Loading...
2005 12 07 ALRC`y OF ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quirita City Hall Session Room 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California DECEMBER 7, 2005 10:00 A.M. Beginning Minute Motion 2005-035 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 Meetings of September 7, 2005 and October 5, 2005. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item ....................... Applicant ................ Location ................. Request ................. Action .................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-839 Marchi & Associates for Wells Fargo Bank Northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street within The Pavillion at La Quinta project Consideration of development plans for a bank building. Minute Motion 2005- ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE B. Item ....................... Applicant ................ Location ................. Request .................. Action .................... C. Item ....................... Applicant ................ Location ................. Request .................. Action .................... VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2005-032 Nispero Properties Northwest corner of Avenida La Fonda and Main Street in the Village at La Quinta Consideration of architecture and landscaping plans for a 19,433 gross square foot two-story office building with coffee house. Minute Motion 2005- SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-846 Toll Brothers, Inc. North side of Avenue 58, ± 1 /2 mile west of Madison Street Consideration of architecture and landscaping plans for six prototypical residential plans for Tract 30834 (Stone Creek Ranch). Minute Motion 2005- VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: VIII. ADJOURNMENT 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 Meetingof Wednesday, December 7, 2005, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico, the bulletin board at the La Quinta Post Office bulletin board, and at Stater Bros. 78-630 Highway 1 1 1, on Friday, December 3, 2005. DATED: December 3, 2005 B T SAWYER, Executive 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 September 7, 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 Thorns. It was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to excuse Committee Member Christopher C. Staff present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Andrew Mogensen, 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 August 3, 2005. There being no changes, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to approve the Minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2005-840; a request of Michael Shovlin for consideration of architecture and conceptual landscaping plans for a pet shop, supply, and grooming retail commercial building within the One Eleven La Quinta Center, bounded by Highway 111, Washington Street and Adams Street. 1. Associate Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced David Smalley, who gave a presentation on the project. r-\WDnnrQ\AI cr�o_znc Al cr .Inn Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee September 7, 2005 2. Committee Member Thoms asked why staff was recommending the trash enclosure be relocated. Staff explained. Committee Member Thoms stated it should be parallel to the loading dock and the air conditioning units screened from visibility. 3. Committee Member Thoms asked where the green color would be used. Staff noted the location on the site plan. 4. Committee Member Thoms asked about the planting adjacent to the columns on the existing sites and should be repeated on this building directly adjacent to the columns with vertical elements such as bougainvillea. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the planters that were located at the west end. It is too plain and should be tied to the parking lot to add it to this building. 6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2005-029 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-840, as recommended and amended: a. Trash enclosure to be relocated. b. The air conditioning units shall be screened. C. Plant material shall be added between the columns Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2005-837; a request of ND La Quinta Partners, LLC for consideration of architectural and landscape plans for a guard house (caretakers residence), for the property located on the south side of Avenue 52, midway between Madison Street and Monroe Avenue, within The Madison Club. 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 John Gamlin and Cindy Zamora, representing the applicant. 2. Committee Member Thoms questioned . the use of the Star Jasmine and asked what sizes were to be used. Mr. John Gamlin stated they would be five gallon plants. r-MlDnnr Ql Al Rr\0_7nR Al Cr . — 2 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee September 7, 2005 , 3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the Star Jasmine will not do well in the summer months and suggested a substitute. Mr. Gamlin stated they are using a horticulturalist and would confirm with her. Committee Member Bobbitt commended the design of the building. