The URL can be used to link to this page

2006 05 23 PCT4t!t 4 eCP Qum& Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-guinta.orn PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California MAY 23, 2006 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2006-022 Beginning Minute Motion 2006-010 1. CALL TO ORDER IL PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. 111. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 9, 2006. B. Approval of the Joint Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission for May 9, 2006. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc V. PUBLIC HEARING: For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time. Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public hearing. A. Item ................ CONTINUED - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 34416 AND VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2006-033 Applicant ......... David Chapman Investments, LLC Location .......... Northeast corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive Request ........... Consideration of a Resolution of Denial Action ............. Resolution 2006- B. Item ................ CONTINUED - SIGN APPLICATION 2005-932 Applicant ......... Chad Addington, Sign -A -Rama for Vista De Montana Location .......... North side of Calle Amigo and west of Desert Club Drive Request ........... Consideration of a request for a Sign Program to serve two office buildings in the Village Commercial District Action ............. Minute Motion 2006- C. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-859 Applicant ......... Shovlin Development Location .......... Bounded by Highway 111, Washington Street and Adams Street within the One Eleven La Quinta Center Request ........... Consideration of architectural and conceptual landscaping plans for two retail shops and tenant storage Action ............. Request to continue to June 13, 2006 VI. BUSINESS ITEM: A. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-809, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant ......... Innovative Communities, Inc. Location .......... Northwest corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street Request ........... Consideration of architectural revision and landscaping plans for a revision to the existing approval for a clubhouse facility, associated with Watermark Villas Action ............. Minute Motion 2006- G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\t AgendaW.doc B. Item ................ SPECIFIC PLAN 99-035, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant ......... East of Madison, LLC Location .......... Avenue 52 and Meriwether Way area within the Madison Club Request ........... Consideration of Avenue 52 perimeter wall plans adjacent to the Reception Center/Guard House entry area Action ............. Minute Motion 2006- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Review of City Council meeting of May 16, 2006. IX. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on June 13, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, May 23, 2006, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, on Friday, May 19, 2006. DATED: May 19, 2006 BETTY J AWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California GAWPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaMdoc Public Notices The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at 777-7123, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's office at 777-7123. A one (1) week notice is required. If background material is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00 p.m. meeting. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7 AgendaMdoc PH #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 23, 2006 CASE NO: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 34416 & VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2006-033 APPLICANT: DAVID CHAPMAN INVESTMENTS, LLC PROPERTY OWNER: DAVID CHAPMAN INVESTMENTS, LLC REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF DENIAL TO DISAPPROVE PROPOSED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 34416 & VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2006-033 ENGINEER: ESSI SHAHANDEH, KELLEHER MAPPING ARCHITECT: PREST VUKSIC ARCHITECTS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: RGA LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF AVENUE 52 & DESERT CLUB DRIVE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THESE PROJECTS ARE EXEMPT FROM CEQA REVIEW UNDER GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (INFILL DEVELOPMENT) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: VC (VILLAGE COMMERCIAL) ZONING: VC (VILLAGE COMMERCIAL) SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH - VC/ VACANT AND RL/ EXISTING RESIDENTIAL SOUTH - RL/ EXISTING RESIDENTIAL EAST - VC/ EXISTING RESTAURANT WEST - VC/ EXISTING OFFICE BUILDINGS PAReports - PC\2006\5-23-06\Palmer's TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Business Item\5-23-06 Staff Report VUP 06-033 TPM 34416 Denial.rtf BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission first heard this item during their April 11, 2006 meeting with the direction for staff to further review the parking, exterior lighting, and prior case history, and for the applicant to provide exhibits identifying site -lines and building perspectives. The applicants conducted the site -line perspectives study on April 18, 2006, with staff and neighbors in attendance. During the May 9, 2006 Planning Commission hearing, after reviewing the site -line study and hearing additional testimony from neighbors, the Commission voted 3-2 to direct staff to draft a Resolution of denial for the two-story office building, to be heard as a business item during the next Planning Commission hearing. The Commission left open the possibility for the applicant to provide a revised project with a reduced impact that could better mitigate their concerns. Calle Barcelona Vacation Since the May 9, 2006 Planning Commission hearing, a third party has applied for a vacation of the Calle Barcelona stub street, identified on the northwest corner of proposed Tentative Parcel Map 34416. The purpose of this street vacation is purportedly to construct a potential office building to the north of this site. The location of this existing right-of-way has the potential to be incorporated into a modified office site plan, as it could provide access to the rear parking area. Tentative Parcel Map 34416 Request: The first portion of this proposal involves the division of the Palmer's Restaurant property into a two -parcel layout (Attachment 1). Parcel 1, the location of the proposed office building and parking lot, is proposed at 44,074 SF in size (1.01 AC) and Parcel 2, the existing restaurant and parking lot, is proposed at 172,553 SF in size (3.96 AC). Village Use Permit Office Building Request: The applicant is proposing to construct a two-story, 13,171 square foot commercial office building in the location of the existing landscaped golf feature at the main entrance of the existing Palmer's Restaurant (Attachment 2). The building has been designed to be consistent with the existing Palmer's Restaurant, utilizing the same color palate, Spanish roof tiles, stone facade, wood accents, and landscaping palate. The two story structure has been designed in a "V" shape with individual tenant access via the rear exterior of the structure. The building will be setback 25 feet from the right of way on Avenue 52 and will be setback from five to nine feet from the right-of-way along Desert Club Drive. The highest point of the building is proposed at 35 feet at the center rotunda with a general roofline of 31 feet in height. PAReports - M2006\5-23-06\Palmer's TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Business Item\5-23-06 Staff Report VUP 06-033 TPM 34416 Denial.rtf Analysis: Based upon the direction of the Planning Commission during their May 9, 2006 public hearing, staff has drafted a Resolution of denial based upon the following summarized findings: 1. That approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map and Village Use Permit are not consistent with the City's General Plan land use policy to encourage the preservation of neighborhood character and assure a compatible land use pattern. The proposed two-story office building would establish a significant mass on the corner with a maximum height of 35 feet and is therefore unsuitable for the site. 2. That the existing Environmental Assessment and Village Use Permit did not take into account the addition of a two-story office building on the proposed site and the potentially significant environmental effects resulting from the scale of the project such as vehicular congestion and noise. 3. That the scale of use of the two-story office building will have a significant impact on the existing parking operations and vehicular circulation while providing no additional access points onto Desert Club Drive or Avenue 52, contributing to a cumulative negative impact on noise, traffic, parking, and a situation resulting in congested vehicular circulation, especially during those late afternoon/early evening hours in which the commercial offices close for business and the existing restaurant receives dinnertime patrons. In addition, the project will contribute to increased vehicular trips entering and exiting the site onto Avenue 52, which is currently a busy street with limited visibility due to the sharp angle of the existing street corner. 4. That there are no prior entitlements to subdivide the property or to construct a two-story office building that have been granted to the applicant. The applicant had the opportunity to previously develop this site during the original approvals for the restaurant and did not do so. 5. That the proposed application cannot be declared exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act in that the environmental issues related to the development of a two-story office building will result in cumulative negative impacts from noise and traffic on adjacent residences which stem from the scale of the proposal. 