could be done with the 1/4 and 1/2 lots on San Pablo Avenue. He said he had walked along that street and noticed a boarded up house and the fact that these lots did not look very nice. Mr. Diaz responded that staff would look into this and bring a report back to Council. 5. Councilmember Benson asked whose responsibility it was to clear the area by the wash on Cook Street. She said she had noticed a lot of debris left from the construction of the overpass. In addition, she said there was a bus stop sitting in the corner of the lot at Portola Avenue and Highway 111, and she asked what was going to be done about that. Mr. Gregg Holtz responded that the debris at Cook Street was not from the bridge construction and that it was actually from the Coachella Valley Water District project to extend sewer lines. With regard to the bus stop at Portola and Highway 111, he said it had been pulled by our contractor and set on that lot when we made modifications at that intersection. He said staff would contact Sunline Transit Agency to see if they will retrieve it or relocate it. Councilmember Benson asked that staff also contact CVWD and ask them to clean up the Cook Street area since many people come into Palm Desert along that street. o City Council Committee Reports: 1. Councilmember Benson showed the Council an article published in the American Airlines Golden Gavel relative to the Palm Springs Desert Resorts Convention and Visitors Bureau. Upon question by Mayor Wilson, she stated she would provide copies of the article for the Council. She also noted that the PSDRCVB had, for the 5th straight year, been named one of the top seven bureaus in the west and 44th in the world. XIV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B None With Council concurrence, Mayor Wilson recessed the meeting at 5:25 p.m. for dinner. He reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. 12 y PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1"4 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s XV. COMPLETION OF ITEMS HELD OVER FROM 4:00 P.M. SESSION None XVI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - C None XVIL AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS A. APPOINTMENT TO THE CIVIC ARTS COMMITTEE TO FILL THE VACANCY CREATED BY THE RESIGNATION OF EARLE STONE (Continued from the Meetings of August 25 and September 8, 1994). Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, appoint Ms. Pam Bieri to the Civic Arts Committee to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Earle Stone. Motion was seconded by Snyder and carried by unanimous vote. B. APPOINTMENT TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION TO FILL THE VACANCY CREATED BY THE RESIGNATION OF DENNIS ORSBORN(Continued from the Meetings of August 25 and September 8, 1994). Councilmember Benson moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Appoint Mr. David Eslinger to the Parks and Recreation Commission to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Dennis Orsborn; 2) appoint Mr. Van Tanner to the Parks and Recreation Commission as an Alternate Member to fill the vacancy created by the appointment of Mr. David Eslinger as a regular member. Motion was seconded by Snyder and carried by unanimous vote. C. APPOINTMENT TO THE PROMOTION COMMITTEE TO FILL VACANCIES CREATED BY THE RESIGNATIONS OF LLOYD CHESTER AND STEVE WARSH AND THE EXPIRATION OF TERMS OF DIANA BROWN, ELIZABETH GREEN, GROVER NOBLES, LOU FEIRING, JIM LOPEZ, ALLAN NYMAN, ROBERT SCHOLL, DICK SHALHOUB, AND PIPER WILSON (Continued from the Meetings of August 25 and September 8, 1994). Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Reappoint Elizabeth Green, Jim Lopez, Allan Nyman, Robert Scholl, Dick Shalhoub, and Piper Wilson; 2) Appoint David Panullo, Robert Evans, and Matt Zack; 3) appoint James Ferguson to the Committee and to serve as the Promotion Committee liaison to the Sister Cities Committee. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote. 13 PRELI IINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 D. APPOINTMENT TO ART-IN-PUBLIC-PLACES COMMITTEE TO FILL THE VACANCIES CREATED BY THE RESIGNATION OF EARLE STONE AND THE EXPIRATION OF TERMS OF VALERIE MILLER AND WAYNE CONNOR. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, reappoint Wayne Connor and appoint Kevin Grauchau and David Katz to the Art-In-Public-Places Selection Subcommittee. Motion was seconded by Snyder and carried by unanimous vote. XVHL PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE RELINQUISHMENT OF HIGHWAY 111. Mr. Diaz reviewed the staff report, noting that at the meeting of September 16, Council representatives made it clear that the City of Palm Desert wishes to cooperate with the City of Cathedral City and would consider adoption of a resolution requesting the State Department of Transportation and the California Transportation Commission to evaluate the relinquishment and/or relocation of State Route 111 designation from Palm Desert western city limits to Monterey Avenue/Highway 111, as long as it did not commit the City of Palm Desert to any particular course of action. He noted the resolution in his report dated September 21, 1994, and said he had received a faxed memorandum from the City of Cathedral City relative to this resolution and requesting that the word "evaluate" be changed to "initiate". It also included suggested wording for a third section which would provide additional security to the City of Palm Desert that the initiation of the process does not commit the City to formal adoption of a relinquishment at this time. He said staff felt "evaluate" was a better word than "initiate" in terms of meeting the goals the City of Palm Desert wishes to set forth. Mr. Folkers added that Cathedral City staff had periodically mentioned that time is of the essence in this matter. Upon question by Mayor Wilson relative to staff's specific objection to changing "evaluate" to "initiate", Mr. Diaz stated that he felt "initiate" indicated.the City of Palm Desert was initiating the process and had already evaluated whether or not we wish to have the relinquishment whereas "evaluate" meant we want to look at the issue. Mayor Wilson stated that his understanding from the City of Cathedral City was that they are under a deadline and want to initiate the process, not study it more. He added that they had assured him that it did not mean the City of Palm Desert is committed. Councilman Crites stated that he wanted it made clear that this is something we very well may not complete. He added that it was not his intent at this time that the City of Palm Desert would actually do this, and he did not want Caltrans to believe otherwise. Mayor Wilson invited testimony from the audience. 14 PRELIMINARY MQNUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMMER 22, 1994 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s • s s s M.R. STEVE CRAIG, Community Development Director for the City of Cathedral City, addressed Council and said he felt the resolution prepared would be adequate for the purpose of securing the$1.5 million of consideration that is to be shared approximately equally among all jurisdictions. He said his memorandum did suggest adding a Section 3 as noted by Mr. Diaz to read as follows: "SECTION 3. This resolution is conditioned upon negotiation and approval of a suitable Cooperative Agreement between Caltrans and the City of Palm Desert to implement the relinquishment of the present highway alignment." In addition, it requested that the word "evaluate" be changed to "initiate" in the title line 5. He added that he was sure most of the Council was aware of Cathedral City's plans and what they intended to do with regard to improvements to the level of service on Highway 111. Councilman Crites asked when this would be implemented in Cathedral City, assuming all goes as planned, and how long before intersections are improved and we have six lanes through that area. Mr. Craig responded that it was anticipated that it would take approximately two years. Councilmember Benson stated she had not received a sufficient answer to a question she asked at the meeting the other day. She questioned whether Caltrans would take the Highway 111 designation and change it to Highway 74 from Monterey Avenue east. She expressed concern because all of the merchants on Highway 111 would then have to change their addressed to Highway 74. She said she was not told whether Caltrans could actually do that or whether they would or would not consider doing so. Mr. Craig responded that they had discussed with Caltrans exactly how they would handle designating the remainder of the area that is currently designated as Highway 111. He felt this was something that should be worked out by the City of Palm Desert directly with Caltrans in the cooperative agreement. Councilmember Benson asked what would happen if Palm Desert were to go ahead and do as requested and then decide at a later time to pull out - would that mean that everyone's funding was lost? Mr. Craig responded that in order for this to move forward and in order for them to keep the allocation of funds from Caltrans which was proposed to be divided among all the jurisdictions, the step needs to be taken now to initiate the relinquishment. If cooperative agreements are not worked out between each of the parties, he said it was his understanding that that would be the end of the availability of the funds - they would go ahead and use the funds for other purposes. Councilman Crites stated that his understandingwas that Palm Desert would et $300 000. 