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the fireplace element would be functioning. Mr. Gamlin stated it would. 5. Committee Member Thorns stated the Star Jasmine should be a five gallon in size and seven feet on center; the Rosemary should also be five and less than 12 feet. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the overhangs should be eliminated at the entry or increased the height. 7. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2005-030 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-837, as recommended and amended: a. Ground cover shall be five gallon and planted closer together and substitute the Star Jasmine with an alternative. Unanimously approved. C. Site Development Permit 2005-838; a request of Bill Sanchez, for 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, the property bounded by Highway 111, Avenue 47, Washington Street and Adams Street. 1. Associate Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Bill Sanchez, representing the applicant, who gave a presentation on the project. c•,mmnnrC%AI or,o_-znw Al o� A3 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee September 7, 2005 2. Committee Member Thorns stated the planting area next to the parking lot is not a problem for the handicapped spaces. In regard to head -in or slant stalls, there is usually an 18-inch space back of the curb to allow pedestrians space to step without interfering with the plantings. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the planting areas should be at least 6-feet by 8-feet to give the plant material a chance to grow. If the 18-inch space is used, the planting bed area should not be reduced. Mr. Sanchez stated they could stripe the area. 4. Committee Member Thom suggested another handicap space be added as well as a stripe to the east. Mr. Sanchez stated the sidewalk is too narrow to accommodate a ramp, so handicap space was added to accommodate the handicap person. They would not have the room to add the additional space. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt stated it should only be needed at the end stalls. Mr. Sanchez stated they would be adding six inches to the curb to make the 18 inches. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the trash enclosure should be aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Sanchez stated it will be consistent with what exists. He noted the location is the only space where they can put the enclosure. Staff noted the capacity needs to be increased as well. 7. Committee Member Thorns asked staff to explain the concern regarding the loading area. Staff explained more detail was needed as it was to be used in conjunction with the other major building. 8. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he concurred with staff regarding the stem wall on the area that protrudes in the retention basin. Mr. Sanchez stated he had met with the Public Works Department and they suggested using a pilaster to retain the volume needed for the retention basin. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he would prefer there be no overhang as it is more than likely it will not be maintained. Additional planting will be needed as well to break up the building. Alternative designs were discussed. r.��n,onnrm ni erko_znc Al Or a... 4 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee September 7, 2005 9. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he concurred with staff's recommendation in regard to the awnings and trellises. Mr. Sanchez stated. canopies and trellises will be over the " storefronts. Staff noted they need a shade cloth or something added to give more shade. Mr. Sanchez was concerned that the cloth would detract from the appearance. 10. Committee Member Thorns suggested tightening up the distance between the beam members to provide ,shade. In regard to the plantings on the southeast elevation along the walkway, a tree form is needed along the back side of the Buildings 4 and 5. 11. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2005-031 recommending approval of Site' Development Permit 2005-838, as recommended and as follows: a. A 12 inch band of concrete shall be added on the parking stalls. b. Trees shall be added to the back of Building 4. C. Additional wood members shall be added to the trellises to give shade. d. A stem wall shall be used on the rear of Sub -Major 5 adjacent to the retention basin with landscape material to hide the building. Unanimously Approved. D. Site Development Permit 2005-8342 a request of KB Homes Coastal, Inc., for consideration of architectural plans for six prototypical residential plan types for use in Tract 31732, the property located at the southeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60. 1. Principle 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 Ty Mangrum and Cecil Hernandez, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he has a problem with the density of the tract. r.%%A/OnnrQk AI orko_7_ng Al or a..,. 