Loading...
2005 09 07 ALRC� s y OF TK4 ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 10:00 A.M. Beginning Minute Motion 2005-029 CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. 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. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes for the. Regular Meeting of August 3, 2005. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item ....................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-840 Applicant ................ Michael J. Shovlin, Project Manager Location ................. Bounded by Highway 111, Washington Street and Adams Street Request .................. Consideration of architecture and conceptual landscaping plans for a pet shop, supply, and grooming retail commercial building within the One Eleven La Quinta Center. Action .................... Minute Motion 2005- ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE B. Item ....................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-837 Applicant ................ ND La Quinta Partners, LLC Location ................. South side of Avenue 52, midway between Madison Street and Monroe Avenue, within The Madison Club Request .................. Consideration of architectural and landscape plans for a guard house (caretakers residence). Action .................... Minute Motion 2005- C. Item ....................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-838 Applicant ................ Bill Sanchez, Project Manager Location ................. Bounded by Highway 1 1 1, Avenue 47, Washington Street and Adams Street Request .................. Consideration of architectural and conceptual landscaping plans for a retail commercial building featuring one sub -major unit and ten minor units within Washington Park Commercial Center (Sub - Major 5 and Shops 4). Action .................... Minute Motion 2005- D. Item ....................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-842 Applicant ................ KB Home Coastal, Inc. Location ................. Southeast corner of Monroe Street & Avenue 60 Request .................. Consideration of architectural plans for six prototypical residential plan types for use in Tract 31732 Action .................... Minute Motion 2005- E. Item ....................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-841 Applicant ................ K. Hovnanian Homes Location ................. Northeast of the intersection of Monroe Street and Avenue 60 Request .................. Consideration of architectural and landscape plans for seven prototypical residential plan types for use in Tract 32398. Action .................... Minute Motion 2005- VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: VIII. ADJOURNMENT G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\Agenda.doc ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE 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 Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2005, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-465 Calle Tampico, the bulletin board at the La Quinta Post Office bulletin board, and at Stater Bros. 78-630 Highway 111, on Friday, September 2, 2005. DATED: September 2, 2005 4j BE TY . aER,E ve Secretary City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\Agenda.doc MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA August 3 2005 10:00 a.m. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:03 a.m. by staff. B. Committee Members present: Bill Bobbitt, and David Thoms. It was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to excuse Committee Member Christopher C. Staff present: Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Staff asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of July 6, 2005. There being no changes, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to approve the Minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2005-804; a request of James Paul for consideration of landscaping plans for a three building office complex for the property located on the north side of Corporate Center Drive, east and west of Commerce Court. 1. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the, information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Gustavo Magana, landscape designer, and Karl Allgeier, ORR Builders, who gave a presentation on the project. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\8-3-05 ALRC.doc Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 3, 2005 1. Committee Member Thorns asked that the Mesquite tree be replaced with a different variety. Discussion followed regarding different tree and plant species. 2. Committee Member Thorns noted the deep well bubblers may not work if the heads are buried. Mr. Magafia stated this is a standard used by CVWD. Committee Member Thorns asked that some portion of the head be out of the ground. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated CVWD is more concerned with water conservation than maintenance. Mr. Magana stated they must meet CVWD regulations. 4. Committee Member Thorns asked why the Washingtonia Palms were not skinned. Mr. Magana stated they wanted the rustic look. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt stated his concern regarding the slope in the 18" lawn setback adjacent to the walkway. Mr. Magana stated it is designed to be within CVWD regulations. The slope itself is not drastic. Committee Member Bobbitt stated most lawns are sloped, but as the sprinkler heads are set back 18 inches, the irrigation water will.drain down the slope without using decomposed granite. 