8 > In addition, staff estimated that this would cost the City $50,000 per year. If all of that is accurate, after six years, that road that used to be Highway I II is ours, out of pocket, forever. 15 PRELIMU NARY Afl NUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 Mr. Craig agreed. Councilman Crites stated that it would not do the City of Palm Desert any good to relinquish Highway 111, and he asked whether the City of Cathedral City had entertained the idea of figuring out a way to hold Palm Desert at a net zero cost increase for doing that. He said the obvious question a citizen in Palm Desert is going to ask is why we should spend $50,000 a year for the next 50 years to simply remove a designation from a roadway that does not do us any good within our own city. Mr. Craig stated that the goal and benefits for everyone in this is to improve Cathedral City's downtown area and get traffic moving through there. In order to accomplish that, Cathedral City felt this was an essential first step. The benefits to the region and to the daily movement of people through this corridor is that they can get through in an expedited manner and get through an area that will enhance the total economy of the region. Councilman Crites agreed and said Palm Desert had done that itself over the last 20 years, going from two lanes and awful frontage roads to six lane highways, etc., which also helps people from Cathedral City, Indio, etc. and paid for it itself. Mr. Craig stated that it was also important to keep in mind what will be coming in the future, and that is that ultimately the Highway 111 designation is to be moved down to the mid-valley parkway. Whether Palm Desert takes the action to support Cathedral City and move forward with this process now, recognizing the regional and inter-city benefits for transportation, or whether it comes at a later date when the mid-valley parkway move occurs, there will still be the issue that the road will ultimately be moved. He said in terms of the liability and insurance issues, those had been reviewed by the Joint Powers Insurance Authority, and no significant claims of conflict arose out of that. He felt the compensation providing by Caltrans was quite substantial, and he disagreed with staff that it would cost $50,000 per year to maintain the roadway. He said he did know that this was the last opportunity to take advantage of this kind of funding for the relocation. With the seismic bonds failing on the last election, he said there will not be money available for this purpose in the future to fund a relinquishment, and it may be many, many years before these funds are available. He said the grateful position was that at least we have the opportunity now to take advantage of this. The money will be held and if in the future a cooperative agreement is validated and the City of Palm Desert decides it does want to go forward, the money will at least have been retained by initiating the process. Mayor Wilson stated he would like to acknowledge and welcome several elected officials in the audience - Carol Englehard, Mayor of Cathedral City, and Former Mayor Pat Murphy. CAROL ENGLEHARD, Mayor of Cathedral City, addressed Council and asked for its support of this process. She said if the process is not initiated, they would lose the money. She agreed with Steve Craig that this is a regional project that will bring jobs to the County. 16 I PROXVIINARY MINUTES v REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL. MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 Upon question by Councilmember Benson relative to what action had been taken by the City of Palm Springs, Mayor Englehard responded that they had similar concerns to Palm Desert but were sure that these things could be worked out. She said there were some language problems and some questions that staff needed to answer, and a,meeting had been set for Wednesday, September 28, at which time this would be discussed again. She noted that the cutoff date was September 30, and she said she felt confident from the response at last night's meeting that the Palm Springs City Council was encouraged about the initiation process. MS. ANNE ZACHARY, Member of the Downtown Task Force, addressed Council and stated that this would take nothing away from Palm Desert. She asked for Council's approval. With no further testimony offered, Mayor Wilson declared the public hearing closed. Mayor Wilson asked Mr. Erwin whether changing the word "evaluate" to "initiate" and adding Section 3 would weaken Palm Desert's position in any way. Mr. Erwin noted for the record that he was the City Attorney for the City of Cathedral City as well as for Palm Desert. He said he believed that changing the wording in the title did nothing to weaken Palm Desert's position. He also believed that adding Section 3 strengthened Palm Desert's position. Councilman Crites moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 