Loading...
2003 01 08 ALRC Minutes MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Ouinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Ouinta, CA January 8, 2003 10:00 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Committee was called to order at 10: 12 a.m. by Planning Manager Oscar Orci who led the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Bill Bobbitt, Dennis Cunningham, and David Thoms. C. Staff present: Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Management Analyst Debbie Powell, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planners Wallace Nesbit and Gre!~ Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: It was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to reorganize the agenda to take Item C as Item A. Unanimously approved. IV. CONSENT CAI_ENDAR: A. Staff asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of December 4, 2002. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to approve the Minutes as submittlsd. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Commercial Property Improvement Program 2003-020; a request of Santa Rosa Developers for review of a request for funding to enhance the exterior/entry of the Santa Rosa Plaza development located at the northwest corner of Calle Tampico and Desert Club Drive. 1 . Management Analyst Debbie Powell gave a report on the request and introduced the applicants for the project. 0:\ WPDOCS\ARLC\ 1-8-03. wpd 1 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes January 8, 2003 2. Committee Member Thoms questioned whether this type of application qualified for the loan. Staff stated we do fund new construction projects and it does falls under that category. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated he has the same problem and it is an issue of what is the spirit of this program. His understanding of the program was to help enhance the older buildings in the Village. To help make the Village more vibrant and encourage development in the Village area. He still feels this money should be for the "moms and pops" to help them enhance their buildings. If the program guidelines allow funding for this type project, then he has no problem. 4. Committee Member Thoms stated there are a lot of new projects in the Village and questioned whether this would set a precedent for funding. He appreciates the applicant's intent, but believes the money should be more for remodeling and not new construction. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he concurred. The program has always been difficult to interpret. He would prefer to have someone from the City make a more definitive definition as to how the funds are to be used. If this is approved today, it may set the precedent and deplete the funds that should be available for the older buildings that need the help. 6. Committee Member Thoms noted the project does not meet funding criteria as set forth in the checklist. 7. Ms. Bridgett Myers, Santa Rosa Development stated staff suggested they apply for the loan. They have been working with their neighbors to help enhance their site as well as their own and this was the intent. They do not believe they should be associated with discussion regarding the parameters of the program. 8. Committee Member Bobbitt stated they have been struggling with this program in regard to what should be funded since the beginning. The project looks great and he has no issue with the request. The question is the purpose of the program. 9. Committee Member Cunningham stated he would like to continue this request and direct staff to either provide a more definitive explanation of what the funds are to be used for or schedule a meeting where the Committee can meet with the appropriate staff to answer their questions regarding the program. G: I WPDOCSIARLCI] -8-03. wpd 2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes January 8, 2003 10. Committee Member Thoms also asked for clarification as to whether a request can be made for architectural work or site work, as well. 11 . There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to continue CPIP 2003- 020, with direction to staff for a clear explanation as to the policies and criteria of the program, Unanimously approved. 8. Site Development Permit 2002-757; a request of Affiliated construction/La Ouinta Developers. for review of architecture and landscaping plans for a 5,000 square foot two story office building in the La Ouinta Professional Plaza located within Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 29889 at the southeast corner of Avenue 47 and Washington Street. 1 . Committee Member Thoms stated he does reside within Lake La Ouinta, but has no real project interest within a 500-foot radius of the project. 2. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit described the project and introduced the applicants for the project. 3. Committee Member Thoms stated the color on the renderings appears to be different on the east and west elevations. Staff stated the color boards were a better indicator and the project colors will coordinate with the existing buildings. 4. Committee Member Cunningham stated it mirrors all the other architectural treatments at the site and he as no objections. 5. Committee Member Thoms asked staff why they were asking the Committee to review the west elevations. Staff clarified it was to ensure it matches up with the rest of the complex. 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2003-001 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2002-757 as submitted. Unanimously approved. 