5 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee September 7, 2005 3. Committee Member Thorns stated each unit's architecture is all right, but he has a problem with there being a series of two stories with ten feet between them. Staff clarified the garage location dictates the distance between the houses. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the two stories are too massive. Mr. Mangrum explained the two story units would be on the interior of the tract and the single story houses would be along the perimeter streets. He went on to explain the design of the units. The two story units are two bedroom with a loft. It is not the entire structure that is two story; they are tiered. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he was concerned with the massiveness. There is no variation in the height of all the houses. Discussion followed regarding the house designs. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if wood fencing would be used in the rear yards. Mr. Mangrum stated they do intend to use wood in the sideyards. 6. Committee Member Thorns stated wood should not be used. He has no problem with the individual architecture, but recommends the Planning Commission look at the issue of all two story units with the alley. 7. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2005-032 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-842, as recommended and as follows: a. Planning Commission be made aware of the Committee's concern regarding the two story units being all located next to each other. Unanimously Approved. E. Site Development Permit 2005-841; a request of K. Hovnanian Homes, for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for seven prototypical residential plan types for use in Tract 32398, for the property located northeast of the intersection of Monroe Street and Avenue 60. n.\\NOnnrC\AI Or\O_]_nC AI Pr A.., 6 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee September 7, 2005 1. Principle 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 Susan Banel, K Hovnanian Companies, and Ms. Kim Castruita who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Thorns asked if the two story and single story houses would be side by side. Staff explained the plan layout. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the setback in regard to landscaping on the alley. A six foot setback for the garages is required. Committee Member Bobbitt stated as long as the garages do not line up; that there is some undulation and room for the trees. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if they would be using wood fencing and split face overlap. Ms. Castruita stated they - normally use slump stone or precise block. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he would prefer slump. stone. Community Development Director Doug Evans suggested they use a sack finish and play with different finishes. Ms. Castruita suggested using both for effect or banding. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the perimeter wall columns. Ms. Banel stated they would be a straight or decorative block. 6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2005-033 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-841 for the architectural elements, as recommended and as follows: a. Perimeter wall pilasters would be straight or decorative block with a mortar type cap. Unanimously Approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None r-\UlCnnrQ%AI arIo_7nG Al cr A-, 7 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee September 7, 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 October 5, 2005. This meeting was adjourned at 11:57 p.m. on September 7, 2005. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER Executive Secretary r-%%A,onnrckni Gr\O_7_nF Al Cr A-, 8 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA October 5, 2005 10:00 a.m. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:10 a.m. by Community Development Director Doug Evans. B. Committee Members present: Frank Christopher and Tracy Smith. It was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Smith to excuse Committee Member Bobbitt. Unanimously approved C. Staff present: Planning Manager Les Johnson Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: None V. BUSINESS ITEMS:. A. Site Development Permit 2005-843; a request of East of Madison LLC for consideration of architecture and landscaping plans for a maintenance building for the property located on the north side of Corporate Center Drive, east and west of Commerce Court. 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 Mr. John Gamlin, representing the applicant, who stated he had no comments nor do they have a problem with reducing the height of the canopy. 2. Commissioner Smith asked what material was being used for the brown outdoor color. , Mr. Craig Pearson, architect, it is an outdoor shade cloth. Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee October 5, 2005 3. Commissioner Christopher stated he had no major issues. He was interested in whether or not Lots 75 and 76 will be facing away from the maintenance building. Mr. Gamlin stated they face toward the golf course with dense screening to hide facility. 