Loading...
2005 07 06 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 July 6, 2005 10:00 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10: 1 0 a.m. by Community Development Director Doug Evans. B. Committee Members present: Frank Christopher, Bill Bobbitt, and David Thoms. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, Principal Planner Fred Baker, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, 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 June 1, 2005. There being no changes, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Thoms to approve the Minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2005-833; a request of Mulvanny G2 Architecture for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for a 150,000 square foot retail store and fueling station for the property located south of the intersection of Depot Drive/Highway 111, between Dune Palms Road and Jefferson Street. 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 Peter Clement and Jeffrey Wilson, Brad Lenahan, the Costco representative, the architect and landscape architect, who gave a presentation on the project. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\7-6-05 ALRC.doc Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee July 6, 2005 1. Committee Member Christopher asked about the wall abutting the low-income housing project next door and the drive for the loading trucks. Mr. Clement answered they have looked at the drive for the trucks. 2. Committee Member Thoms asked if the access path was to service the handicap. He then asked about the path on the east. The blowups of the parking area show it as a pedestrian connection, on the west side of the access path there is a concrete block the cars to the west. On the east side there is a low wall and hedge planting and then the parked cars. What happens when pedestrians want to get to the path, do they walk through the shrubs. Mr. Wilson stated there is a clear path to both sides where the parking spaces are provided. Where there needs to be ADA accessibility, it will be open on both sides. This is a typical cross section, not actual. Committee Member Thoms stated his concern is that people will have to walk through the hedge to get to the path. Mr. Wilson stated where there are no ADA accessible paths, people will normally use the vehicle travel lanes, but they will work with their landscape architect to ensure there are break areas where people will want to walk through. Mr. Clements asked if it would be better to meander the sidewalks to work out with the ADA spaces. Committee Member Thoms stated there is not enough room to meander a sidewalk. Mr. Clements stated they could move the shrubs from one side to the other to create the breaks on the east side as well. Mr. Wilson went on to describe the pathway from Highway 111 to service pedestrian access as well as ADA pathway. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked the height limits for this location. Staff stated 40-feet, but architectural projections can exceed this. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the use of the Chinese Elm and Ash trees; are these normal trees for Costco? Mr. Brad Lenahan, landscape architect for the project, stated yes, and explained the alternative trees they may use. Committee Member Bobbitt discouraged the use of the Pistacias because they will blow over and split. They need to be maintained or they will not achieve their purpose. Committee Member Bobbitt commended the applicant on the parking lot islands at 6-feet. He then asked what type of irrigation would be used. Mr. Lenahan stated drip for shrubs, deep two inch G:IWPDOCSIALRC\7.6.05 ALRC.doc 2 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee July 6, 2005 bubblers on the trees. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the bubblers can be a problem if not installed correctly. It is better to use a grid of emitters, one on each side of the tree. Mr. Lenahan suggested nettafim that is laid out in a grid. 4. Committee Member Christopher asked about the 1.5 inch caliper trunk tree size and suggested they be 36-inch box trees. 5. Committee Member Bobbit explained the 1.5 inch was a Code requirement. Mr. Lenahan stated that when they submit for plan check the specifications will be listed at that time. 6. Committee Member Christopher stated the trees next to the building should be larger. 7. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2005-023 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-833, as recommended and as follows: a. Redesign the planting areas to allow breaks in the plant hedges for pedestrians in the parking lot. Accommodations shall be made on the east and west elevations. b. Trees in and around the building shall be in scale with the building. Unanimously approved. B. Village Use Permit 2005-029; a request of Prest Vuksic Architects for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for a 30,787 square foot of retail in two one-story buildings, for the property located at the southwest corner of Calle Estado and Desert Club Drive. 1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced David Prest, John Vuksic and Bob Lichter, the architect and landscape architect, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Bobbitt clarified that in regard to the palm trees, his comments have been that they not be placed in high G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\7-6-05 ALRC.doc 3 . Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee July 6, 2005 traffic areas and the choice of trees be made by a qualified landscape architect to ensure they did not come out of an old grove, but were strong, healthy trees and not stressed. 3. Committee Member Christopher asked about'the integration of the residential uses in conjunction with the commercial uses. Staff stated the applicant is not receptive to the idea at this time. If it were considered, Building "B" would be the only building for this type of development. Committee Member Christopher stated this corner would be the ideal location to have four residential units on the second story. Staff noted it would require processing of a Specific Plan. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the storefronts opening onto the street. With the parking lot on the inside, it does not lend itself to having entries on the street side. Staff explained the site plan. 5. Committee Member Thoms stated that as presented, it does not make sense to create punch-out areas to allow the entrances on the street side. He asked the location of the corrugated metal. Staff noted the location of the use. Committee Member Thoms stated he would have a problem accepting the corrugated metal in the Village. Mr. Bob Lichter described how the metal would be integrated into the design of the project. In regard to the use of the corrugated steel, he would hope they would not consider the material without taking into account the entire project. In regard to mixing this use with a residential component, it could be a real problem. Parking would be the biggest problem. Mr. Vuksic went into more detail on the project. 6. Committee Member Thoms stated he thinks it is a wonderful project and agrees the residential uses would not work here. He still has a problem with the use of corrugated metal. Mr. Lichter stated the material on the City Library is metal. Mr. Vuksic stated the metal is all exposed to give the texture of material for a specific look. It will create shadows with the light. 7. Committee Member Christopher stated the use of metal is pushing the limits on the style in the Village when the majority of the buildings are already some form of Spanish revival. However, this site could support the contemporary style. It is G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\7-6-05 ALRC.doc 4 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee July 6, 2005 his understanding that Council has stated they would like to have the eclectic look. 8. Committee Member Bobbitt stated his concern is whether or not the design would fit in this location. He does like the project and he would visit the site. The building and landscape are beautiful building. 9. Committee Member Christopher suggested there are a host of materials made out of copper that are prefinished with almost the same color pallet. It changes that element. It accomplishes the design idea but uses a different material. Mr, Lichter stated he would agree, but would question whether or not they can find a material that is cost effective. Mr. Vuksic stated the metal will not have the industrial look. It will be upscale. Committee Member Christopher noted this corner is a transition site where there should be a lot of foot traffic. He suggested having the second building take access onto the street and create a seating area. Discussion followed regarding alternatives for the site, Mr. Prest stated he believes the City would want the different architecture to have a variety. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated the ALRC has stated their approval of the building and concern about the location of certain metals. He would state his concern is to develop new customers and have a larger customer base, This building could bring the younger clientele to keep it alive 50 years down the road. 10. Committee Member Christopher stated this is a good location as it is the focused corner and this project would be a good transition. 11 . Committee Member Thoms stated he has no objection except to the corrugated metal. 12. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2005-024 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2005-029, as recommended and as follows: a. Non glue-Iem products be pressure treated. b. Actual metal sample of the finish piece of corrugated metal be provided to the Planning Commission. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\7-6-05 ALRC.doc 5 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee July 6. 2005 Unanimously approved. C. Site Development Permit 2005-814, Amendment #1; a request of the Entin Family Trust for consideration of a modification to architectural plans for a 23,760 square foot two-story general office building for the property located 43-576 Washington Street, approximately 950 feet north of Fred Waring Drive. 1 . Associate Planner Wallace Nesibt presented, the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Albert Barcelo, the architect, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Thoms asked how the first floor related to the curb on Washington Street. Staff stated there is a slight elevation. Mr. Barcelo stated the finish floor is at 151 feet above sea level and the sidewalk on Washington is 146. It is not a dominant building sitting on Washington Street. It is recessed back from the street. 3. Committee Member Christopher asked if the solar concerns raised by staff were addressed. Mr. Barcelo explained the changes. Committee Member Christopher stated the banding on the windows gives a more institutional look. He suggested an eyebrow arch over the center upper windows. Mr. Barcelo stated they considered it when they realized the extra space. They did break it up on the first floor and rear of the building. By adding the extra arches they thought this may be too much. They were looking to have a balanced look on the entire building. 4. Committee Member Thoms asked about the landscape plan. He noted the changes as being an improvement. Along Washington Street there needs to b,e more screening of the parking lot. It is almost all decomposed granite (DG) with one and two gallon plants. There needs.to be more screening. He asked what happens along the north and south side. Staff stated they would need to have a reciprocal access agreement. The adjoini(1g properties are commercially zoned. 5. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Thoms to G:IWPDOCSIALRC\7-6-05 ALRC_doc 6 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee July 6, 2005 adopt Minute Motion 2005-025 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-814, Amendment # 1, as recommended and as follows: a. Tri-colored tile shall be used on the roof, b, More plant material shall be added along Washington Street to provide more screening for the parking lot, c, Screening of property line walls shall be required. Unanimously Approved. 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 Bobbitt/Thoms to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a meeting to be held on August 3, 2005. This meeting was adjourned at 11:47 p.m. on July 6, 2005. Respectfully submitted, ~v G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\7-6-05 ALRC.doc 7