6. That the bulk and massing of the proposed office building detracts from the intended Village concept, as outlined in the Village of La Quinta Design Guidelines, in that the cumulative construction of two-story office structures with minimal setbacks along Desert Club Drive results in a street massing effect which is not suitable for the Village Commercial District. PAReports - M2006\5-23-06\Palmer's TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Business Item\5-23-06 Staff Report VUP 06-033 TPM 34416 Denial.rtf In light of the determinations made at the previous Planning Commission hearing, the Commission stated that they would be willing to review a revised proposal if it were to address the bulk, scale, and size of the building, and address the related issues of traffic congestion, noise, and parking. A revised and reduced scale design, such as a single story structure, would address many of the Commission's concerns with the current building proposal. Additional modifications could be made including incorporating the existing Calle Barcelona right-of-way to serve as direct access into the existing parking lot. Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) Action: On March 20, 2006, the ALRC reviewed the project landscaping and building architecture. On a 2-0-1 vote, the ALRC adopted Minute Motion 2006-010, recommending approval of the proposed project subject to provisions. Public Notice: This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on March 31, 2006. All property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required. No comments have been received as of this report's preparation, though one adjacent property owner has requested to review the project plans over the counter. Any correspondence received interim to the public hearing will be transmitted to the Planning Commission. Public Agency Review: Staff transmitted the applicant's request to all responsible and concerned public agencies. All comments received are on file at the Community Development Department, and have been incorporated into the attached Conditions of Approval, as appropriate. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Based on the provisions of the General Plan, Zoning Code, and the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines, findings necessary to approve a denial of this proposal can be made as noted in the attached Resolution to be adopted for the project. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006- , disapproving the subdivision of ±4.97 acres into two commercial parcels and disapproving a request for a 13,171 square foot commercial office building within the Village Commercial District. P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\Palmer's TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Business Item\5-23-06 Staff Report VUP 06-033 TPM 34416 Denial.rtf Transmitted by: And I Mogensen As ciate Planner Attachments: Tentative Parcel Map 34416 Architectural Packet P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\Palmer's TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Business Item\5-23-06 Staff Report VUP 06-033 TPM 34416 Denial.rtf PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DISAPPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF ±4.97 ACRES INTO TWO COMMERCIAL PARCELS AND DISAPPROVING A REQUEST FOR A 13,171 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING WITHIN THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. CASE NO.: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 34416 AND VILLAGE USE PERMIT VUP 02006-033 APPLICANT: DAVID CHAPMAN INVESTMENTS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 25`h day of April 2006, and on the 9" and 23rd days of May, 2006 hold duly noticed public hearings to consider a request by David Chapman Investments to approve Tentative Parcel Map 34416 and Village Use Permit 2006-033 to allow for the division of 4.97± acres into two parcels and construction of a 13,171 square foot office building on the northeast corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 1" day of July 1997, grant final map approval for Tract 28470-1, by adoption of Minute Order 97-115; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 6`" day of February 2001, certify a Negative Declaration of environmental impact with Environmental Assessment 2000-071, General Plan Amendment 2000-071, Zone Change 2000-096, and Village Use Permit 2000-04 by adoption of Resolution No. 2001-04, Resolution No. 2001-05, Ordinance No. 352, and Resolution No. 2001- 06, approving the existing Palmer's Restaurant in its current form; and WHEREAS, approved Village Use Permit 2000-04 identified the proposed project site to be used for a landscaping feature at the front of the existing restaurant; and WHEREAS, the City staff members who processed General Plan Amendment 2000-071, Zone Change 2000-096, and Village Use Permit 2000-04, including Jerry Herman, who was then Community Development Director, and Fred Baker, then and now a Principal Planner, have indicated that David Chapman Investments and its consultants did not, at the time they were processing those requests, indicate that their intention was to ultimately develop the southwestern portion of the property into a two-story commercial office building or otherwise propose any development that would be inconsistent with the use of the site as a landscape feature; and City Council Resolution No. 2006- TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Adopted: May 23, 2006 Page 2 WHEREAS, there is not sufficient evidence in the record that David Chapman Investments intended to (or communicated to the City its intention to) develop the property as a two-story commercial office development, particularly in light of the fact that approved Village Use Permit 2000-04 called for the location of the proposed office building to be developed as a landscape feature; and WHEREAS, in Chapter 2 of the General Plan, Land Use Elements, the purpose of land use in the Village Commercial designation states that "the intent of this designation is to ... help create a village atmosphere in the traditional core of the City;" and WHEREAS, the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines, Section 2C, calls for "variations in floor levels, steps and stairs, building faces, roof forms, and other treatments that help create the appearance of a smaller project" and states that "building mass and scale shall be compatible with that of surrounding structures, "and WHEREAS, Chapter 2 of the General Plan, Land Use Elements, directs the Planning Commission to Apply the City's discretionary powers and site development review process consistently to assure that subdivision and development plans are compatible with existing residential areas, "and WHEREAS, the City's Parking Ordinance specifies that the proposed office building provide a minimum number of parking spaces as required under Chapter 9.150.060 and the proposed Village Use Permit does not provide the adequate number of parking spaces on the office building parcel resulting in the need for a joint parking agreement which will intensify parking on the adjacent parcel and increase use of off -site parking; and WHEREAS, there is testimony in the record that adjacent homeowners have experienced negative impacts related to nuisances of traffic, parking, and noise based upon their proximity to the existing restaurant and have testified that a two- story office building would contribute to a cumulative effect of these nuisances due to the intensified use of this site; and WHEREAS, the Guidelines to the California Environmental Quality Act, contained in Article 19, Section 15332, provide that infill development projects may be categorically exempt from CEQA only if there is substantial evidence in the record that (among other requirements) the surrounding residential land uses are urban in nature and that approval of the project would not result in a significant impact on parking, traffic, noise, and air quality; and City Council Resolution No. 2006- TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Adopted: May 23, 2006 Page 3 WHEREAS there is testimony in the record from adjacent homeowners that the proposed two-story office building would contribute to environmental factors such as noise, light glare, traffic congestion, and intensified parking; and WHEREAS, Environmental Assessment 2000-071 did not address the impact of removing landscaped open space from Palmer's Restaurant, nor did this Environmental Assessment address noise, air quality, water quality, parking, or traffic circulation impacts in the event that a new two-story office building would be constructed in the proposed location in proximity to residential uses; and WHEREAS, upon hearing and consideration of all testimony, evidence, and arguments presented, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard and based upon the entire record for this application, the following facts exist which justify disapproval of Tentative Parcel Map 34416 and Village Use Permit 2006-033: 1. Approval of the proposed Village Use Permit for a two-story office building will create visual conditions of increased mass and scale which would be incompatible with the existing residential properties which are predominantly single story and are located in an adjacent Low Density Residential zoning district. 2. That approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map and Village Use Permit are not consistent with the City's General Plan land use policies of encouraging the preservation of neighborhood character and maintaining a village atmosphere in that the intensity of use of the proposed development will contribute to effects such as noise, parking incompatibilities, and increased vehicular trips. 3. The site is not physically suitable for this scale of development in that the prior entitlement for this site required that the site would be used for landscape purposes and provided a visually compatible transition with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. The application does not provide for adequate parking operations to accommodate the proposed intensity of use, especially during late afternoon/early evening hours in which the proposed offices would typically close for business and the existing restaurant receives dinnertime patrons. 