94_106, amended to replace the word "evaluate" with "initiate" in the title line 5 and adding Section 3 to read as follows: "This resolution is conditioned upon negotiation and approval of a suitable Cooperative Agreement between Caltrans and the City of Palm Desert to implement the relinquishment of the present highway alignment." Motion was seconded by Wilson. Councilman Crites noted that he had not yet had anyone in Palm Desert express support of this request and that everyone he spoke with felt it should be left as it is. He said there needed to be a very good campaign on the part of Cathedral City to convince a lot of people that not only will this cure conditions of blight, etc., it will also facilitate the movement of traffic with the improvements to six lanes, etc. Councilmember Benson added that we reallyneed the facts down because in the hearing that g was held, she had never heard that there would be six lanes. Mayor Wilson reoppned the public hearing to receive additional testimony. Mr. Craig stated that there would be four dedicated travel lanes plus turn lanes and parking on the side. In some areas, where the road opens out at intersections, there would be six or seven lanes. He said the actual design for the project was based on the fact that constraints of keeping traffic moving is related to the intersections, not the number of lanes between intersections. He added that this would be clarified in more detail in the Environmental 17 r PRELIM[NARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 Impact Report. He said it needed to be made clear to the public that there will be significant change to the traffic. CouncilmajuCrites noted that there would be skeptics to that. He said you do not get good traffic flow by leaving the lanes the same and just changing the intersections. Mayor Wilson declared the public hearing closed. Mayor Wilson called for the vote. Motion carried by a 4-0-1 vote, with Councilman Kelly ABSENT. XIX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - D None XX. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Crites, second by Benson, and unanimous vote of the Council, Mayor Wilson adjourned the meeting at 7:43 p.m. S. ROY WILSON, MAYOR ATTEST: MARY P. FRAZIER, DEPUTY CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 18 ECE�vED 3 1994 EO ; AUb tW,t, I I DESERT�� AUGUST 1, 1994 G r� MR. WAYNE RAMSEY X' LICENSING/CODE ENFORCEMENT , I^ CITY OF PALM DESERT �JN\ 73-510 FRED WARING PALM DESERT, CA 92260 DEAR MR. RAMSEY, . j THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CODE VIOLATIONS OCCURRING ON EL PASEO IN A CONTINUING MANNER. I HAVE RECEIVED COMPLAINTS FROM THE MEMBERSHIP AND, IN TURN, HAVE SO ADVISED CODE ENFORCEMENT. THE RESPONSE HAS BEEN: SIN THE SUMMER WE ARE NOT SO JSTRICT AND TOLERATED VIOLATIONS." AT ITS REGULAR MEETING JULY 21, 1994, THE EL PASEO BUSINESS ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY DISAPPROVED OF THIS POLICY AND YOU ARE HEREBY REQUESTED TO CORRECT THIS ATTITUDE. EL PASEO IS A "YEAR ROUND STREET" AND WHAT IS DISTASTEFUL IN JANUARY IS EQUALLY DISTASTEFUL. IN JULY. IT IS UNREALISTIC TO APPLY CITY CODES ON AN ARBITRARY BASIS AND HOPE TO MAINTAIN ANY RESPECT FOR CITY -AUTHORITY OR FOR YOUR OFFICERS WHOSE DUTY IT IS TO RESPOND TO AND CORRECT COMPLAINTS. THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A SMALL MINORITY WHO BELIEVE ONLY. OTHERS MUST OBEY THE RULES, RESERVING FOR THEMSELVES THE PRIVILEGE OF DOING AS THEY PLEASE UNTIL THEY ARE REPRIMANDED. THE BOARD REFUSES TO ACCEPT ANY EXCEPTIONS. PLEASE ADVISE YOUR STAFF THAT THE ASSOCIATION EXPECTS FULL ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE TWELVE MONTHS A YEAR. YOURS TRULY, $ONI' A M CAMPBELL, PRES. EL PASEO BUSINESS ASSOCIATION GOV TO TO BOARD OF DIRECTORS ly... - SMC/Psc CC: MR. BRUCE ALTMAN, CITY MANAGER ALL MEMBERS, CITY COUNCIL EL PASEO BUSINESS ASSOCIATION • P.O. BOX 6000 STE. 305 • PALM DESERT,CA M61 L i INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM City of Pain Desert TO: BRUCE ALTMAN, CITY MANAGER FROM: WAYNE RAMSEY, ACTING DIRECTOR OF CODE COMPLIANCE SUBJECT: EL PASEO MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION LETTER - FOLLOW UP NA669 DATE: AUGUST 12, 1994 I. BACKGROUND: In the past, merchants complained that we were being too restrictive during the summer. After discussing this with the planning dept. , Ray directed us to allow a relaxation of the Sign Ordinance to accommodate E1 Paseo merchants. II. DISCUSSION: Due to discussions the City has had with the El Paseo Merchants Assoc. and merchants, we have tried to work with E1 Paseo businesses and allowed them to advertise being open in a more liberal manner. Since receiving Mrs. Campbell's letter I have directed staff to, strictly, follow the ordinance and not to allow violations. III. RECOMMENDATIONt Staff recommends that the City