4. Commissioner Smith stated the Phoenix canariensis, Strelitzia nicolai will not hold up against the wind. Cats claw vines will grow, but the wind will blow them down. Other than that it is a good plant list. He asked what ground cover would be used. Mr. Gamlin stated it would be decomposed granite (DG). 5. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Smith to adopt Minute Motion 2005-034 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-843, as recommended and as follows: a. Recommend Phoenix canariensis, Strelitzia nicolai and cats claw be reviewed due to desert climate. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None VIII. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Smith to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a meeting to be held on November 2, 2005. This meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. on October 5, 2005. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER Executive Secretary 2 iWWI of 17 in ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: DECEMBER 7, 2005 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-839 APPLICANT: MARCHI & ASSOCIATES (BRETT MARCHI) FOR WELLS FARGO BANK REQUEST: REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR BANK BUILDING LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND ADAMS STREET WITHIN THE PAVILION AT LA QUINTA PROJECT BACKGROUND: The project site is within Specific Plan 2003-066 that was approved in October, 2003. The architectural plans for the first phase of construction, consisting of the west half of the main buildings, the two pads along Adams Street and Pad 3 on Highway 111, was approved by the Planning Commission on June 8, 2004 (Attachment 1). The Chick-fil-a restaurant was approved on October 26, 2004. The second phase, consisting of the east half of the main buildings, was approved in May, 2006. Construction has begun on the project. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The architectural and landscaping' plans for a freestanding Wells Fargo bank have been submitted (Attachment 2). This building is located at the southeast corner of the site adjacent to Highway 111. The architecture of the buildings is somewhat Tuscan in nature utilizing plaster and stone combined with a clay tile roof. On all sides of the building a wall mounted, three dimensional welded wire trellis system will be installed vertically in various locations and planted with vines. The overall appearance of the building is similar to the construction previously approved. The material and colors are the same as previously approved for use and includes various shades of tan to brown exterior colors. Roof mounted equipment will be screened in a lowered mechanical well near the northwest corner of the roof. A drive -through lane is provided around the south and east sides of the building with the service window on the east side. The traffic will enter from the west and exit to the northeast. The tower at the northeast corner of the building is over the drive-thru PAReports - ALRC\12-07-05\sdp 2005-839 alrc rpt.doc ATM service. A trash enclosure is shown at the entry to the drive-thru with the doors facing northeast. The development plans include landscaping immediately around the building, trash area and adjacent to the exit area. The planting to the south and east of the drive - through lane is outside of the project area and is to be provided by the centers master developer. Proposed plants include those used in the shopping center. The wire trellises will be planted with vines. As part of the plans, cross section views primarily adjacent to Highway 111 have been submitted to show how the drive -through lane will be screened from view of Highway 111. ISSUES: With regard to the "proposed project, Staff has the following comments: 1. The building complies with the maximum 22' height limit within 150' of Highway 111. 2. The architectural style of the building is compatible with the other buildings in the center. 3. On the south elevation a wire trellis should be provided in the center arch opening to provide some relief on the wall. 4. The berming and landscaping provided adjacent to the south side of the drive - through lane by the master developer appears to be adequate to provide the desired screening. RECOMMENDATION: By Minute Motion, recommend to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 2005-839, subject to the following conditions: On the south elevation of the building provide a wire trellis in the center arch opening. 2. Landscaping and berming south and east of the drive-thru lane shall be provided to screen the lane to the satisfaction of the Community. Development Department. Planting and irrigation adjacent to Highway 111 to be coordinated between the applicant and master developer and installed prior to Community Development Department occupancy clearance for the bank or when the perimeter improvements are installed, whichever occurs first. 