6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2005-026 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-804, as recommended and amended: a. An alternative tree shall be used in place of the Mesquite tree and Agapanthus. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2003-765, Amendment #1; a request of Rick Wilkerson Madison/ P.T.M. La Quinta, LLC for consideration of a modification to architectural plans for the Point Happy Plaza parking structure, for the property located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\9-3-05 ALRC.doc 2 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 3, 2005 1. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. The applicant was not present. 2. Committee Member Thorns asked about the concrete buffer bumper. Staff stated that is a barrier for the original structure mounting. They are existing and poured in place. Committee Member Thorns asked what was going to be used for the roof material for the new structure. Staff stated it would be metal with a cornice with plaster skin. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff to explain the process. Staff noted the architect was not present and they were unaware of the procedure. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the columns were stuccoed. Staff noted they are steel post that will be round and stuccoed. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the roofing material. Staff stated they would be using corrugated metal and staff would request it not be a shiny metal. 5. Committee Member Thorns asked if there would be any treatment along the north side of the parking structure. Staff stated there will be landscaping. The applicant has also approached CVWD about planting bougainvillea and lantana in front of the structure. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if they could build a similar structure out of noncombustible materials, such as metal with a tile roof. Staff stated they looked at this, but the total weight of the structures was a concern. 7. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2005-027 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2003-765, Amendment #1, as recommended and amended: a. Corrugated roof material shall be textured or colored to match the building colors. Unanimously approved. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\8-3-05 ALRC.doc 3 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 3, 2005 C. Site Development Permit 2005-836; a request of GLC-Duc La Quinta, LLC for consideration of common area landscaping plans for Tract 32279 and Tract 33336 for the property located on the north side of Avenue 58, west of Madison Street. 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 Shawn Milligan, LC-Duc La Quinta and Mary Webber, landscape architect, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Thorns asked the textured material at the entrance. Ms. Webber, stated it is colored stamped concrete. Committee Member Thorns stated he would prefer a paver be used; something more natural. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had no objection to the plant palette. Several of the trees will go deciduous to the point of losing all their leaves. This may cause problems with the property owners. The colors of the trees are beautiful. There is a large area of land and the trees are pretty well mixed up, it could work. 4. Committee Member Thorns asked why they were relocating some of the trees. Mr. Milligan stated Mr. Baker, the adjoining property owner, requested they be moved. 5. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2005-028 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-836, as recommended and as follows: a. Pavers with variable colors shall be used at the entry pavement. Unanimously Approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\8-3-05 ALRC.doc 4 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 3, 2005 Vill. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a meeting to be held on September 7, 2005. This meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. on August 3, 2005. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER Executive Secretary G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\8-3-05 ALRC.doc 5 1 ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: CASE NO: APPLICANT: ARCHITECT: SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-840 MICHAEL J. SHOVLIN, PROJECT MANAGER CARL COX, ARCHITECT REQUEST: ARCHITECTURAL AND CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR A PET SHOP, SUPPLY, AND GROOMING RETAIL COMMERCIAL BUILDING WITHIN THE ONE ELEVEN LA QUINTA CENTER LOCATION: BOUNDED BY HIGHWAY 111, WASHINGTON STREET AND ADAMS STREET Attached are the plans and materials board for this proposal for your review, comment, and discussion at the meeting (Attachment 1 & 2). PROJECT PROPOSAL: This will, be 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. 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 buildings are proposed to have stuccoed facades at the front 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. Lighting will utilize the same fixtures as placed on other existing buildings in the development. The sign area above front entrance will covered with a tile roof. The rear of the structure will also be stuccoed with a double parapet feature. Landscaping is already in place for the development. P:\Andy's\Site Development Permit\SDP 05-840 Petco\ALRC SDP 2005-840.doc ICCI Me. Sanitation enclosures at the rear of the structure should be directed away from the recessed truck well for better access. Side elevations should be provided to identify roof and parapet screening for mechanical units. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Planning Commission approval of architectural and landscape plans for Site Development Permit 2004-840 with the following conditions: 1. Revise trash enclosures to be parallel to the truck loading well. 2. All roof top mechanical equipment shall be fully screened per Section 9.100.050 of the Zoning Ordinance. Transmitted bv:, Andr)KX X Mogensen, Associate Planner Attachments 1. Development plans 2. Materials Board I PAAndy's\Site Development Permit\SDP 05-840 Petco\ALRC SDP 2005-840.doc ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-837 APPLICANT: NO LA QUINTA PARTNERS, LLC ARCHITECT: NFA NICK FULLERTON ARCHITECTS, P.C. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: VITA PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR GUARD HOUSE (CARETAKERS RESIDENCE) LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF AVENUE 52 MIDWAY BETWEEN MADISON STREET AND MONROE AVENUE WITHIN THE MADISON CLUB Background: The Madison Club site is 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 a Specific Plan amendment and Tentative Tract Map, with construction recently started. Proposed is a 1,145 square foot guard house complex for the Avenue 52 entry (Attachment 1). It is the first approval for a building requested in the project._ The location of the guard house is approximately 300 feet south of Avenue 52 on Meriwether Way. Due to its location and perimeter landscaping it will probably not be visible from Avenue 52. The complex is located at the entry side of the road which is separated from the exit lane by a wide planted median. The complex is made up of two one story high buildings, one on each side of the entrance lane. The buildings are designed in an old world traditional style with plaster walls, clay tile roof, ornate wall, door and window trim, and two outdoor fireplaces. Wall colors are light, with shade of browns for the trim and ornamentation. The roof tile color will be red. Exact colors and finishes are shown on the material and sample board that will be available at the meeting. Decorative security gates for the entry and exit lane will be provided. The roof will vary in height with a maximum of 19 feet. Each building has a tile roofed chimney for the outdoor fireplace that is 28 feet high. PASTAWTHE HIDEAWAYMADISONCLUB (CC OF DESERT)\SDP 2005-837 ALRC RPT.DOC The landscaping plan indicates a design consisting of a grove of large box size Metaleuca trees and three types of groundcover. Analysis: The gate house complex is well designed and therefore, acceptable. Recommendation: That the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee recommend to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 2005-837, as submitted. Attachment: 1. Architectural and landscaping plans Prepared by: 5rLTitM, !S4AA'A_ Stan Sawa, Principal Planner P:\STAN\THE HIDEAWAVMADISONCLUB (CC OF DESERT(\SDP 2005-837 ALRC RPT.DOC BI #C 04 ' ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-838 APPLICANT: BILL SANCHEZ, PROJECT MANAGER ARCHITECT: KKE, ARCHITECTS REQUEST: ARCHITECTURAL AND CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR A RETAIL COMMERCIAL BUILDING FEATURING ONE SUB - MAJOR UNIT AND 10 MINOR UNITS WITHIN WASHINGTON PARK COMMERCIAL CENTER (SUB -MAJOR 5 & SHOPS 4) LOCATION: BOUNDED BY HIGHWAY 111, AVENUE 47, WASHINGTON STREET AND ADAMS STREET Attached are the plans and materials board for this proposal for your review, comment, and discussion at the meeting (Attachment 1 & 2). PROJECT PROPOSAL: The proposed architectural design is similar in style to other buildings in, the commercial center, and is consistent with the Washington Park Specific Plan. The buildings are proposed to have flat roofs with uncomplicated and varied roof lines with deep set multi -paned windows. Exterior wall materials consist of smooth exterior plaster with stone veneer accents. Building masses are accentuated by deep-set openings, reveals, inset detailing, and human scale features. Pedestrian use includes a 'sundial' outdoor seating area with trellised canopies. Roof lines are distinctive, and vary with the use of parapet heights and setback screening elements. Colors are compatible with existing buildings and are consistent with the Specific Plan. PAReports - ALRC\09-07-05\ALRC SDP 2005-838.doc The Landscape Concept Plan provides a visual layout consistent with previous landscape designs for other phases of Washington Park. Water efficient landscaping materials, including native plants, are provided. Plant types and arrangements compliment the building's architecture and follow the decorative sidewalk pattern. Benches have been identified on the plans to compliment pedestrian space. Varying awnings and trellises are proposed to provide shade for pedestrian areas. Landscaping is identified along the northeast rim of the retention basin, with a few trees placed along the rear of the structure. Though not called out on the plans, the applicant has indicated his intent to use decomposed granite as a ground cover. ANALYSIS: While the design of, this portion of Washington Park will be consistent with previously approved and developed phases, there are some items of concern. The rear corner of the Sub -major 5 shops structure overhangs above the retention basin. The applicant has indicated that the corner of Sub -major 5 will have a support beam from the corner of the structure placed into the retention basin. Although currently in plan check and not a part of this phase, recent modifications have been made to enlarge the loading area of the adjacent Shops 3 phase of the project, which