enforce the Sign Ordinance as written, and direct all complaints to the E1 Paseo Merchants Assoc. A J % � WAYNE AMS Y ACTIN DIRECTOR OF CO E COMPLIANCE /Sr Gemini Helpful Hints sprinted from issue#11 of Gemini Letters Sign Builder Illustrated t 103 Mensing Way P.O.Box 106 Farmville,NC 27828 Cannon Falls,MN 55009 1-800-LETTERS 919-321-1777 FAX:507-2634887 Letter Choice s ........... HOW DO YOU HELP YOUR CUSTOMER CHOOSE THE RIGHT LETTER? There are many things to con- KNOW YOUR BUSINESS well together.What will give the sider before recommending a Study your craft. It is impor- highest visibility? What style is proper letter for a customer. tant to understand that the best for the situation? Many Unless the customer is an ad choices the customer makes other factors come into play agency or another sign com- may determine his/her success such as the background color pany, (don't laugh, most sign or failure in business. it is im- and composition.Recommend- companies have grossly inferior perative that the public ing the proper letters today is signs for themselves) they responds favorably to your no simple choice. It used to be probably have no idea what client's sign. If your client is "Standard Block" in 5 sizes and they need or like. Sometimes smart they will rely on your ex- 5 colors. Now, the choices are what they like is not what they pertise...if you are smart you'll endless.That is why you MUST need."I want 12"Old English in know what to recommend. know your business. all capital letters", they say in Proper size, color and style their most authoritative voice. are important factors that must KNOW THEIR BUSINESS It is at this point you must reach be considered in choosing the What does your customer down inside yourself and proper letters for the want to convey to the public? muster up all the intelligence, customer's sign. You need to Obviously, a law firm will not tact and courage that you have. understand what colors work want to project the same image as a hot dog stand... I'd better qualify that statement...in most V;Ue cases. An exclusive dress shop will prefer an elegant choice of letter style and color rather than a bold style and color. A* There are several considera- tions in choosing the proper let- ter for your customer: too' I.Visibility. For obvious reasons, one would not select a small size or "busy" style for a .47 r_Af'1)4. client whose business is on a busy street with fast moving traffic.On the other hand,if the L D traffic is mostly pedestrian, a small letter may work quite well if used properly. If a business is set back off the street where the traffic is 45 miles per hour, (see figure 1) you need to take into consideration that the motorist will travel 66 feet every second. (See chart 1) As you can see,the motorist only has 1.5 seconds to FIGURE I read the business' sign. There- fore, it MUST be adequate. i l TRAVELED miserable choice.However, the (see chart below). Notice that DISTANCE same size, color and style may there are two distances given be very effective if presented on for each letter size, "Maximum a well designed "monument" Readable Distance " and SPEED FT. PER SEC. sign in a conservative, well "Readable Distance for Maxi- 65 95 groomed professional com-- mum Impact". Let your cus- 60 88 munity. So, part of the decision • tomer make the decision. Ask 55 81 must be based on relative sur- ' him/her, "Would you prefer 50 73 roundings. your sign to have minimum im- , 45 66 30 44KNOW ABOUT READABLE pact ormaximum impact on the DISTANCES public. A sensible answer would be "Maximum". Thus CHART 1 Probably the first question your customer sells himself on 2. Class of Business. Lawyers, your customer may ask is, the sign, without pressure from doctors and other pro essiona s What size do you recom- you. will tend to use more conserva- mend?" Try to refrain from Also,keep in mind that these live letter styles, colors and recommending a 60" tall letter readiib e tstancesar-e ase on sizes. Some are even limited by simply because you have a lot of viewing rom a txe position. their proles—slonal code of ethics bills to pay this month. Instead, Time anO viewing angle must as tote size letters t ey can refer to a Letter Visibility Chart CONTINUED NEXT PAGE use. a sometimes tend to choose bronzes, blac cs, rowns and iv o over bolderco ors. Their Choice of letter style LETTER VISIBILITY CHART tyle le wou usually be a roman style OLME icn . There are other READABLE businesses that demand a bold MAXIMUM DISTANCE look.Hardware stores,building READABLE FOR MAXIMUM LETTER supply houses, car repair, fast DISTANCE IMPACT HEIGHT food restaurants usually require heavy styles and bright colors. 100, 30' 3" "Trendy"stores often use bright 1 50' 40' 4" colors and choose more flowing 200' 60' 6" or casual styles. Fashion stores, such as dress shops, and hair 350' 80, 8" styling boutiques tend to use 400' 90, 9" "feminine"or script styles with a 450' 100, 10" more conservative color range. 