1993 10 06 DRB Minutes
MINUTES
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
CITY OF LA QUINTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California
October 6, 1993
5:30 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Chairman Curtis brought the meeting to order at 5:31 P.M. and Boardmember
Rice led the flag sal u te.
II. ROLL CALL
A. Present: Boardmembers Fred Rice, David Harbison, Randall Wright, James
Campbell, Planning Commissioner Barrows, and Chairman Curtis.
Boardmembers Harbison/Campbell moved to excuse Boardmember Anderson.
Unanimously approved.
B. Staff present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, Principal Planner Stan Sawa,
Associate Planners Greg Trousdell and Leslie Mouriquand-Cherry, and
Department Secretary Betty Sawyer.
Staff stated that Century Homes was present and requested to be added to the agenda for review
of their architectural plans for Phase VI of the La Quinta Highlands tract. These units were
approved for Phases I, III, and V in 1991 and 1992 (76 lots). Boardmember Rice asked if staff
had reviewed the plans and was prepared to give a report. Staff stated they had done so.
Planning Commissioner Barrows asked if Century Homes had information on the previously
approved units. Mr. John Pavelak stated they did. There being no further questions, Planning
Commissioner Barrows moved and Boardmember Campbell seconded a motion to place the item
fourth on the agenda. Unanimously approved.
III. BUSINESS SESSION
A.
Conditional Use Permit 93-008 and Variance 93-023; a request of Augustin
Martinez (La Quinta Meat Market) for approval to remodel and enlarge an
existing 1,581 square foot one story commercial building and a request to vary
from the C- V -N zoning district standards (street sideyard setback) and modify the
City's Off-Street Parking requirements for a building located on the northeast
corner of Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas.
DRBIO-6
1
Design Review Board Minutes
October 6, 1993
DRB10-6
1.
Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in
the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2.
Planning Commissioner Barrows asked staff if the wall at the back end of
the property would be a block wall. Staff stated they would retain the
existing landscaping but a new block wall was proposed along the east
property line. Planning Commissioner Barrows stated her concern for
safety at the rear of the property and whether the building lighting would
be enough. Staff went on to explain the lighting proposed for the project.
3.
Boardmember Rice asked what the height of the common property line
wall would be. Staff stated it was proposed to be four feet.
4.
Boardmember Campbell asked if the City had any standards for trees.
Staff stated that the City has not adopted a street tree ordinance but the
draft material is used as a guideline for tree type. It was mentioned that
the adopted specific plan has a street tree program.
5.
Boardmember Campbell questioned the treatment of the metal window
frames. Staff stated that the Village Specific Plan allowed the applicant
to either go with wood or anodized metal provided it was painted.
6.
Boardmember Campbell asked if the concrete sidewalk on Avenida
Bermudas was required by the City. Staff stated they recommended
reducing the width but could eliminate the sidewalk and require
landscaping if the Design Review Board felt it was more appropriate.
7.
Mr. Charles Garland, architect for the applicant stated he was in
agreement with the staff report and would answer any questions of the
Board.
8.
Boardmember Wright asked if on the north elevation the tile roof eyebrow
could be extended across the rear of the structure. Boardmember Wright
also asked why the tower element on the east side was not the main
entrance as opposed to the southeast corner being the entry into the
building. Mr. Garland stated the entrance was based on what the owner
wanted due to the interior layout of the equipment and the corner entrance
was a compromise to keep the entrance away from the cabinet layout and
to keep close to Calle Tampico.
2
Design Review Board Minutes
October 6, 1993
9.
10.
11.
12.
DRB10-6
Chairman Curtis asked that if the entrance was to be on the southeast
corner of the building, could an entry statement be added to this area. He
stated the sign and column setup needed to be moved to the corner with
the door. Mr. Garland stated it would be easier to rearrange the interior
and try to put the entrance on the south side by putting more glass on the
front side. Chairman Curtis stated that the south elevation did need more
store-front glass to dress up the new business.
Boardmember Campbell stated his concern that the ramp for the handicap
would be blocked. Mr. Garland explained the handicap access.
Discussion followed.
Boardmember Harbison stated there was some confusion regarding the
Tampico frontage. It was uncertain as to whether it was the entry or
whether there needed to be a window display so it would not look like the
east side of the building. Mr. Garland stated he would address the issue
with the owner.
Chairman Curtis asked if some other architectural upgrades could be done
to the north elevation. Mr. Garland stated his concern that this is the
delivery side and any low building projections would interfere with truck
deliveries. Boardmember Harbison stated that due to the amount of traffic
passing through this area, something was needed to dress up the loading
dock. Boardmember Campbell suggested that possibly a small balcony
could solve the problem. Discussion followed regarding alternatives to
dress up the north side building elevations.
13.
Planning Commissioner Barrows expressed her concern for lighting on the
north and west elevations as it was a place to congregate and security
would be a problem. Mr. Garland stated this was a concern of the owner
as well. This was why he was trying to separate his building from the
business to the east.
14.