5. That based on evidence in the record, including testimony of and letters from nearby property owners, the construction of a proposed two-story office building may have an impact on noise, traffic, and circulation that has not been subject to environmental review in that the construction of an office building City Council Resolution No. 2006- TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Adopted: May 23, 2006 Page 4 on current landscape -restricted property will be in proximity to existing residences that have testified about noise and traffic issues relating to the existing approved restaurant use. 6. These impacts were not analyzed in the Environmental Assessment nor in prior environmental documentation. For this reason, the potential cumulative effect of a decision to approve this project must be analyzed as part of the project's environmental review documentation. The project's traffic, parking, and circulation impacts are not sufficiently analyzed. Environmental Assessment 2000-071 is therefore unable to be relied upon for this project because it does not constitute an adequate informational document to permit the Planning Commission to approve the project based on the potential impacts that may be associated with the proposed project. 7. That the project is determined not to be exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, Article 19, Section 15332. Specifically, the record does not contain substantial evidence that the project site is surrounded by urban uses and that approval of the project would not result in a significant impact on parking, traffic, noise, and air quality. Additionally, the City cannot make the finding required by Subdivision (a) of Section 15332 which requires that the project be consistent with applicable zoning regulations in that the proposed project does not provide the required on -site parking on the office parcel as required by Zoning Code Section 9.150.060. 8. That there is no feasible method to mitigate or avoid the impacts identified in findings above other than by denying Tentative Parcel Map 34416 and Village Use Permit 2006-033 because, including without limit, there has been insufficient prior environmental analysis relating to noise, air quality, water quality, or traffic circulation impacts caused by the addition of a two-story office building. 9. The facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at public hearings, the staff presentations and staff report, all materials in the project files, and the testimony and written correspondence and telephone messages left by area residents, and the applicant. There is no other substantial evidence, nor are there other facts that detract from the findings made in this Resolution and the City Council expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. City Council Resolution No. 2006- TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Adopted: May 23, 2006 Page 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of said Planning Commission in this case. In addition, pursuant to La Quinta Municipal Code Section 13.12.130, the City further finds as follows: A. The proposed Tentative Parcel Map and Village Use Permit are not consistent with the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan for, among others, the reasons outlined above; B. The design or improvement of the proposed Village Use Permit is not consistent with the surrounding residential area for, among others, the reasons stated above; C. The proposed office building or the proposed improvements may cause substantial environmental damage; D. The design of the proposed improvements may cause serious quality of life problems due to the increase in traffic and noise; E. The site is not physically suitable for the type of development for the reasons stated above; 2. That the Village Use Permit application would create conditions and impacts which cannot be avoided. 3. The Planning Commission disapproves of Tentative Parcel Map 34416 and Village Use Permit 2006-033 based upon these findings. 4. That the Planning Commission issues this denial without prejudice so that the applicant could re -submit a modified application and associated documents. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California held on the 18th of April, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Iki Is] *5l City Council Resolution No. 2006- TPM 34416 & VUP 06-033 Adopted: May 23, 2006 Page 6 ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R. EVANS Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California PH #B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 23, 2006 CASE NO.: SIGN APPLICATION 2005-932 APPLICANT: CHAD ADDINGTON, SIGN-A-RAMA (FOR VISTA DE MONTANA) REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A SIGN PROGRAM TO SERVE TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS IN THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: BACKGROUND: NORTH SIDE OF CALLE AMIGO & WEST OF DESERT CLUB DRIVE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL/VC DISTRICT THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15311, CLASS 11, OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR ON -PREMISE SIGNS. THEREFORE, NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION IS NECESSARY. This item was continued from the previous Planning Commission hearing held on May 9, 2006 because the applicant had stated he did not receive the staff report and attachments prior to the meeting, and the Commission had questions about the size of the un-permitted PMAC Mortgage sign on the building. The additional information regarding the PMAC Mortgage sign has been provided and incorporated into this report. The project site is located at the northwest corner of Calle Amigo and Desert Club Drive. One of the two Vista De Montana buildings has been completed and is located on the corner. The uncompleted second building will be located immediately to the west on Calle Amigo. Each of the Vista De Montana buildings consist of 6,800 square feet of tenant space, with a maximum eight tenants per building, four per floor. The existing 24.9 square foot Dyson and Dyson signs, placed on the south and east elevations of the existing building, were approved under Sign Application 05-898. At the time of that application in May of 2005, Dyson and Dyson had been assumed to be the sole building tenant and no sign program was proposed. PAReports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SA 05-932\SA 2005-932 Revised Staff Report.doc The existing 18 square foot PMAC Lending sign, located on the north elevation of the existing building has been installed without an approved sign permit. An application was applied for after installation under Sign Application 05-910. That sign application will be required to conform to whichever sign program is approved by the Planning Commission. Upper row lettering on the PMAC sign is 20 inches in height, ten inches higher than both the applicant's proposed sign program and the staff sign program proposal. The applicant will be responsible for bringing the existing PMAC Lending sign into conformance with the approved sign program. APPLICANT'S SIGN PROGRAM PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing a sign program permitting a total of nine possible tenant signs on each of the two buildings and two monument signs. This proposal would result in a total of 182 square feet of on -building signage and two, 24 square foot sandstone slab monuments. First floor tenant signs would be permitted a maximum area of 25 square feet each. Second floor tenant signs would be permitted a maximum area of 15 square feet each. Also under the applicant's proposed sign program, a maximum of 12 square feet of sign area would be permitted on the tower features. Signs would all consist of % inch thick black acrylic lettering, stud mounted flush to the wall. Letters would be limited to a maximum height of 10 inches. Corporate logos with color would be permissible with a maximum height of 22 inches. Since the maximum lettering size is ten inches, the maximum sign area would permit double rows of ten inch lettering. The applicant's two proposed Vista De Montana center identification monument signs would utilize the same black acrylic lettering as the building, mounted on a sandstone slab not to exceed four feet in height. Tenants would not be permitted to utilize the proposed monument signs. Details regarding the actual type of lettering used on the monument signs have not been identified in the applicant's proposed sign program. The applicant's proposed elevations are inconsistent with the proposed sign program. While the sign program limits maximum lettering area and lettering size, the elevations identify maximum sign area as being 75% of the total fascia width, a conflict which would allow much larger sign areas on the building. In review of the sign program, staff had recommended the applicant provide a number of revisions to the sign program, including consistent details and clearer definitions as to permitted sign placement, but the applicant has elected not to do so. As a result, staff has edited a recommended sign program as an alternative to the applicant's proposal. PAReports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SA 05-932\SA 2005-932 Revised Staff Report.doc STAFF ALTERNATIVE SIGN PROGRAM: Staff has drafted a recommended alternative sign program which clarifies details, removes signs from being placed on the buildings' tower features, and reduced the permitted sign area allowed for second story tenants to a single line of text. Lettering size remains at the applicant's proposed maximum ten inch height. STAFF COMMENTS: As an alternative to listing a number of revisions to be made to the applicant's proposed sign program, staff has written an alternative proposal which clarifies a number of items which should reduce any issues that may arise once the individual tenants apply for their individual permits. Staff's draft of the sign program does not include revisions to the sign program elevations, which staff is recommending the applicant revise to be consistent with the approved sign program. FINDINGS: The following findings can be made in support of the proposed SA 2005-932 with the recommended conditions of approval: A. Sign Application 2005-932 is consistent with the purpose and intent of Chapter 9.160 in that it does not conflict with the standards as set forth in said Chapter. B. Sign Application 2005-932 is harmonious with and visually related to all signs as proposed under the Sign Program since proposed are common letter type and size, color and location of signs. C. Sign Application 2005-932 is harmonious with and visually related to the subject building as the scale of the signs and letter color used accentuate the building design. D. Sign Application 2005-932 is harmonious with and visually related to surrounding development, as it will not adversely affect surrounding land uses. E. Sign adjustments to Sign Application 2005-932 can be made in that the proposed signs improve the overall appearance of the project, facilitates good design, provides an orderly and concise signing pattern, and facilitates compatibility with the building architecture. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2006- approving Sign Application 2005-932, subject to the following conditions: P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SA 05-932\SA 2005-932 Revised Staff Report.doc 1. The staff revision of the Vista De Montana Sign Program shall be the approved sign program for SA 05-932. 2. Sign program elevations shall be revised to be consistent with the approved sign program. Revised sign program elevations shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to the sign program final approval. 3. Final sign plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval prior to issuance of a building permit for the signs. 4. Distribution of the sign locations to each of the tenants shall be the responsibility of the landlord. Attachments: 1 . Applicant's Proposed Sign Program 2. Staff Recommended Revision of the Sign Program (edited text in italics) 3. Sign Program Elevations 4. Site Photos Prepared by: An J. Mogensen Atsociate Planner P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SA 05-932\SA 2005-932 Revised Staff Report.doc ATTACHMENT SIGN PROGRAM for VISTA de MONTANA EAST & WEST 51-625 DESERT CLUB DR. & 78-080 CALLE AMIGO LA QUINTA, CA 92253 Prepared by: (approved vendor) Sign -A -Rama 41-945 Boardwalk, Ste. L Palm Desert, CA 92211 Phone: (760) 776-9907 Fax: (760) 776-9844 E-mail: info@pdsignarama.com A. INTRODUCTION The intent of this Sign Program is to provide guidelines necessary to assure visually appealing signage and achieve a uniform appearance for the benefit of all tenants. This Sign Program shall be strictly enforced and any non -conforming signs shall be removed or brought into conformity by the Tenant or its sign contractor at the Tenant's expense, upon demand by the Landlord. B. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. At the discretion of the landlord & the City of La Quinta Planning Department, each tenant is permitted a maximum of two (2) permanent exterior wall signs. The total quantity, maximum size, type, color and locations of signs shall not deviate from the requirements set forth herein. 2. Prior to sign fabrication or installation, Tenant shall submit two (2) copies of the proposed sign for Landlord's approval. Drawings must include sign location, size, layout, design and color, including all lettering and/or graphics. 3. Upon Landlord's approval, Tenant shall obtain all applicable permits from the applicable government agency prior to sign installation. 4. All costs for signs, installation and permits shall be at the sole expense of the Tenant. 5. Tenant is responsible for fulfillment of all requirements of this Sign Program. Page 1 of 3 Revised 2-8-06 ATTACHMENT 1 C. DETAIL REQUIREMENTS, MAIN TENANT SIGN, BUILDINGS 1 and 2 Non -Illuminated, Individual Cut-out Letters/Logo. Material: Black Acrylic, stud mounted flush to wall. Letter/Logo Thickness: 1 /2 inch Maximum Letter Height: 10 inches Maximum Logo Height (as applicable): 22 inches Typestyle: Optional at approval of landlord & City of La Quinta 1. Signs shall be permitted only in area designated on elevation drawings. (Attachments 1, 2, 3 & 4) 2. Maximum sign copy area: a. Maximum overall sign size for first floor signs other than tower area shall not exceed 24 inches in height nor 25 square feet in total area. Maximum width of sign shall not exceed 75% of the width of the fascia panel or upon which it is placed. b. Maximum overall sign size for tower area sign shall not exceed 24 inches in height nor 6 feet in width. C. Maximum overall sign size for second floor signs shall not exceed 18 inches in height nor 10 feet in width. d. Upon landlord and applicable government agency approval, tenant may use federally registered corporate logos and colors for their signage. 3. Signage shall be attached to building surface using threaded blind studs secured with 100% clear silicone adhesive. 4. Upon removal of any wall sign, the building surface shall be cleaned of adhesive, patched as necessary and painted to match its original condition at Tenant's sole expense. D. DETAIL REQUIREMENTS, SECONDARY TENANT SIGNAGE For purposes of business identification, Tenant will be permitted to place upon glass window panel adjacent to the entrance door to its premises Avery Ivory Opaque vinyl lettering not to exceed four (4) square feet in area. Letters shall not exceed four (4) inches in height and copy shall indicate business name, hours of business, emergency telephone, etc. Typestyle shall be optional. Page 2 of 3 Revised 2-8-06 ATTACHMENT 1 E. PROHIBITED SIGNS 1. Signs which rotate, move, flash, reflect, blink or appear to do any of the foregoing, including searchlights, shall be prohibited unless required by law or utilized by a proper government agency. 2. Temporary banners or portable freestanding signs shall be prohibited. 3. Signs on public property, in the public right-of-way or on public utility poles are prohibited unless authorized by applicable government agencies. This prohibition shall include all portable signs placed on vehicles with the exception of vehicle identification. F. CENTER IDENTIFICATION SIGNS Two (2) single sided freestanding monument signs (one for each building) not to exceed twenty-four (24) square feet in area nor four (4) feet in height, shall be permitted for center & building identification only. These signs are not intended for tenant identification. (Attachments 5 & 6) Page 3 of 3 Revised 2-8-06 ATTACHMENT1 SIGN PROGRAM for VISTA de MONTANA EAST & WEST 51-625 DESERT CLUB DR. & 78-080 CALLE AMIGO LA QUINTA, CA 92253 Prepared by: (approved vendor) Sign -A -Rama 41-945 Boardwalk, Ste. L Palm Desert, CA 92211 Phone: (760) 776-9907 Fax: (760) 776-9844 E-mail: info@pdsignarama.com Ell The intent of this Sign Program is to provide guidelines necessary to assure visually appealing signage and achieve a uniform appearance for the benefit of all tenants. This Sign Program shall be strictly enforced and any non -conforming signs shall be removed or brought into conformity by the Tenant or its sign contractor at the Tenant's expense, upon demand by the Landlord. B. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS At the discretion of the landlord & the City of La Quinta Planning Department, each tenant is permitted a maximum of two (2) permanent exterior wall signs. The total quantity, maximum size, type, color and locations of signs shall not deviate from the requirements set forth herein. 2. Prior to sign fabrication or installation, Tenant shall submit two (2) copies of the proposed sign for Landlord's approval. Drawings must include sign location, size, layout, design and color, including all lettering and/or graphics. 3. Upon Landlord's approval, Tenant shall obtain all applicable permits from the applicable government agency prior to sign installation. 4. All costs for signs, installation and permits shall be at the sole expense of the Tenant. 5. Tenant is responsible for fulfillment of all requirements of this Sign Program. Page I of 3 Revised 2-8-06 ATTACHMENTI C. DETAIL REQUIREMENTS, MAIN TENANT SIGN, BUILDINGS 1 and 2 Non -Illuminated, Individual Cut-out Letters/Logo. Material: Black Acrylic, stud mounted flush to wall. Letter/Logo Thickness: 1 /2 inch Maximum Letter Height: 10 inches Maximum Logo Height (as applicable): 22 inches Typestyle: Optional at approval of landlord & City of La Quinta 1. Signs shall be permitted only in area designated on elevation drawings. (Attachments 1, 2, 3 & 4) 2. Maximum sign copy area: a. Maximum overall sign size for first floor signs other than tower area shall not exceed 24 inches in height nor 25 square feet in total area. Maximum width of sign shall not exceed 75% of the width of the fascia panel or upon which it is placed. b. Maximum overall sign size for tower area sign shall not exceed 24 inches in height nor 6 feet in width. C. Maximum overall sign size for second floor signs shall not exceed 18 inches in height nor 10 feet in width. d. Upon landlord and applicable government agency approval, tenant may use federally registered corporate logos and colors for their signage. 3. Signage shall be attached to building surface using threaded blind studs secured with 100% clear silicone adhesive. 4. Upon removal of any wall sign, the building surface shall be cleaned of adhesive, patched as necessary and painted to match its original condition at Tenant's sole expense. D. DETAIL REQUIREMENTS, SECONDARY TENANT SIGNAGE For purposes of business identification, Tenant will be permitted to place upon glass window panel adjacent to the entrance door to its premises Avery Ivory Opaque vinyl lettering not to exceed four (4) square feet in area. Letters shall not exceed four (4) inches in height and copy shall indicate business name, hours of business, emergency telephone, etc. Typestyle shall be optional. Page 2 of 3 Revised 2-8-06 ATTACHMENT 1 E. PROHIBITED SIGNS 1. Signs which rotate, move, flash, reflect, blink or appear to do any of the foregoing, including searchlights, shall be prohibited unless required by law or utilized by a proper government agency. 2. Temporary banners or portable freestanding signs shall be prohibited. 