525' 1 20' 1 2" Whatever style they choose, it 630' 1 50' 15" will convey the "personality" of 750' 180' 18" the business, and they must be 1000' 240' 24" made aware of this. 1 250' 300' 30" 3.Relativity. No,not Einsteins Theory of Relativity.I'm talking 1500' 360' 36 about the location of your 1750' 420' 42" clients business. Actually, "ex- 2000' 480' 48" ternal atmosphere" may be a 2250' 540' 54" better choice of words than 2500' 600' 60" "location". What are the sur- roundings of your client's busi- NOTE: The following distances will vary approximately 10% with ness? If he/she is in a location various color combinations..... 5,280' equals one (1) mile... that every business is wrapped maximum distance in color would be RED or BLACK on WHITE up in neon and flashing.]ights,4" background. Bronze helvetica would be a Prepared by the California Institute of Technology. i CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGr_ or "open" letters have weak at- mechanically measured, sign . also be taken into considera- tractions for each other. These work would not be an art, it tion. A sign that can only be letters must be spaced closer. would be a science. seen for a second or two must Examples of these letters are Word spacing is the "white" not be "wordy". the I's and L's. Heavy letters space between the words. A KNOW ABOUT SPACING have a strong attraction for basic rule is that the space each other and must be spaced , should be as large as the O of An inexperienced sign per- more openly. Examples of - the letter style.Too much space son usually assumes that distan- these letters would be B's and givds the illusion that the words ces between letters should be R's. are not connected and are read ' equal. This is not true. Gemini, Since original lettering or individually rather than as a Inc. has good advice on proper layout is almost always done in group." letter spacing: black and white,you must allow KNOW ABOUT COLOR "Letter spacing is the "white" for weight changes that will space area between the letters occur if the lettering is in color Recently, in our city,a multi- of a word.Good spacing is more or the background is color. For million dollar office building than just equal areas of white example, note the difference in was built. They finished it off space. If the only consideration intensity of the following two with a "monument" type sign in letter spacing was that all the letters. with the same type light ivory spaces between the letters be To summarize,good spacing colored brick that the building equal in area,then tight spacing means that each letter of the was made of. The background and open spacing would make word can be quickly and easily was nicely done with a couple of equally effective word pattern. perceived and that the open rows of contrasting brown However, letters that have too area between the letters be brick.Expensive cast aluminum little space between the letters roughly equal. Another rule of letters with a satin finish was are illegible (as well as uneven thumb is the space between let- mounted to the light colored in pattern)and letters that have ters should be roughly equal to background. At 20' away, the too much space are not per- the stroke of the letter. sign was virtually unreadable. ceived as a work pattern. Light Remember if lettering could be There is no doubt in my mind t at t e m LETTER SPACING following the specifications of an arc ect who knew not mg about signs. MELT bL One-e sFiouTd try to understand e<o�errea s°<u"c M a L� ��pIETTtgS°«,"� about colors that work well together. Find out how colors affect a person's moods. Study some of the color schemes of major franchises. These folks have paid "high dollars" for j POOR their choices. In summary, YOU are the Tn;s I e.ample shows m,pae. professional. At least, you • or • meaa rams should be. Most of the time, beto1 ween sFe e.lremq•es I � � °"nele11fif your on your judgment boutmer �their ll ysiignage. Most of us would love to sell all signs that are priced in the GOOD thousands. However, many mat times that is neither what the '"a' '"° •'°•a b°'w°`° customer needs or can afford_It lepnra maa be.11. a.lI Tn•s work is up to you to be able to match good"color." the customers usmess wit an e active sin SBI i �1 I cr � c ,� �Q NY , � � -3 J�r ;I -76 �> - iJ �r N� I, Ir lfi li I 1 I 16 THE WORLDS LARGEST AND BEST SPA COMPANY cam 11 a }•3+� i) e G�I� ✓W I�n l i i D a —7 — 6z2 xlv� 30 ) Pam r r� ex ' - - 1 770-915// i f�1 - ' , �/, _ 3�-a--�-�1� --- __I� + �� .�i � _ � - ,�� ----- ,II �' -� -- - -- �,, ;� kl, _-_ -..---- ; ' i ��- _� i _ i, Zcc �., 11 — 91coS �/ 1 Y 7 1 S 4v�L Kt 4✓ K", / q'L(/[J� , �/C. �L �lD'W.�'t(.7 V l - 9Lzn lbLLL, r -- itDec- 06 7 ,-) - J -So i