02 P:\Reports - ALRC\12-07-05\sdp 2005-839 alrc rpt.doc Attachments: 1. Approved Phase I plans 2. Plan exhibits Prepared by: �KJIM. Sal_Ai7Jl. Stan Sawa, Principal Planner U3 PAReports - ALRC\12-07-05\sdp 2005-839 alrc rpt.doc Color & Material Legend \ — .. ..., a,.,�,.�,..�,.,... A. A & e IONS COLOR K Mh Compnn..� FEET 0 32 84 se Figure 4= h MAJOR A I SHOPS2 cm PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN wwmp�r777i SOUTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION 7- OVERALL SOUTH ELEVATION ............. WE&`ELEVATION Color & Material Legend ,LIMINARY EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS COLOR (A) 33 BI #B ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: DECEMBER 7, 2005 CASE NO: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2005-032 APPLICANT: NISPERO PROPERTIES ARCHITECT: SOUTH WEST CONCEPTS REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR A 19,433 GROSS S.F. TWO-STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH COFFEE HOUSE LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF AVENIDA LA FONDA AND MAIN STREET IN THE VILLAGE AT LA QUINTA (SEE ATTACHED LOCATION MAP) BACKGROUND This proposal is on a ±0.72 acre site, which is made up of two vacant odd -shaped lots, comprising a half -circle, in the Village at La Quinta. The proposed building is an approximately 19,433 gross s.f. structure intended for general office uses, including a 935 s.f. space for a coffee bar. The first floor will contain the coffee bar and general office space of about 9,470 s.f. of gross s.f., with 9,963 s.f. of gross s.f. on the second floor. Based on the total gross leaseable floor space of 15,432 s.f., the building requires 68 total parking stalls, with 49 provided. The 19 deficient stalls will be addressed at the Planning Commission hearing as part of a Development Agreement still to be drafted. The building is generally located on the east portion of the site along the curved boundary, with the front of the building facing on Main Street (east elevation). The parking area occupies the remainder of the site, on the west side of the building. The building is flanked on its east and west sides by exterior stairwells. The highest building point is at 38.5 feet from finish grade at the central turret feature, with the main roof line at 29.8 feet high. The height limit for the Village is two stories, not to exceed 35 feet. However, the code does allow architectural elements to extend above the required height limit, within certain parameters, as part of a Site Development Permit review. In the past, staff has interpreted that this applies to all development permit applications, and this design is consistent with the parameters of the code relative to the excess height proposed. The architecture is best described as a blending of Traditional Spanish and Mediterranean design elements, with a more contemporary architectural design overall. The building walls will be stucco, with darker earth -tone colors applied to the finish, ALRCvup032 with use of stone veneer as an accent. The roofing material will be a two-piece mission clay tile in a darker tri-color earth tone blend. The window surrounds, doors and mullions will be framed in a finished aluminum. The roof eaves will be accented with exposed rafter tails, stained in a dark wood color. Upper floor exterior access areas are framed with a wrought iron railing. Staff recommends that the west elevation of the coffee bar space be revised to include architectural features more consistent with the overall building design. The building combines the use of roof pitch and parapet elements, with a central round tower/turret feature while the coffee bar area incorporates a gabled pitch roof design, with oval windows in the elevation, which appears out of character with the overall building architecture. In regard to the landscaping plan, there are no turf areas provided, instead utilizing decomposed granite, salt cobble and boulders. Along the streetscape, Mexican fan palms are the dominant tree, accented with four date palms at the central courtyard entry, two Palo Brea trees at the south driveway, and three hybrid Washingtonia palms at the north end of,the building. Bougainvillea and Pink Powder Puff vines are set against the building piers. The courtyard incorporates a water feature location, with a hardscape that utilizes a decorative stone paver. There are 11 silk trees shown along the west property line, and a screen wall will be required pursuant to the parking code requirements. Overall, the landscape plan is appropriately designed, and staff has no recommendations in regard to its design. All landscaping plans are required to meet the City's Water Efficient Landscaping ordinance. It should be noted that this project will require reduced parking consideration, as it cannot provide the required number of spaces. At present, this is the design that the applicant proposes and staff will now be addressing reduced parking designs, as part of a conditional requirement, for a parking/development agreement process before the Planning Commission. While this issue does not affect the building and landscape design as currently configured, staff wants to make the ALRC aware of the