3. Signs on public property, in the public right-of-way or on public utility poles are prohibited unless authorized by applicable government agencies. This prohibition shall include all portable signs placed on vehicles with the exception of vehicle identification. F. CENTER IDENTIFICATION SIGNS Two (2) single sided freestanding monument signs lone for each building) not to exceed twenty-four (24) square feet in area nor four (4) feet in height, shall be permitted for center & building identification only. These signs are not intended for tenant identification. (Attachments 5 & 6) Page 3 of 3 Revised 2-8-06 ATTACHMENT 2 SIGN PROGRAM (Staff Version) for VISTA de MONTANA EAST & WEST 51-625 DESERT CLUB DR. & 78-080 CALLE AMIGO LA QUINTA, CA 92253 A. INTRODUCTION The intent of this Sign Program is to provide guidelines necessary to assure visually appealing signage and achieve a uniform appearance for the benefit of all tenants. This Sign Program shall be strictly enforced and any non -conforming signs shall be removed or brought into conformity by the Tenant or its sign contractor at the Tenant's expense, upon demand by the Landlord and/or the City of La Quinta. B. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. At the discretion of the landlord & the City of La Quinta Community Development Department, each tenant is permitted a maximum of two (2) permanent exterior wall signs (maximum 1 sign per elevation). The total quantity, maximum size, type, color and locations of signs shall not deviate from the requirements set forth herein. 2. Prior to sign fabrication or installation, Tenant shall submit two (2) copies of the proposed sign for Landlord's approval. Drawings must include sign location, size, layout, design and color, including all lettering and/or graphics. 3. Upon Landlord's approval, Tenant shall obtain all applicable permits from the City of La Quinta prior to sign installation. 4. All costs for signs, permits, and installation shall be at the sole expense of the Tenant. 5. Tenant is responsible for fulfillment of all requirements of this Sign Program. C. DETAIL REQUIREMENTS, MAIN TENANT SIGN, BUILDINGS 1 and All signs shall be non -illuminated, individual cut-out letters/logo only. Material. Black Acrylic, stud mounted flush to wall Letter/Logo Thickness: 112 inch ATTACHMENT 2 Maximum Letter Height: 10 inches Maximum Logo Height Second 12 inches Floor (as applicable): Maximum Logo Height First Floor (as applicable): 22 inches Typestyle: Optional at approval of landlord & City of La Quinta 1. Signs shall be permitted only within areas designated on elevation drawings. (Refer to elevations) 2. Maximum sign copy area: a. Maximum overall sign area for first floor letterin shall not exceed two rows of 10 inch lettering text within a space allowance of 24 inches in height and 10 feet in width. First floor logos shall not exceed 3.3 square feet in area. b. Signs shall not be permitted on or within tower areas. C. Maximum overall sign area for second floor lettering shall only be allowed on the south elevations and shall not exceed a single row of 10 inch lettering text within a space allowance of 12 inches in height and six (6) feet in width. Second floor logos shall not exceed one (1) square foot in size. d. Upon landlord and applicable government agency approval, tenant may use federally registered corporate logos and colors for their signage. 3. Signage shall be attached to building surface using threaded blind studs secured with 100% clear silicone adhesive. 4. Upon removal of any wall sign, the building surface shall be cleaned of adhesive, patched and/or painted as necessary to match the original condition at Tenant's sole expense. 5. Sign lettering shall be centered on the fascia at a location consistent with the requesting tenant's leased space. D. DETAIL REQUIREMENTS, SECONDARY TENANT SIGNAGE For purposes of business identification, Tenant will be permitted to place upon glass window panel adjacent to the entrance door to its premises Avery Ivory ATTACHMENT 2 Opaque vinyl lettering not to exceed four (4) square feet in area. Letters shall not exceed four (4) inches in height and copy shall indicate business name, hours of business, emergency telephone, etc. Typestyle shall be optional. E. PROHIBITED SIGNS 1. Signs which rotate, move, flash, reflect, blink or appear to do any of the foregoing, including searchlights, shall be prohibited unless required by law or utilized by a proper government agency. 2. Temporary banners or portable freestanding signs shall be prohibited. 3. Signs on public property, in the public right-of-way, or on public utility poles are prohibited. This prohibition shall include all portable signs placed on vehicles with the exception of vehicle identification. F. CENTER IDENTIFICATION SIGNS Two (2) single -sided freestanding monument signs (one for each building) not to exceed twenty-four (24) square feet in area nor four (4) feet in height, shall be permitted for center & building identification only. Monument signs shall utilize pin -mounted lettering set 2" off the rock. These signs are for center identification only and shall not include tenant identification. One freestanding monument sign shall be permitted per street frontage. I-4 m rn 41a 1119 y z � N CD I� m 4z a 'e. 1 I I I �T 9991 91 I I �M2sa2 k§| !§| iA-§ 290 ! + , < � � E� w � k § ƒ g� � � .. � q »- m � �\ rn rn a |2 � � { q � 2e } = H m/ k|�) / `2 $( §f M 8 f 9e .2 §{�§ 00 § ^ !21) M. { Is± m Z S 3 N m a tgms W < ZZc m zy! 3 a a a Y � � 6 U m g _ K � n r s Y D ? O 4 Z S V r � CD T. 3 3 3' o+ o��.0cn � atcn _ 0 CD C- W low CVN �= 3towoo !'17 co � o :3x CDo w cno- -o v CD n (n � c0 c CD c :3 � � , .... No• _ ..,� o a=cc N CD � CA 0 :3 VA" CP co CD r. CA� i o CD CD 'CD + X cD N. .0 N COD N N C1c'�, CD N N D Mot- 3 D f z -i, O CD �r� CDCD N r-► r __ .+ 3' CD C N C1 � Q � O 3• r y CD O. 3 3 •••,� _ v m co O W N -� cocoO 00 CD C1 — C Co no.w: 3Nc-o03 o � �' 00 co � 0 M X CD � �r�► cn Y rn (DO f �� - mm � 4 �� Nro ! moovuuowouom•o cx __ % vo3nondl i _ - �s•3, i i.mngyylnpnri. • ljl �,,$,� � ,y � •,� I �` i i f. w t tna � Is vx • oe. Y _ �f i I i li i U) C z V Q m m r Q Z m Z x o Q x r'�:i56( PH #C STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 23, 2006 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-859 REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR TWO RETAIL SHOPS AND TENANT STORAGE LOCATION: BOUNDED BY HIGHWAY 111, WASHINGTON STREET AND ADAMS STREET WITHIN THE ONE ELEVEN LA QUINTA CENTER LEGAL: PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP #31047 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: SHOVLIN DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-319 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 89-014, AMENDMENT NO. 2 ONE ELEVEN LA QUINTA SPECIFIC PLAN. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS AND NO NEW INFORMATION IS PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL AS SESSMENT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC) SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: FLOODPLAIN (FP)/STORM CHANNEL SOUTH: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)/COMMERCIAL USES EAST: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)/COMMERCIAL USES UNDER CONSTRUCTION WEST: COMMUNITYCOMMERCIAL CC)/COMMERCIAL PAReports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SDP 06-859\PC staff rpt. SDP 2006-859.doc I BACKGROUND: This project will be located on a vacant pad as one of the latter phases of the One Eleven La Quinta commercial development originally approved in December of 1989 and later amended in July of 1996. This phase of the site is located between the uncompleted Petco pet store approved by the Commission on September 27, 2005, and the existing Legacy Furniture store (former movie theater) at the center of the project. Project access will be via existing signaled driveways on Highway 1 1 1. The parking layout and count was previously approved for the commercial center as a whole and has been completed. The request is for approval to construct 8,003 square feet of retail space for two tenants and 2,777 square feet of interior storage space to be used exclusively by existing tenants. The applicant does not have information regarding a potential tenant for the proposed retail space at this time. The applicant has submitted a letter dated May 17, 2006 requesting this item be continued in order to allow additional time to revise the project as per staff and ALRC direction. Architectural and Landscape Design The proposed architectural design is similar in style to other buildings in the One Eleven La Quinta commercial center and is consistent with the One Eleven La Quinta Specific Plan. The building is proposed to have stuccoed facades at the front, side, and rear in the same colors and style as previous phases. Pedestrian access along the front will be covered by a flat roof hidden with a parapet and supported by stuccoed columns. Store entries will be covered by a two-piece red clay tile roof. Lighting will utilize the same sconce fixtures as placed on other existing buildings in the development. The sides and rear of the structure will be stuccoed with a double parapet feature. The highest point of the building, at the top of the front parapet, is proposed to be 22 feet. The rear storage portion of the building will have an 18 foot parapet. Actual roof line will range from three to five feet below parapet height in order to provide screening for mechanical units. Landscaping is already in place for the development, though the project will include landscaped areas at the front and east elevation. In the front of the store, Bougainvilleas will be placed in front of and between the pillars. An acacia tree and some decorative grasses will be placed adjacent to the sidewalk access between the existing Legacy Furniture and the proposed shops. Access and Loading Due to the existing side doors, ramp, and fire access at the adjacent Legacy Furniture, an access path has been installed along the east elevation of this phase. A sidewalk, focused security lighting, and landscaping will be placed along the east elevation to tie P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SDP 06-859\PC staff rpt. SDP 2006-859.doc 2 into the west and front elevations of the existing Legacy Furniture store, which are currently landscaped. The trash enclosure will be shifted closer to the building due to the access ramp and loading zone from the existing Legacy Furniture building. Tenant storage space has been conditioned for the exclusive use of shopping center tenants. All but two of the storage units are being revised in order to be accessed via a central corridor. Loading and unloading will be from the rear of the building. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW: The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of May 3, 2006 (Attachment 2). The Committee adopted Minute Motion 2006-018 recommending approval with the following conditions: 1. Landscaping shall be installed along the storefront. Bougainvilleas shall be attached to the front columns as a vertical element. Plantings shall be placed between the front columns. 2. All roof top mechanical equipment shall be fully screened per Section 9.100.050 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Tenant lockers shall be revised to be accessed from the interior corridor where possible and the rear entries shall be utilized for access to the interior Corridor. 4. Landscaping and lighting in accord with the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance shall be provided along the sidewalk between this proposed phase and the existing Legacy Furniture store. PUBLIC NOTICE: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on May 12, 2006. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice. ANALYSIS AND ISSUES: The developer has requested continuing the item in order to provide for additional time to complete revisions to the site plan. The site plan that has been submitted to the Planning Commission is currently undergoing revisions intended to address the concerns of the ALRC Committee and provide further clarification as to the proposed site in relation to the adjacent Legacy Furniture store and Petco pet supply store under construction. R\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SDP 06-859\PC staff rpt. SDP 2006-859.doc 3 RECOMMENDATION: Continue the requested Site Development Permit request until the June 13, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, as requested by the developer. Attachments: 1. Initial Submittal Plans and Elevations 2. Letter from the Applicant Requesting Continuance 3. Minutes for the May 3, 2006 ALRC meeting Prepared by J. Mogensen, e Planner PAReports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SDP 06-859\PC staff rpt. SDP 2006-859.doc 4 �Y-17-2006 WED 09:25 AM SHOVLIN COMPANIES FAX NO, 7601 ATTACHMENT 2 Consolldaited Contracting, Inc. 46-753 Adams Stmet, Le QlAhib, CA 92253 TEL (760) 771-3345 FAX (760) 771-4431 CA Contractor License #8241a3 May 17, 2006 Andrew Mogensen, Associate Planner City of La Quints PO Box 1504 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quints, Ca_ 92247-1504 Re: Can #SDP 06-859 Dear Andrew, Please accept this letter as our request for continuance on the above referenced project allowing us the time to revise our site plans in response to your memorandum identifying Should you have any questions please call me at 760-771-3345. Best % �asey Director of Construction Cc: Michael Shovlin file SAY 1 .�eiauN�.. •• P,-lJ STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 23, 2006 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-809, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES, INC. REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL REVISION AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR A REVISION TO THE EXISTING APPROVAL FOR A CLUBHOUSE FACILITY, ASSOCIATED WITH WATERMARK VILLAS (SP 2003-069) LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF AVENUE 52 AND JEFFERSON STREET (ATTACHMENT 1) ARCHITECT: COLBOURN/CURRIER/NOLL ARCHITECTURE, INC. GENERAL PLAN: MHDR - (MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, UP TO 12 UNITS/ACRE) ZONING: RMH - (MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-486, IN CONJUNCTION WITH APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-069 ON JANUARY 6, 2004, FOR THE WATERMARK VILLAS PROJECT. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE PROPOSED WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THE PREPARATION OF ANY SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT BACKGROUND: Specific Plan 2003-069 and Tentative Tract 31798 were approved by the City Council on January 6, 2004. This approval granted conceptual site plan approval for 250 resort residential condominiums on approximately 21 acres. The project approval also permitted a clubhouse with restaurant site on t 0.4 acres, at the immediate corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52. Site development conditions were placed on the project as part of the Specific Plan and tentative tract map approvals. Site Development Permit 2004-809 was approved by City Council on P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SDP 809 A1\PCrptsdp809A1.doc July 6, 2004 as architectural approval for the residential units, clubhouse and ancillary buildings for the site. The project was subsequently sold to Innovative Communities, which then processed a revision to the project site plan that was approved administratively on January 11, 2006 (Attachment 2). This revision relocated some of the common area amenities and one residential duplex building, and also eliminated a 740 square foot maintenance building and one of two tennis courts. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The existing clubhouse approval is a three -level structure, with an underground cart barn (9,800 s.f.), a 10,000 gross s.f. resident gym on the second level (first floor), and a 6,000 gross s.f. restaurant, with an additional ±4,000 s.f. outdoor patio dining area. The request is to revise the previously approved clubhouse/recreation building to eliminate the cart barn and first floor levels, making the building a single - level structure of approximately 9,500 total interior s.f., plus 1,300 s.f. of outdoor dining area. The building footprint and internal facilities are not significantly changed from the existing approval; the changes primarily affect the size of interior spaces, and exterior architectural appearance related to the building level changes. The building revision reflects the applicant's desire to no longer include a restaurant facility that would be open to the general public; this would be a clubhouse oriented solely to on -site users, and the dining areas have been reduced in size accordingly. The general architectural theme has been retained, but revised to more closely resemble the residential components of the project and reflects a Mediterranean Villa influence. The materials and color scheme will essentially remain as approved; some revisions are necessary due to product availability. The materials/colors for the entire project consist of S-type terra cotta roof tile, stucco exterior wall and trim covering in earth tones, and door and window frames in a medium green color as an accent (refer to previously approved sample sheet). The applicant will present a revised sample board at the meeting. The overall project landscaping is currently in plan check review. The proposed landscape layout and palette is consistent with those plans and the governing approval requirements and documents related to project landscaping. The overall landscape concept is based on retention of the existing date palms and integration into the site design, which has been incorporated with the clubhouse site. In regard to parking, seven additional guest and clubhouse parking stalls were included with the January 11 site plan revision, for a total stall count of 92. The stalls as provided on the site plan are considered adequate for parking needs of the clubhouse, as the public restaurant aspect is no longer proposed and the majority of residential guest parking is provided for around the residential buildings. P:\Reports - PC\200615-23-06\SDP 809 A1\PCrptsdp809A1.doc Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of May 3, 2006, and on a 3-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 2006-016, recommending approval of the proposed project (Attachment 3), with recommended conditions. The ALRC recommendation is as follows: 1. Building height shall not exceed 22 feet from finish grade to the highest point of the building. 2. The chimney extension for the Grand Ballroom fireplace shall not exceed 25 feet in height from finish grade of the building pad. 3. All trellis areas as shown shall incorporate pressure -treated beams. 4. Areas shown as mulch treatment on the landscape plan shall be replaced with decomposed granite or similar material. Public Notice This request is being processed as a Business Item, and no public notice was deemed necessary. A condition of the project Specific Plan requires that any Site Development Permit (SDP) applications be presented to City Council for review as a Business Item. As this is a minor amendment to the original SDP, the same process is being followed in conjunction with the Planning Commission review. Should the decision be appealed, a public hearing would be held as required. Public Agency Review This request was not transmitted to other agencies for comment as the amendment was deemed to be a minor change limited to architectural revisions that do not affect the site layout, design concept or overall project objectives. It relates only to design review elements of the architecture and site landscaping. Technical review for street improvement requirements, dedications, drainage control, etc., was completed as part of the Specific Plan and Tract Map applications, approved in January 2004. These prior conditions (Attachment 4) are incorporated by reference in the conditions prepared for this application RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2006 - _, approving Site Development Permit 2004-809 Amendment #1, subject to the recommended findings and attached conditions. P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SDP 809 Al \PCrptsdp809A1.doc Attachments: 1 . Location Map 2. Approved Overall Site Plan 3. ALRC Minutes of May 3, 2006 (Excerpt) 4. City Council Resolution 2004-071 Conditions of Approval 5. Planning Commission exhibits (PC only) Prepared by: /ti/q. /L/ .