Loading...
1990 09 05 DRB Minutes MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CITY OF LA QUINTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California September 5, 1990 5 :30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. Vice Chairman Llewellyn brought the meeting to order at 5 :35 P.M. and Boardmember Michael Platt led the flag salute. Vice Chairman Llewellyn asked for a roll call. II. ROLL CALL A. Present: Boardmembers Paul Anderson, David Harbison, John Walling, Michael Platt, Planning Commission Representative Peter Zelles, Vice Chairman Llewellyn. B. Absent: Chairman Rice III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Planning Commissioner Zelles moved and Boardmember Platt seconded the motion to approve the Minutes of August 1, 1990, as submitted, unanimously approved. IV. BUSINESS SESSION A. A request of Sunrise Company for review of seven unit types for use in the PGA West proiect area. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Boardmember Anderson asked Staff to explain what they mean by "better" elevations. Staff stated that they needed to be more defined, less conceptual. 3. Allan Levin, Sunrise Company, gave a brief description of the units to be presented. He further stated that the setbacks would adhere to the City Code requirements. In reference to more detail work on the side elevations, he stated that they did not MINDRB-9/S 1 have more detail because of the zero lot line concept units and the blank wall is adjacent to the next unit. Additionally, landscaping is used to cover any blank wall areas. 4. Ben Rover, Architect, Sunrise Company, described each of the units they were presenting. 5. Planning Commissioner Zelles inquired what the price range would be. Mr. Levin stated they would range from $150,000 to $750,0002:. 6. Vice Chairman Llewellyn asked if Staff was comfortable with the side elevations. Principal Planner Stan Sawa stated that the reputation of Sunrise had proven to be a quality product. Boardmember Walling stated that on the zero lot line units should have a buffer to break up the long wall. 7. There being no further questions, Boardmember Harbison moved' to approve the unit plans as submitted with additional side architectural treatment where feasible. Boardmember Walling seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. In /ri; 'i J . 0:;/ B . A request of Landmark Land Company for review of plantiIw.: plans for street medians adjacent to Tract 24890. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Boardmember Paul Anderson dismissed himself due to a possible conflict of interest. 3. Mr. Ray Lopez, Landmark Land Company presented the proposed landscaping plans for the median. He described the plants and irrigation system to be used. 4. Discussion followed regarding the type of trees to be used and a general consensus of approval of the plan. 5. Following discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Platt and seconded by Commissioner Zelles to approve the plans as submitted. Unanimously approved with Boardmember Anderson abstaining. /i? //J/ ';/.) () .;; -.; C. PLOT PLAN 90-453 AND VARIANCE 90-013. A request of Oranco Development for review of a 3,550 square foot commercial building in the Village at La Quinta Specific Plan area. MINDRB-9/S 2 MINDRB-9/S 1. 2. 3. 4. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. Vice Chairman Llewellyn asked if this project was within the flood plane area. Principal Planner Stan Sawa stated that it was within the I-foot zone and they were in compliance. Commissioner Zelles inquired if the Applicant was in favor of Staff recommendations. Staff stated the Applicant was here to speak. Boardmember Walling asked if Staff was asking the Board to continue the matter till the Staff recommendations were met. Principal Planner Sawa stated that it was at the discretion of the Board. Staff would be comfortable with whatever they decided. 5. Mr. Earl Florence, Architect, Arvid Johnson Associates spoke on behalf of the Applicant and stated that they had no serious problem with Staff recommendations, but were confused as to what was being asked of them in comparison to what is already built in this area. They would request some direction from the Board as to what criteria is expected of them. He went on to explain the changes they were making in compliance with Staff recommendations. 6. Boardmembers Walling and Anderson had questions regarding the 16-foot trellis. Different ideas as to ways to cantilever the trellis were discussed. 7. Boardmember Platt inquired as to what materials were to be used on the covered parking. Discussion followed as to what types of materials would work best in the desert. 8. Mr. Tom Knowlen, 73-381 Elkhorn, Palm Desert, the owner of the building spoke regarding the in-lieu fee for parking spaces. He asked that the Board give them the direction as to what is required. 