will be used by the Sub -major 5 tenant. Landscaping placed adjacent to parking spaces should be discussed, as there is some concern with pedestrians exiting vehicles onto landscaped strips. The proposed elevations for the front and rear do not appear consistent with the proposed landscaping plans and overhead floor plan. Sanitation enclosures have been requested by Waste Management to be revised. Details from the future adjacent phases and Shops 3 phase of the project should be provided to show how the parking and driving aisles will interact. Some landscaping should be added along the rear of the structure and within the retention basin with notes identifying the method of ground cover. Finally, details are necessary to identify the structural support for the Sub -major 5 cantilevered overhang into the retention basin. Public Works has indicated that the retention basin can be modified to compensate for both a maintenance ramp and the placement of a stem wall. ITEMS FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER: Recommend to the Planning Commission approval of architectural and landscape plans for Site Development Permit 2004-838 with the following considerations: 1. Parking spaces adjacent to landscaped areas should include provisions to prevent damage from passengers exiting vehicles. Such provisions could include a wider curb or step for passengers and should not reduce the overall P:\Reports - ALRC\09-07-05\ALRC SDP 2005-838.doc ' 002 landscaped area or conflict with the proposed landscaping and sidewalk pattern. 2. The trash enclosures should be revised to Waste Management specifications with consideration to the proposed side loading area. 3. Details concerning the loading area designed for Shops 3 should be submitted, as Sub-major.5 utilizes the Shops 3 loading area. Parking and driving aisle details concerning the adjacent future phases located to the south would help clarify ingress and egress at the proposed side loading area for this phase. 4. The proposed Sub -major 5 structural overhang at the retention basin should be eliminated and modified to a stem wall. 5. Additional landscaping should be planted along the entire rim of the retention basin, including the rear of the structure and the side loading area. 6. Provisions for a maintenance ramp have been requested by Public Works. Ramp access should have a 3:1 slope. 7. Items cited on the materials board should include a citation that they will be consistent with materials used in previous approved phases of Washington Park. 8. Although the plans identify variations between awnings and trellises, additional canopy shade for pedestrian areas should be considered. Transmitted by: Mogensen, Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Development plans 2. Materials Board � r: PAReports - ALRC\09-07-05\ALRC SDP 2005-838.doc �-� '�� 04 w OF TNti� ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: CASE NO: APPLICANT/ ARCHITECT: SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-842 KB HOME COASTAL, INC. REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR SIX PROTOTYPICAL RESIDENTIAL PLAN TYPES FOR USE IN TRACT 31732 LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MONROE STREET AND AVENUE 60 Background: BI #D Tentative Tract Map 31732 was approved for this 39.7 acre property on January 21, 2004. The tract consists of 197 residential lots and a recreation lot (Attachment 1). Some of the lots have an alley for garage access. Previous plans were submitted for review by Innovative Resort Communities. These plans were reviewed by the ALRC and recommended for approval. The Planning Commission rejected the plans and requested they be revised. The applicant chose to sell the property to KB Homes. KB Homes has submitted prototypical plans for six residential plan types (Attachment 2). Three of the plans (Solana product line) are one-story high and have front loaded garages with the remaining three plans having partial two-story units (Viento product line) with rear alley -facing garages. Each plan type is provided with three front elevation treatments. Each of the elevation treatments utilizes a different style of architecture. Those styles are Spanish, Italianate, and Tuscan. All unit plans are 40- feet wide with varying depths. The floor plan submitted is for the Italianate faced and does not match the Spanish and Tuscan facades. They will be available at the meeting. The Solana plans are one-story in height with the tallest plan being 19'-3" feet high and vary in size from 1,793 to 2,217 square feet. The Viento plans are two -stories in height with the tallest plan being 25'-5" feet high and vary in size from 2,165 to 2,491 square feet. Exterior building colors are earth tones with the roof consisting of mixed earth tone concrete "S" tiles. Stone or brick veneer is used on portions,of the lower facades of some plans. Accents include shutters, wrought iron features,, pot shelves, accent P:\Reports - ALRC\09-07-05\sdp 2005-842 tt 31732 alrc rpt.doc wood siding and awnings. Side and rear elevations of each plan will vary based on the architectural type. Material and color samples have been submitted and will be available at the meeting. This subdivision includes a recreation lot with a clubhouse. These plans as well as the landscaping plans for the front yards and common areas have not been submitted and will be process under a separate application. Analysis: In general, the architectural plans are well designed and compatible with the area and each other. Although all plans are the same width, a variety of designs are proposed which will create an attractive streetscape. The plans are designed to fit the lots approved. Two of the Tuscan designs of the Viento product line indicate some accent wood siding on the front elevation. This material should be a wood -like composite material since wood siding does not weather well in the desert. Staff recommends the ALRC provide direction regarding the following issues: 1 Alley concept plans including unit design (elevations) and wall placement. 