Loading...
2005 01 05 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 5, 200!5 10:00 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER A. Thiis meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:04 a.m. by Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit. B. Committee Members present: Bill Bobbitt, Frank Christopher, and David Thoms. C. Staff present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa 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 December1, 2004. There being no changes, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to approve the Minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. ViI~Use Permit 2004-026; a request of Prest Vuksic Architects for consideration of landscaping plans for a 6,800 square foot two story oHice building located on the north side of Calle Amigo, one lot west of 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. 2. Committee Member Thoms asked if the material inside the people space what is it. Staff stated it appears to be pavers. Committee Member Thoms asked that the benches have backs on them. C:\Documents and Settings\cwalker\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\ 1-5~05 ALRC.doc Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee January 5, 2005 3. Committee Member Christopher asked if the landscaping will grow to a significant height to soften the building. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the palm trees will. Staff noted the robusta is the only one to have height. Most of the others are low growing. The building has enough architectural detail that you don't want to hide the building. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked where the Chamaerops humilis was located on the site. They are noted on the legend but do not appear on the site plan. Staff noted he did not see where they are on the site plan. Committee Member Bobbitt noted if they use them they will each need to be at least six feet apart. He has a concern regarding evergreen pear is known to get bacteria and it is unable to kill and will wipe the tree out. He would recommend they not use them, but replace them with a different variety. Courtyard area needs shade trees. 6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2005-001 recommending approval of proposed landscaping plans for Village Use Permit 2004-026, as recommended by staff and amended: a. Material be a paver not concrete. b. Benches have backs to them. c. Evergreen pear be replaced with a Ligustrum Lucidum. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2004-820; a request of for consideration of Ehline Company for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for four prototypical residential plans for Tentative Tract Map 31249 located on the south side of Avenue 58, :t 1/2 mile west of Madison Street. 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 Natasha King, project manager, who gave a presentation on the project. C:\Documents and Settings\cwalker\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\ 1-5-05 ALRe.doc 2 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee January 5, 2005 2. Committee Christopher asked the location of the model units on the tract. Staff noted the lots. 3. Committee Member Thoms asked if the interior streets had sidewalks. Staff noted they are going through revisions to reduce the street widths and neither plan shows sidewalks. It will be a wedge design for each lot. Committee Member Thoms noted one of the exhibits shows a connecting walk from the driveway to the entrance. Staff noted that is a continuation of the model walkways. He noted the entry perimeter wall, landscaping, and gate, do not show enough detail for review. Staff noted they will be brought back for review and approval. 4. Committee Member Christopher asked what developments adjoin this tract. Staff noted the surrounding developments. 5. Committee Member Thoms asked about the street lighting. Ms. King stated it will be included with the landscaping plan when it is submitted. 6. Committee Member Christopher asked if the Committee was approving the models as well as the typical lot landscaping. Ms. King stated they were requesting only the model complex landscaping. The sidewalk noted is only for the model home path. 7. Committee Member Thoms noted there is a note indicating pavers on one plan and the other states concrete. 8. Committee Member Bobbitt stated they own it and have to market them, so he has no issue. Looking t the elevations, they are very attractive. Ms. King stated that in regard to the "model trail," each model has a different type of surface to make the offer to the client as to which option they would prefer. 9. Committee Member Thoms noted the garage door openings and asked the material. Ms. King stated cedar and a new type of wood material. Same as used at the Norman Estates. 10. Committee Member Bobbitt noted the wall in the parking area and asked the material. Ms. King stated that was a garden wall. Committee Member Bobbitt stated it should be a slump C:\Documents and Settings\cwalker\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\ 1-5-05 ALRe.doc 3 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee January 5, 2005 stone, or similar, split face, plaster to keep in keeping with the architecture. 11. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the front yards were to be HOA maintained. Ms. King stated HOA maintained. Committee Member Bobbitt stated there may be a problem with individual clocks at each unit instead of a central clock. Ms. King stated they normally have a common area clock. Committee Member Bobbitt suggested that whatever area being maintained by the HOA have at a central location. 12. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2005-002 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2004-820, as recommended by staff and amended: a. Perimeter landscaping and wall, and gate plans and interior common area will be brought back for review. b. Garden walls shall be plaster or in keeping with the architecture. 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 regular meeting to be held on February 2 2005. This meeting was adjourned at 11: 01 a.m. on January 5, 2005. Respectfully submitted, C:\Documents and Settings\cwalker\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\ 1-5:05 ALRC.doc 4