9. Boardmembers continued to discuss the Staff recommendations with the Applicant and give direction as to what the Board was asking of the Applicant. 3 MINDRB-9/S 10. Boardmember Anderson stated that they were impressed with the willingness of the Applicant to work with the City and realized their frustration as this was the first application to go through the Village Zoning requirements. He went on to give some ideas for cantilevering over the doors, the covered parking materials and tile around the scuppers, materials to be used on the risers on the steps. 11. Mr. Florence inquired of the Board regarding the restriction of signs on the awning. The Board had no objections. 12. Commissioner Zelles asked if the Applicant had been made aware of the Sign Ordinance. Principal Planner Sawa stated that in the application process the Applicant is made aware of the Sign Ordinance. 13. Boardmember Walling stated that the awning sign could work well if it was designed to play into the trellis and was one continuous awning throughout the length of the building. He also suggested that the Applicant put a small planting area with plants going up the walls between the windows and doors to break up the wall; also in the back put 3-foot curb triangles off the back curb and have large canopy trees. 14. Following discussion, it was moved by Boardmember Anderson to continue the matter to a special session to review the plans when revised. Commissioner Zelles suggested that the Board not hold the Applicant up, but grant an approval of the project with the recommendations the Board requires being sent to the Planning Commission so they can confirm the changes. Principal Planner Sawa suggested that the Board approve the project with the Conditions and add a condition that prior to final working drawings being prepared, the matter would come before the Board. 15. Boardmember Anderson amended his motion to approve the project subject to following conditions: a. Specific sign program shall be approved by the Design Review Board prior to issuance of building permit. b. Preliminary and finallandscaping/irrigation plans shall be approved by the Design Review Board prior to issuance of building permit. Final plans not to be prepared until preliminary plans have been prepared. Street trees with grates per specific plan are to be provided with landscape areas (especially vines or trellis) added adjacent to street sides of project. Landscaping fingers to be provided between parking stalls to provide code required shading 4 of parking area. Shade trellis or cover, may be used in place of landscaping fingers. c. Architectural treatment shall be added on parking lot sid, and side of building to be equivalent to street sides of building per code requirements. Repeat trellis treatment (extend 16" out from building) over rear doors and provide tile or other architectural treatment around scuppers. d. Trellis structures, especially rafters, should consist of heavy beams or be constructed of decorative metal. e. The stucco shall be provided with a decorative trowelled finish per Village Specific Plan. f. The face of the steps adjacent to streets shall be provided with tile or other decorative treatment for safety and aesthetic purposes. g. Prior to working drawings being started, revised plans per the above conditions, shall be submitted to the Design Review Board for approval. Commissioner Zelles seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. //I!;/"I () -0 ';:;.3 D . Presentation by TKD Landscape Architects on Eisenhower Medians . MINDRB-9!S 1. Mr. Tom Doczi, TKD Landscape Architects, 333 N. Palm Canyon, Palm Springs, presented the report of medians island proposals. 2. Boardmember Walling inquired as to a construction starting date. The Applicant stated that they were projecting a starting date in late October. 3. Boardmember Anderson asked what the overall design would be. Mr. Doczi stated that as they approached the Village, a different palm tree would be used with a more dense shrubbery. Discussion followed regarding the types of plants that are throughout the City, and the use of landscaping lighting. Boardmember Harbison suggested that from the cost perspective, it would be best to install the sleeve during construction. 4. Following discussion it was moved by Boardmember Walling and seconded by Boardmember Harbison to approve the proposal as submitted. Unanimously approved. / ,/'.., /, - (( /p! (!ruJ,! S V. It was suggested that the City entry signs be tabled until Chairman Rice returns. Unanimously approved. VI. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Planning Commission Representative Zelles and seconded by Boardmember Harbison to adjourn to a regular meeting of the Design Review Board on October 3, 1990, at 5: 30 P.M. This meeting of the La Quinta Design Review Board was adjourned at 7:00 P.M., September 5, 1990. MINDRB-9/S 6