2 Building design in relation to streetscape, distance between buildings for two- story units, alley elevations. Staff recommends a typical block (or two) street elevation with alley elevation exhibit be prepared for Planning Commission consideration. Elevations, site plan and landscape plans need to be integrated into this exhibit. 3. Evaluate proposed use of building materials such as concrete versus clay tile, machine applied versus smooth plaster finishes, use of wood siding, building architectural details, appropriate application of stone veneer. Recommendation: Recommend to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 2005- 842, subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. Typical preliminary front yard and common area landscaping plans and recreational lot architectural plans shall be submitted to the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee for approval prior to issuance of first production home permit. 2. Wood siding accents and any other wood accents used on the units shall consist of a composite material. PAReports - ALRC\09-07-05\sdp 2005-842 tt 31732 alrc rpt.doc 1, 2 3. Air conditioning/pool equipment cannot be located in the side yards unless five feet of clearance between equipment and property line is provided. 4. The required inside clear dimensions for two car garages is 20' by,20'. 5. A detailed street elevation and alley elevation exhibits, including site plan be developed for a typical block with an alley condition and for a typical non -alley block condition and submitted for Planning Commission approval. Transmitted by: �7�v✓�, �Gyint�. Stan Sawa, Principal Planner Attachments: 1. Tract map layout 2. Architectural plans 0U3 P:\Reports - ALRC\09-07-05\sdp 2005-842 tt 31732 alrc rpt.doc 1 � ® I m t q Ilk a _ .. § ® 4 » I 7 OO b © T- L 0- 444 auw w C�yOF Cti�9 ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: CASE NO: APPLICANT: ARCHITECT: SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-841 K. HOVNANIAN HOMES KTGY GROUP, INC. BI #E REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR SEVEN PROTOTYPICAL RESIDENTIAL PLAN TYPES FOR USE IN TRACT 32398 LOCATION: NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MONROE STREET AND AVENUE60 Background: Tentative Tract Map 32398 was approved for this 110+ acre property on November 16, 2004. The tract consists of 392 residential lots, a recreation lot, common lots and a ten acre commercial lot (Attachment 1). Some of the lots have an alley for garage access. The commercial lot is not proposed to be developed at this time. The applicant has submitted prototypical architectural plans for seven residential plan types (Attachment 2). Three of the plan types (Product "A") have alley facing garages with the remaining four plans (Product "B") having front yard facing garages. Each plan type is provided with three front elevation treatments. Each of the elevation treatments utilizes a different style of architecture. Those styles are Spanish, Santa Barbara, and Tuscan. Plans vary between 42 and 50-feet wide with varying depths. Plans 1, 2, 4, and 5 are one-story in height with the tallest plan 17'-10" feet high. Plans 3, 6, and 7 are two -stories in height with the tallest plan 26'-1 " high. The plans vary in size from 2,115 to 3,262 square feet. Exterior building (plaster and trim) colors are earth tones with the roof consisting of mixed earth tone concrete "S" and flat tiles. Stone veneer is used on portions of the Tuscan facades of each plan. Accents include door and window trim, shutters, and wrought iron features. Side and rear elevations of each plan type will be the same except for roof lines regardless of architectural style. Material and color samples have been submitted and will be available at the meeting. PAReports - ALRC\09-07-05\sdp 2005-841 tt 32398 airc rpt.doc Various landscaping plans have been submitted, including wall and gate plans (Attachment 3). Planting plans include a plant palette and size. All plans include notes to describe features of the plan. The following landscaping plans have been submitted: 1. Overall conceptual landscape master plan. This plan conceptually shows all areas of the subdivision, except the community park. Turf areas are limited to play areas and the bottom of retention areas. Along the public street perimeters, trees are shown along with mass shrub planting areas. 2. Enlargement of a major entry plan. This plan shows the Monroe Street entry with the primary tree being the date palm in the center medians of the entry street. 3. Enlargement of Community Park. This private recreational facility includes a full court basketball court, sand volleyball court, meandering walkways, shade trees, turfed play areas and a picnic area with bar-b-ques. 4. Conceptual wall and fence plan for entire project. This plan shows all walls and fencing proposed and details regarding their design: Along the interior side yards of the residential lots six foot high wood fences are proposed. Lots backing up to common green belt areas will have a six foot high combination block/picket view fence. 