requirements and to allow the project to move ahead as proposed. A material and color board, along with full-size color illustrations, will be provided at the meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of a minute motion recommending to the Planning Commission approval of the preliminary architectural and landscaping plans for Village Use Permit 2005-032, subject to the following requirement: 1. The west elevation of the coffee bar space shall be revised, to be more consistent with the overall building architecture and design. Transmitted by: Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner U2 ALRCvup032 O I k— i O Viz x. R w R�Wy�I _ R 4rna - �3 BI #C r ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: DECEMBER 7, 2005 CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-846 APPLICANT: TOLL BROTHERS, INC. ARCHITECT: RNM ARCHITECTS/TOLL ARCHITECTURE REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR SIX PROTOTYPICAL RESIDENTIAL PLANS FOR TR 30834 (STONE CREEK RANCH) LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF AVENUE 58, t 1/2 MILE WEST OF MADISON STREET (SEE ATTACHED LOCATION MAP) BACKGROUND: Architecture and landscaping plans were originally approved for the Stone Creek Ranch project (Tract 30834) on August 12, 2003, by the Planning Commission. The approval allowed three units. A fourth was added administratively. Currently, five units have been built, using three of the four approved plans. All five existing units are single -story. The Stone Creek Ranch project has recently been sold to Toll Brothers, Inc. who wishes to change the architectural plans. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicant has submitted prototypical plans for six unit designs (Attachment 1). Each plan is designed with two elevation treatments. The first five plans utilize two elevations referred to as Spanish Colonial and Tuscan styles, and vary in size from 2,779 to 4,188 square feet in area, based on livable floor area without optional,space. Plan 6, the Piedra, utilizes two elevations as well, referred to as Tuscan and Santa Barbara styles. Each unit has the following characteristics: Plan 1: Pasillo plan, 2,779 s.f.: 1-story, 3 BR + den/media room, 2-car garage (1 car side -entry). Plan 2: Entrada plan, 3,615 s.f.: 2-story, 3 BR with office and upstairs guest unit/living room, 3-car garage (2 tandem spaces). n, n1_1_o•c Plan 3: Montana plan, 3,774 s.f.: 2-story, 3 BR with den and upstairs game room or guest unit option, 2 + 1 car garages (both side entry). Plan 4: Mollino plan, 4,188 s.f.: 2-story, 3 BR with den, 2 + 1 car garages. Second floor has 2 guest rooms and deck. Plan 5: Quintana plan, 3,412 s.f.: 1-story, 3 BR with den, 2 car+ golf cart garages Plan 6: Piedra plan, 3,285 s.f.: 1-story, 3 BR with bonus room/casita option off open courtyard, 3-car garage. This plan incorporates a Santa Barbara elevation scheme in lieu of the Spanish Colonial scheme used with the other five plans. The applicant's proposed model location will showcase Plans 3 and 4. The plant palettes and landscape improvement layouts for these two plans will be the typical design employed for each of the six plan types. Planting plans for common and perimeter areas of the entire tract, including the entry gatehouse and perimeter walls, have already been approved and constructed. The model parking lot landscaping incorporates Chilean Mesquite trees, which the ALRC has discouraged in past projects. In general, the landscape palettes presented are acceptable; however, staff recommends that front yard turf/sod areas as shown be reduced or eliminated. The applicant will be required to present water calculations to show compliance with Chapter 8.13, LQMC. Unit Size - Overall, four prototype plans are approved for the Stone Creek Ranch tract, ranging in size from 2,753 to 3,280 square feet, as base units with no optional living area. Casita and loft options raised the potential habitable floor area to a range of 3,321 to 3,762 square feet. In comparing the six new floor plans against the existing approvals, the Plan 4 (Mollina) exceeds the 10% threshold allowed for compatibility by 50 square feet. This plan will need to be modified to reduce its floor area, from 4,188 to 4,138 square feet maximum size. In addition, only one guest room may be provided in a residential unit, per Code, and the second floor space will need to be modified to living space, similar to the Plan 3 second floor, in order to comply with that restriction. This can be done by changing the entry guest room to a den/living space for the second guest room. This can be handled through building plan check and will not affect the unit appearance. Building height - More significantly, building height limitations of the Zoning Code restrict the location of the proposed second story units within the tract. Because there are five existing one-story units at Stone Creek Ranch, new two-story units will be restricted on lots that border these units; one of the models (Plan 4) is a two-story unit proposed adjacent to an existing single -story unit. The applicant has indicated they may want to