� Wallace Nesbit, Principal Planner P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SDP 809 A1\PCrptsdp809A1.doc MINUTE MOTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-809, AMENDMENT #1 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES — WATERMARK VILLAS MAY 23, 2006 FINDINGS 1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed Site Development Permit, as amended, is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan, as it proposes a revision to an approved accessory clubhouse use within an approved residential development, which is General Plan -designated for MHDR (Medium -High Density Residential) development. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed Site Development Permit, as amended and conditioned, is consistent with the development standards of the City's Zoning Code, in terms of architectural style, building heights, building mass, parking, and landscaping. It is also consistent with the governing Watermark Villas Specific Plan (SP 2003-069), in terms of development standards and type of development set forth in said plan. 3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The proposed Site Development Permit, as amended, is not subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as Environmental Assessment 2003-486 was adopted by the City Council on January 6, 2004 (Resolution 2004-005)• No changed circumstances or conditions exist which would require the preparation of any subsequent environmental evaluation. 4. Architectural Design: The architectural design aspects of the proposed Site Development Permit, as amended, provide interest through use of varied roof element heights, accent colors, facade treatments, color roof tiles and other design details which will be compatible with, and not detrimental to, surrounding development, and with the overall design quality prevalent in the City. The revised architecture is reduced in scale and massing, from a three - level to a single -level structure. 5. Site Design: The site design aspects of the proposed Site Development Permit, as amended, are compatible with, and not detrimental to, surrounding development, and with the overall design quality prevalent in the City, in terms of interior circulation, pedestrian access, and other architectural site design elements such as scale, mass, and appearance. The site design is substantially similar to the original approval under the existing Site Development Permit. Minute Motion 2006- Site Development Permit 2004-809, Amendment #1 Conditions of Approval - Recommended May 23, 2006 Page 2 6. Landscape Design: The proposed project is consistent with the landscaping standards and plant palette and implements the standards for landscaping and aesthetics established in the General Plan, Watermark Villas Specific Plan and Zoning Code, and as previously approved for the overall Watermark Villas project. The project landscaping for the Site Development Permit, as amended and conditioned, shall unify and enhance visual continuity of the proposed homes with surrounding development. Landscape improvements are designed and sized to provide visual appeal. The permanent overall site landscaping utilizes various tree and shrub species to accentuate views and blend with the building architecture, and is consistent with the overall landscape concept for the Watermark Villas project as approved. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL 1 . Applicant shall adhere to all prior adopted approval conditions for SDP 2004- 809, adopted by City Council Resolution 2004-071 on July 6, 2004 and which by approval of this Amendment #1, are hereby attached as Exhibit B and incorporated by reference. Said conditions shall be fully applicable in addition to these conditions for said Amendment #1. 2. Approval of this Amendment #1 to SDP 2004-809, shall not extend the approval period granted under the original approval. As such, the approvals granted under SDP 2004-809 shall expire on July 6, 2006. The applicant may file an extension in accordance with the procedures outlined in the La Quinta Municipal Code, relating to Site Development Permits. BUILDING DESIGN 3. Building height shall not exceed 22 feet from finish grade to the highest point of the building. 4. The chimney extension for the Grand Ballroom fireplace shall not exceed 25 feet in height from finish grade of the building pad. 5. All trellis areas as shown shall incorporate pressure -treated beams. O•�On..�.,e crwnna\c 10 AA%CnD Ono Atb.^"nCnOAI A-, Minute Motion 2006- Site Development Permit 2004-809, Amendment #1 Conditions of Approval - Recommended May 23, 2006 Page 3 LANDSCAPING 6. Areas shown as mulch treatment on the landscape plan shall be replaced with decomposed granite or similar material. 7. All box trees specified shall include the appropriate caliper size, as measured at 36 inches above trunk base. Generally, 24-inch box trees shall be a minimum 2.5 inch caliper, with 36-inch box trees at a minimum 3.5 inch caliper. p.jp .n.,n Gl9SnnH\6 11 nR%QnO Gno AI%m—AnQAQA1 Ann ATTACHMENT 50TH AVE. w N SITELd 17 z z 52ND AVE. z _ U- w 53RD AVE. VICINITY MAH NOT TO SCALE SDP 2004-809 - WATERMARK VILLAS ATTACHMENT 3 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA/ May 3, 2006 10:00 a.m. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and,L/andscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:05 a.m. by/Planning Manager Les Johnson. B. Committee Membe/anager ill Bobbitt, Frank Christopher, and Tracy Smith. C. Staff present: PlanLes Johnson, Principal Planners Stan Sawa, Fred BakerNesbit, Associate Planner Andrew Mogensen, and Exery Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT C ENDAR. A. Com ittee Member Smith asked that Page 2 be corrected. There being no of r corrections, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Smitj/Christopher to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2004-809, Amendment No. 1; a request of �. Innovative Communities, Inc. for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for a revision to the existing approval for a clubhouse facility, associated with Watermark Villas for the property located at the northwest corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street. 1. Principal Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Mr. Brad Foman who introduced the project architect and landscape architect who gave a presentation on the project. r-%%A/Gnorq\AI ar%R.vna nor Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee May 3, 2006 2. Committee Member Christopher asked if the density had been changed with this amendment. Staff stated no; the only changes were to the clubhouse. Committee Member Christopher asked why the cartbarn was eliminated. Mr. Foman stated the parking was reduced as it was originally open to the public. Committee Member Christopher asked if the gym facility would be capable of handling all the residents at buildout. Mr. Foman stated it was designed to accommodate the membership. Committee Member Christopher asked how many units would be built. Staff stated 250 units. 3. Committee Member Smith asked the purpose of the mulch. The project landscape architect stated it was to be used where the citrus trees are being used. The material would not be wood chips but a DG or a gravel material. Committee Member Smith said he had no objection to the plant list. 4. Committee Member Christopher asked if the trellis material would be pressure treated glumen or non -wood material. Mr. Foman stated it would not be wood. 5. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2006-016 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2004-809, Amendment No. 1, as recommended and as amended: a. Entrance trellis shall be pressure treated beams or non - wood material. b. The mulch material shall be DG or gravel sly approved. B. Site evelo ment Permit 2003-775; a request of Bill Sanchez, Jack Tarr velopment for consideration of architectural plans for retail shops to ted south of Highway 1 1 1, west of Adams Street, within Washinqtoh Park. Principal lanner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staf eport, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development epartment. Staff introduced Bill Sanchez, who gave a presenta n on the project. 2 r-%%AlGnorq\Ai arkF_q-na nnr ATTACHMENT 4 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2004-071 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-809 ROBERT SELAN - WATERMARK VILLAS JULY 6, 2004 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. The applicant shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation measures, which are incorporated by reference herein, for the following related approvals: • Environmental Assessment 2003-486 • Specific Plan 2003-069 • Tentative Tract Map 31798 In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine precedence. No development permits will be issued until compliance with these conditions has been achieved. 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency City Council Resolution No. 2004-071 Site Development Permit 2004-809 / Watermark Villas LQ, L.L.C. Conditions of Approval - FINAL Adopted: July 6, 2004 Page 2 The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvement plans for City approval. FEES AND DEPOSITS 4. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Art in Public Places program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 5. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). LANDSCAPING 6. Landscape plans as required under the approvals for Tract 31798 and Specific Plan 2003-069 shall include lighting locations and details of all proposed fixtures and mounting. Berms and walls shall be subject to review under the City's applicable development standards in effect at the time of plan submittal. 7. The applicant shall incorporate those measures as outlined in the letter on file dated December 10, 2003, prepared by the Citrus Course Homeowner Association, into the landscape plans, as appropriate. If any measure set forth in said letter conflicts with other City requirements and/or standards, alternative methods of compliance shall be investigated that are commensurate with the original standards, and in the absence of any commensurate alternative, the City standard(s) shall take precedence. In addition, the applicant shall provide 36 inch box trees in lieu of the 24-inch box trees indicated on the landscape plans and as requested by the Citrus Course Homeowner Association in the letter dated June 21, 2004. 