5. Front vard conceptual landscape plans for all orototvpical unit tvpes. These plans show two trees per lot in the front yard area, shrub masses and turf. These turf areas appear to be equivalent to approximately 50-60% of the front yard area. Sidewalks are shown adjacent to the curb. No landscaping is shown adjacent to the alley for those plans that have rear -facing garages. Analysis: In general, the architectural plans are well designed and compatible with the area and each other. A variety of architectural styles and designs are proposed which should create an attractive streetscape. The plans are designed to fit the lots approved. Shutters should be metal or a wood -like composite material since wood shutters do not weather well in the desert. The conceptual landscape master plan and front yard typical plan do not provide adequate detail to determine acceptability. Additionally, the landscape plans do not show sufficient detail to evaluate the overall design of alleys (walls, landscape and other improvements). The master plan does not show most of the alleys. The master plan treatment of the public street perimeters needs refinement. The perimeter walls along all street frontages needs to be evaluated for articulation, material, grading and relationship to landscape design. The typical lot plans need to show shrub location, U I_I 2 PAReports - ALRC\09-07-05\sdp 2005-841 tt 32398 alrc rpt.doc species and quantities, reduced turf area, and provide berming and a meandering header. Additionally, the rear alley planting needs to be shown. The wall and fence plan shows wood fencing along interior side yards of residences. Although had typically used in tracts in La Quinta, the Zoning Code does permit this; specific standards for construction are found in Section 9.60.030E.1 . The rear yard walls shown for the alley lots do not maximize the back yard area and need to be re- evaluated as noted above and below. Staff recommends the ALRC provide direction regarding the following issues: 1. Perimeter landscape plan and proposed perimeter wall design. 2. Proposed landscape concept and proposed plant list noting that more detailed plans need to be submitted showing berming, shrub planting, and ground cover. Current plans are very preliminary. Currently, street tree species are not called out. 3. Alley concept plans including unit design (elevations), landscape design and wall placement. 4. Proposed fencing and wall material. 5. Landscape design for recreation lots as plans relate with retention area grading. 6. Building design in relation to streetscape, distance between buildings for two- story units, alley elevations. Staff recommends a typical block (or two) street elevation with alley elevation exhibit be prepared for Planning Commission consideration. Elevations, site plan and landscape plans need to be integrated into this exhibit. 7. Evaluate proposed use of building materials such as concrete versus clay tile, machine applied versus smooth plaster finishes, building architectural details, appropriate application of stone veneer. 8. Determine acceptability of Chitalpa tashkentensis. This deciduous tree is a cross between a Catalpa bignoniodes and Chilopsis linearis, is fast growing and can reach 15-20 feet in height and width. Recommendation: Recommend to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 2005- 841, subject to the.following Conditions of Approval: 1. Revised detailed landscape plans shall be submitted for all parkways, open space areas, and alley areas for approval by the Planning Commission, prior to approval of the mass grading plan. 2. Revised perimeter parkway landscape, berm, and perimeter wall plans shall' be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to approval of the mass grading plan. 3. A detailed street elevation and alley elevation exhibits, including site plan, and landscape plan exhibits be developed for a typical block with an alley condition P:\Reports - ALRC\09-07-05\sdp 2005-841 tt 32398 alrc rpt.doc i' 3 landscape plan exhibits be developed for a typical block with an alley condition and for a typical non -alley block condition and submitted for Planning Commission approval. 4. Shutters and any other wood accents used on the units shall consist of a composite material (not wood). 5. Air conditioning/pool equipment cannot be located in the side yards unless five feet of clearance between equipment and property line is provided. 6. The required inside clearance dimensions for a two car garage is 20' by 20'. 7. Masonry walls adjacent to the commercial site shall be eight feet high. 8. Turf use in typical front yard plans shall be reduced to no more than 40% of the yards landscape area with meandering headers provided. One to two foot high berming and meandering headers shall be provided. 9. Adjacent to alleys, residential lots shall have a minimum six foot landscaped setback between the alley and backyard privacy wall. Landscaping shall include one 15-gallon (minimum 1.5" caliper) vertical -growing tree. A detailed plan, per Condition #1 above, shall be submitted. 10. Provide a non -turf front yard landscape option for all plan types. This Plan shall be submitted to the Architectural and Landscaping r Review Committee for approval prior to issuance of first production home permit. 11. Specific Plan 2004-072 requires brown trunk height of palm trees to be used in common areas to be a minimum of 25-feet. Washingtonia filifera height, if used, shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Transmitted by: S�aw�.SGiti,rrx Stan Sawa, Principal Planner Attachments: 1. Tract map layout (see Landscape master plan) 2. Architectural plans 3. - Landscaping plans P:\Reports - ALRC\09-07-05\sdp 2005-841 tt 32398 alrc rpt.doc �`!