Planning Commissioner Barrows stated that if more windows were added
she wanted to be assured that she would not see the backs of display racks
from the exterior of the building. Mr. Garland stated he would address
the issue wi th the owner.
15.
Boardmember Campbell asked if the block wall separating the two
businesses would be stuccoed. Mr. Garland stated it was one of the
conditions.
3
Design Review Board Minutes
October 6, 1993
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
DRB10-6
Boardmember Campbell stated the plans did not match the elevations.
Column pilasters on the west side that did not match the elevations as well
as the east side shows existing trees and the elevations show Cypress
trees. Mr. Garland explained the floor plan was submitted before the
elevations were drawn and the elevations show the proposed changes. He
further stated the extra columns would be eliminated.
Boardmember Campbell asked what the reason was for the walkway on
the east side. Mr. Garland stated the owner did not want a lot of
landscaping to maintain, therefore the walkway was provided. It also
made it easier for deliveries. Members stated that the additional walkway
would encourage debris and graffiti and landscaping would be preferred.
Boardmember Campbell recommended that the trash enclosure be moved
to the east property line. Mr. Garland stated this was already planned and
was a condition proposed by staff.
Boardmember Campbell asked if Mr. Garland had any problem USing
painted metal window frames instead of the anodized metal. Mr. Garland
stated he had no objection.
Boardmember Campbell stated he was not comfortable with a relationship
of a 18" overhang with a half of a column that is 9" and is a half round
that turns into a rectangular piece right above on the same plane. Mr.
Garland stated he would rectify the problem.
Boardmembers Rice and Harbison stated they felt the improvements made
a great improvement on the building.
Planning and Development Director Jerry Herman asked if the Board
intended to require windows and a door on the Tampico elevation.
Chairman Curtis stated that they wanted the door to be an entry statement
and it could be on the east or the south elevation. Staff stated their
concern that if windows were added that a condition be added to restrict
the amount of window signage that could be allowed.
There being no further comments, it was moved by Boardmember
Campbell and seconded by Planning Commissioner Barrows to
recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 93-008 and Variance 93-
023 subject to staff conditions as well as the following:
4
Design Review Board Minutes
October 6, 1993
a. The plans are to be updated to match the elevations before being
submitted to the Planning Commission.
b. Additional architectural features need to be added to the north
elevation.
c. The walkway on the east side of the building be eliminated and
landscaping installed in its place.
d. The building entry be either centered on the building on the east
or south side of the building.
e. The trash enclosure be moved to the east property line.
r. That painted metal window frames be used instead of the anodized
aluminum.
g. The Cypress trees be replaced by canopy trees.
h. Window signing should be regulated per the La Quinta Municipal
Code.
"
1,'1.
e;?)",' The vote was unanimously approved.
B. Plot Plan 93-510; a request of La Quinta Real Estate Development for approval
of a new unit plan for Tract 23268-Acacia.
DRB10-6
1.
Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand-Cherry presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning
and Development Department.
2.
Chairman Curtis asked what the status of the uncolored lots was. Staff
stated these lots were owned by individual owners for custom homes.
3.
Boardmember Wright commented on the square footage of the smallest
existing unit, of which 18 of the first 90 units were. The proposed
smallest unit were slightly smaller than these existing units. Staff stated
that in addition, the proposed largest unit is 169 square feet larger than the
existing largest unit. Discussion followed regarding the product mix.
Staff then showed a video of the area in question.
4.
Planning Commissioner Barrows asked what the City required in the
number of trees to be planted. Staff stated that Condition #2 required two
IS-gallon trees were required on the interior lots and five IS-gallon trees
on corner lots.
5.
Chairman Curtis asked if anyone wished to speak on behalf of the
applicant. Mr. Rick Snyder, representing Acacia Homes, stated he was
agreement with the staff's recommendations and would answer any
questions of the Board.
5
Design Review Board Minutes
October 6, 1993
6. Chairman Curtis asked if they were the builders of the original tract. Mr.
Snyder stated they were.
7.
8.
9.
!
:"j.
~,\)
'AI
Planning Commissioner Barrows asked if the garage doors were proposed
to be metal roll-up or wood. Mr. Snyder stated this had not been
determined as of yet but they would be the same as the existing garages.
Chairman Curtis asked how many homes were planned for Phase I. Mr.
Snyder stated that the first phase would consist of 20 homes and from
there on, it would be dependent upon financing and sales. Chairman
Curtis asked if the mix was also dependent upon sales. Mr. Snyder stated
they would be to a point. Chairman Curtis asked if there were any
limitations on the size of the units due to lot sizes. Mr. Snyder stated no.
Boardmember Rice asked if the price range would be comparable to the
existing units. Mr. Snyder stated they would be.
10.
Boardmember Campbell asked the applicant to explain the window break-
up treatment. Mr. Arnold stated it was a dual pane window with a
sandwiched frame in between to meet the Title 24 requirements.
II.