8. Site Development Permit 2002-756; a request of David and Jamie Reulman/Radioactive for review of architectural and landscaping plans for a 15,248 square foot two story commercial building at 79-441 Corporate Centre Drive. G: I WPDOCSIARLCI 1-8-03. wpd 3 Architectural & Landscape Review Connnittee Minutes January 8, 2003 1 . Associate Planner Greg Trousdell gave an overview of the project and introduced the applicants for the project. Mr. Ricciardi, architect for the project, gave a further presentation of the project. 2. Committee Member Cunningham questioned the "living quarters" in the structure. Mr. Reulman, applicant for the project, explained it was a showroom simulation to show what can be done in a house. 3. Committee Member Thoms asked if the driveway would extend for this project. Mr. Ricciardi indicated where the access locations were on the site map. Ray Martin, landscape designer, explained the revised landscape plan. 4. Committee Member Thoms stated the proposed landscaping will not adequately serve as a retention basin. Staff stated the plans had been submitted on December 31 st to the Public Works Department, who was currently reviewing them. Staff had not yet had the opportunity to review them. This retention basin is for nuisance water only. The entire site has been required to drain to the north into the CVWD Channel. Committee Member Thoms stated that if the retention basin is required for the northeast corner of the site, this landscape plan does not work. He would agree that this parkway retention basin should be eliminated. 5. Committee Member Thoms asked that the plant material between the planter and where the cars park be eliminated as the plants only get trampled. On the side were there are no cars to be parked, it can remain. He expressed concern about the roll-up doors on the west side that will be open during business hours. If this is a shared driveway, it could be unsightly. Mr. Ricciardi stated he has spoken with the developer to the west and their buildings will hide the bays. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if there was any architectural theme for this commercial development. Staff noted each building can have its own theme. 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2003-002 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2002-756 as amended: 0:\ WPDOCS\ARLCI 1-8-03. wpd 4 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes January 8, 2003 1 . The plant material shall be removed from the area in front of the cars on the north side of the building. 2. Applicant is to work with staff to eliminate the retention basin in the Corporate Centre Drive parkway. If the retention plan is required, the applicant is to work with staff to develop a landscape plan that works as a retention basin. Unanimously approved. C. Site Development Permit 2002-758; a request of Cornerstone Developers for review of prototype architectural and model home landscaping plans for four residential unit plans located within Tract 30521 at the northeast corner of Washington Street and Miles Avenue 1 . Principal Planner Stan Sawa, gave an overview of the project and introduced Joe Swain, Cornerstone Developers, and Ray Lopez, the landscape architect for the project. 2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked for clarification as to whether or not he was in conflict with the project. Staff indicated that if he has real estate interest within 500 feet of the project, including common area, he must not participate in this discussion. Committee Member Bobbitt indicated he has no real estate within 500 feet of the project.. 3. Committee Member Thoms recommended eliminating the windows on the garage doors. He also recommended there be pedestrian access between the models and the parking lot before the landscaped corner. Mr. Lopez stated he would extend the handicapped walkway to allow access. Committee Member Thoms asked that there be some slight mounding to the lawn area also and remove the triangle portion of the landscaping on Lot 8 at the sidewalk. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated his personal opinion is that he is not a big fan of the use of decomposed granite. 5. Committee member Cunningham asked that they be required to use the decorative chimney caps. Other than that, the project is in keeping with the area and he has no problems with the project. G:I WPDOCSIARLCII-8-03.wpd 5 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes January 8, 2003 6. Mr. Swain questioned the need for a meandering wall as well as the sidewalk. Committee Member Cunningham stated the general rule is to have in-fill projects blend in with the adjoining projects and yet bring their own character to the area. In regard to the wall, he would suggest they take advantage of the high visibility at this corner by giving some special treatment to the wall. Mr. Lopez stated the sound and grading studies will have requirements as well. 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2003-003 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2002-738 as amended: 1. Windows on the garage doors are to be eliminated. 2. The triangular portion of the landscaping on Lot 8 shall be removed 3. A walkway shall be constructed to tie in the parking lot to the models next to the handicapped parking space. 4. Decorative chimney caps shall be required on all houses with chimneys. 5. The lawn areas shall be mounded 12-18 inches. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: VIII. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a regular meeting to be held on February 5, 2003. This meeting was adjourned at 11 :24 a.m. on January 8, 2003. ~es ectfully submitted, . -~f:{ / (Jtc.) _~ , . T04~R, Eacutive Secretary City o~inta, California G:\ WPDOCS\ARLC\I-8-03.wpd 6