redesign one or more of their two-story units as one story, so they can be sited on the affected lots. There are also corresponding height restrictions in the Code applicable to surrounding tracts, but they do not apply in this case. 02 A, The applicant has indicated they may present concept elevations illustrating these potential revisions at the ALRC meeting, along with a seventh plan to be sited in lieu of the two-story Plan 4 at the model site. Any redesign could be approved at staff level, provided the revised elevations are acceptable to the ALRC as a basis for staff review of the changes. If a new elevation is presented to ALRC, it could be approved in a similar manner. Alternately, the applicant would have to go back through the process for review of these plans, as an amendment to this Site Development Permit. Elevation compatibility - The proposed units provide less detail and architectural depth than the originally approved Stone Creek units, but are consistent in massing and basic appearance. Existing approved plans incorporated high quality design elements, such as mudded two-piece clay tile, exterior plaster finish, exposed rough -sawn roof beams, four-color split face cultured stone veneer, and decorative items such as carriage lantern fixtures, ornamental wrought iron, wooden window shutters and French doors. There is a discernable variation in detailing between the approved units and those proposed. The Tuscan color/material schemes will blend with the existing units at Stone Creek, and should be used in proximity to the five units already existing. Staff recommends that Spanish Colonial Scheme 1, and the Piedra unit's Santa Barbara elevation, not be used adjacent to any existing units, as the colors used do not appear completely compatible. Otherwise, staff has no significant issues with the overall architectural style and design of these units. Casita/guest rooms will be required to be reviewed by MUP as part of phasing for construction. Casitas in side entry garages with reduced setbacks are not permitted. Plans 2,'3 and 4 are not permitted adjacent to any existing units, either in this tract or adjoining those in any adjacent tracts. A Minor Use Permit will be required for the model home complex. These conditions will be added as part of the Planning Commission report. The material and color boards, and full-size color illustrations, will be provided at the December 7, 2005 ALRC meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of a minute motion accepting the plans for Site Development Permit 2005-846, subject to inclusion of the following: 1. Applicant shall provide a typical landscape plans for each unit as part of the landscape plan check review, to be consistent with the plans presented for Plans 3 and 4 as shown on the model landscape plans as approved. Front yard turf/sod areas as shown shall be reduced or eliminated. Plans shall show compliance with Chapter 8.13, LQMC. 2. Plan 4 (Mollina) shall be modified to reduce its floor area, from 4,188 to 4,138 square feet, maximum size, and to show only one guest room on the 2nd floor. This shall be verified during the building plan check process. Only one guest unit/room, as defined by Section 9.60.100, is permitted on a residential lot. 3. Chilean Mesquite shall be removed and replaced in all plant palettes employed for SDP 2005-846. Replacement trees shall be of a similar size and type. 4. No two-story plan may be placed on any lot sharing a common boundary with an existing one-story unit. The Spanish Colonial Scheme 1, and Piedra unit Santa Barbara elevation shall not be used for any home adjacent to an existing unit. Transmitted by: Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Location Map 04 ni nn_�_onc 5�1H AWM E H y AOMT MIN A 1,2 1111111, III d oo i 1 9 • • t i 1 s=r�r �' W, LAI A =rl ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM DATE: DECEMBER 7, 2005 CASE NO: SDP 2005-846 (STONE CREEK RANCH) APPLICANT: TOLL BROTHERS, INC. REQUEST: ADDITIONAL PLAN FOR REVIEW WITH SDP 2005-846 In your staff report on the above case, it was noted that the applicant may present a seventh plan concept and elevations, for consideration along with the six plans proposed. This plan was submitted after the staff report had been completed, so this memo has been provided. The unit has the following characteristics: Santolina plan: 2,794 s.f.: 1-story, 3 BR, 2-car garage, with entry courtyard. This plan will use the same color and elevation schemes as presented under SDP 2005-846, and will be subject to the same requirements as the other six plans. It is within the size allowance and range of the other plans as well. This plan will replace Plan 4 at the model site, and may be used on other lots within the project as well. There are no other issues with this plan, beyond those identified in the SDP report. Staff recommends that the ALRC incorporate this Santolina plan into any action taken on Site Development Permit 2005-846. Transmitted by: Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner Attachment: 1. Santolina plans P:\REPORTS - ALRC\1 2-07-05\ALRCM EMOSDP846. DOC