Boardmember Harbison question the use of 12" overhang and stated his
desire to see 18" overhangs. Mr. Snyder stated that both 12" and 18"
overhangs were being used.
12.
There being no further questions, Boardmembers Harbison/Rice moved
and seconded a motion to recommend approval of Plot Plan 93-510 subject
to staff's conditions as well as the following:
a. That all units have 18" overhangs.
b. That the material of the garage doors match the existing homes in
the tract.
The motion was approved unanimously.
C. Palm Royale Park; a request of the Parks and Recreation Department for review
of park design located on the west side of Adams Street between Fred Waring
Drive and Miles A venue.
DRB10-6
I.
Parks and Recreation Manager Clint Bohlen presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning
and Development Department.
6
Design Review Board Minutes
October 6, 1993
2. Chairman Curtis asked for clarification of the grade elevation. Staff stated
it was 17-feet at its lowest point in the retention basin.
3. Boardmember Harbison questioned the fact that the people in this
neighborhood do not want an active park. Staff stated that in the forums
held, the overwhelming opinion was to have a passive park. They did not
want the area to become a hangout for kids.
4. Boardmember Harbison stated his concern about the street drains being an
eyesore. He felt dry wells were needed to dry the area out. Staff stated
the Master Plan acknowledged the problem and the issue would be
addressed before construction took place.
5. Chairman Curtis suggested that the area be regraded to bring the water to
a specific drainage area and this could possible solve the problem. Staff
stated this would be addressed in the construction drawing stage.
6. Mr. John Pavelak, Century Homes, stated his concern that the passive
park be built. He felt that even though the homeowners in the area
requested a passive park, that the area was ideal for a soccer field and
based on his experience in developing parks, the field would be used if it
was built. He felt the City should not let the fear of the "hang-out"
problem deny the families the opportunity to have a recreation area.
7. There being no further discussion, Boardmembers Rice/Campbell moved
and seconded a motion to recommend approval of the Palm Royale Park
as submitted with the addition of grading the park for drainage.
Unanimously approved.
D. Architectural Plan Approval for La Guinta Highlands - Tract 23269; a request of
Century Homes for architectural approval to develop Plans 3 through 5 in Phase
VIol' Tract 23269.
1.
Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented a verbal staff report since the
item was added to the agenda.
2.
Chairman Curtis questioned staff as to what the party fencing would
consisted of. Staff stated the front fencing would be decorative masonry
and the interior sideyards could be wood, but the street sides would be
masonry or stucco.
DRB10-6
7
Design Review Board Minutes
October 6, 1993
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
.;,'\
:Y'
:?
t\
Mr. John Pavelak, representing Century Homes presented their proposal.
He stated that they built 76 homes in this tract over the last few years in
Phases I, III, and V and they have recently purchased 22 lots in Phase VI.
Williams Development Company was originally going to build 44 homes
but they did not complete their phase. Mr. Pavelak stated he is building
homes which are similar in size to the surrounding existing homes.
Chairman Curtis asked if the applicant would be constructed models. Mr.
Pavelak stated the models were already existing on Las Vistas Drive.
Boardmember Wright asked if the bonus room was added to the plan.
Mr. Pavelak stated that 97% of the previous home buyers requested the
room so they added it to the plan.
Boardmember Wright asked what the average lot size was and the price
range for the homes. Mr. Pavelak stated roughly 7,200 square feet and
the price range was $125-150,000.
Boardmember Rice stated his concern that again there were no 18" roof
overhangs.
Boardmember Wright asked what the S.E.E.R. rating was for the air
conditioning condensers. Mr. Pavelak stated he didn't know but they met
the State Title 24 requirements.
There being no further questions, Boardmembers Wright/Rice moved to
recommend reapproval of the architectural plans for Phase VI of Tract
23269, subject to staff conditions and the requirement that overhangs be
18" and that the air conditioning condenser have a minimum S.E.E.R.
rating of 10.0 or better. Unanimously approved.
E. Application Submittal Reauirement Review
I.
2.
DRB1a-6
Chairman Curtis clarified for the Board their responsibility. The Board
was to review the document and attachments and make any revisions as
they felt they related to the Design Review Board.
Boardmember Wright clarified that the Board will make these revisions
within two weeks and resubmit these documents to staff who would
compile the information and return it to the Board for final approval.
Members discussed with staff the Board's role in the Planning process.
8
Design Review Board Minutes
October 6, 1993
3. Boardmember Campbell asked if staff was satisfied with the current
handout. Staff stated these were the documents currently being used and
if the Board had any suggestions they would be welcome. Staff indicated
they would insert the Design Review Board process where appropriate.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
Chairman Curtis asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of September I,
1993. There being no additions or corrections, Boardmembers Curtis/Campbell moved
and seconded a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved and seconded by Boardmembers Harbison/Campbell to adjourn to a regular
meeting of the Design Review Board on November 3, 1993, at 5: 30 P. M. This meeting of the
La Quinta Design Review Board was adjourned at 7:42 P.M., October 6, 1993.
DRB10-6
9