8. Landscape and irrigation plans (three copies) shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect, or professional landscape designer, subject to the rules and regulations of Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code. The applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal of the final plans to the City Council Resolution No. 2004-071 Site Development Permit 2004-809 / Watermark Villas LQ, L.L.C. Conditions of Approval - FINAL Adopted: July 6, 2004 Page 3 Community Development Department. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the Community Development Department. BUILDING DESIGN 9. The applicant shall submit detailed building lighting plans to include exterior fixture details. The lighting plan shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of any building permits. 10. Final locations of all structures submitted for plan check shall be reviewed against and meet all setback standards of the RMH zoning district. 11. Provide covered parking for the 7 stalls immediately south of duplex unit. An additional 34 stalls shall be located along the clubhouse access road and at the existing stall locations. All stalls shall be designed in accordance with Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the LQMC, to include double hairpin striping. 12. All roof -mounted mechanical equipment must be screened within or otherwise integral to the roof structure, using compatible architectural materials and treatments, so as to not be visible from surrounding properties and streets. Working drawings showing all such equipment and locations shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department along with construction plan submittal for building permits. Method and design of screening must be approved by the Community Development Department prior to any issuance of building permits related to structures requiring such screening. 13. Applicant shall submit a design and text for a plaque, to designate the historic background of the site as one of the early Valley date groves. The plaque's design, content, materials and mounting/location shall be subject to review by the City as deemed appropriate. Applicant may apply the costs of the plaque to offset Arts in Public Places fees, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 2.65, LQMC. BI #f PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 23, 2006 CASE NO: SPECIFIC PLAN 99-035, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: EAST OF MADISON, LLC LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: VITA PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF AVENUE 52 PERIMETER WALL PLANS ADJACENT TO RECEPTION CENTER/GUARD HOUSE ENTRY AREA LOCATION: AVENUE 52 AND MERIWETHER WAY AREA WITHIN THE MADISON CLUB BACKGROUND: The Madison Club site is located on the east side of Madison Street, between Avenue 52 and Avenue 54. The Madison Club design was approved by the City Council in 2004 as an amendment to Specific Plan 99-035 (The Hideaway) and Tentative Tract Map 33076 with construction of the golf course and infrastructure improvements started. The Avenue 52 and Meriwether Way intersection is the main project entrance from Avenue 52. At this intersection will be the recently approved reception center and gatehouse complex. As part of the center a small parking lot will be provided south of the building. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The Specific Plan approval requires the perimeter walls to be reviewed and approved by the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) and Planning Commission. The applicant has submitted the perimeter wall plans for the area around their Avenue 52 entry (Attachment 1). Plans include a site plan of the entry area, showing the proposed wall, along with elevation views and wall details. The wall around the immediate entry includes an "enhanced" treatment which includes a pre -cast wall cap and narrow decorative cast concrete ornate frieze panels mounted on the surface of the wall at 30 foot intervals. PAReports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SP 99-035 East of Madison\Ave 52 entry walls pc rpt.doc The balance of the walls beyond the "enhanced" portions, as proposed, is a standard 6 foot high heavy sand rough stucco finish wall with no cap, frieze panels or pilasters. Grading for the entry area is relatively flat and just slightly above Avenue 52 street grade. The balance of the Avenue 52 perimeter wall location west of this entry area will be reviewed separately because the wall location and landscaping, as well as the berm it will be located on, is still under review by staff. ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC); The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of May 3, 2006 and on a 3-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 2006-019 recommending approval of the request, subject to the following conditions (Attachment 3). 1. Frieze panels or pilasters shall be provided on the "standard" wall every 100 foot to 150 foot on center facing Avenue 52. 2. The east terminus of the perimeter wall along Avenue 52 shall tie into the Rancho Santana perimeter wall to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. The ALRC deleted the staff recommendation that a cap treatment be provided on the "standard" wall areas based on the applicants statement at the meeting that they were intending to landscape the area in front of the wall heavily so that the wall will not be visible from Avenue 52. DISCUSSION: The enhanced wall appears to be attractive with sufficient architectural treatment. The adjacent "standard" wall is a plastered wall with a heavy finish as proposed. This portion of the wall needs some treatment, such as panels or pilasters 100 feet to 150 feet on center as recommended by the ALRC. Staff still has concerns about the "standard" wall treatment. The "standard" wall surrounds the majority of the project boundaries of the 472 acre project. The requirement for the panels or pilasters will enhance the wall, but staff believes depending on landscaping to screen the wall entirely is not appropriate. Staff has not yet approved the planting plans for the perimeter and it may not be permitted to be so heavily planted that the wall is not visible. Additionally, there are no assurances the planting will remain. A wall cap along the entire, or at least portions of the wall should be provided. P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SP 99-035 East of Madison\Ave 52 entry walls pc rpt.doc RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2006- , approving the entry area wall plans, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Wall plans 3. ALRC minutes for the meeting May 3, 2006 Prepared by: VVy Stan Sawa, Principal Planner P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SP 99-035 East of Madison\Ave 52 entry walls pc rpt.doc MINUTE MOTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 99-035, AMENDMENT #1 (WALL DESIGN) EAST OF MADISON, LLLC ADOPTED: GFNFRAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Frieze panels or pilasters shall be provided on the "standard" wall every 100'-150' on center facing the public street. 3. The east terminus of the perimeter wall along Avenue 52 shall tie into the Rancho Santana perimeter wall to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. 4. This approval includes the design of the "standard" wall. A decorative cap treatment on top of the "standard" wall (it can be different from the "enhanced" wall cap) shall be provided subject to approval of the Community Development Director. 5. The approved wall location is as shown on the wall site plan, and includes the "enhanced" wall entry area, easterly to the Rancho Santana wall and to the west a distance of 40' beyond (northwest of) the caretakers (guardhouse) building. P:\Reports - PC\2006\5-23-06\SP 99-035 East of Madison\Ave 52 entry walls pc coa.doc Z i11+ �•.� u' . c � CASE No. �MADSON CLUB CASE MAP SP 99-035 AMENND#1 ATTACHMENT 1 5z __ _ SITE Rik ,elm SCALE: NTS ATTACHMENT 3 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee May 3, 2006 2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked the' purpose of the building. Mr. Cox explained and discuss followed regarding the building layout. 3. Committee Memb/taff sked if the area between this building and the Lbuilding was large enough to support landscapissed the width of the area between the buildhere was enough area to add some landscaping. 4. There being n further questions of the applicant, it was moved and second by Committee Members Bobbitt/Smith to adopt Minute tion 2006-018 recommending approval of Site Develop ent Permit 2006-859, as recommended. Unanimousl> approved. D. Specific Plan 99-035, Amendment No. 1; a request of East of — Madison, LLC. for consideration of Avenue 52 perimeter wall plans adjacent to the Reception Center/Guard House along Avenue 52 and Meriwether Way, within the Madison Club. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Cynthia Zamorez, Madison Club, and Scott Birdwell, Discovery Land Co., who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Christopher asked what material would be used for the cap on the enhanced wall. Mr. Birdwell stated it would be Masonry with an ornamental detail that turns back to the wall. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked the color of wall. Ms. Zamorez explained the detail and stated the color should be a beige. 4. Committee Member Christopher suggested they use the foam stick -on detail for the top of the "standard" wall. Mr. Birdwell stated they intended to just do a rounded grouted finish instead of a cap. r %%AIPnnrQ%A1 ark N_i_na nnr 4 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee May 3, 2006 5. Committee Member Bobbitt questioned the species of trees proposed and discussion followed. 6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2006-016 recommending approval of Specific Plan 99-035, Amendment No. 1, as recommended. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None Vill. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a regular meeting to be held on June 7, 2006. This meeting was adjourned at 11:03 a.m. on May 3, 2006. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER Executive Secretary r.-%%mannrc\ci ar%F_v_na nnr 5