1991 07 03 DRBDESIGN REVIEW BOARD
A Regular Meeting to be held at the
La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado
La Quinta, California
July 3, 1991
5:30 P-M-
I. CALL TO ORDER - Flag Salute
II. ROLL CALL
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes of June 5, 1991
IV.BUSINESS SESSION
A. Public Use Permit 91-011; a request of the La Quinta Arts Foundation
for approval to construct a 6000 square foot administration/display
building in the SR Zone.
B . Public Use Permit 91-010; a request of Michael and Glenda Bangerter for
approval of elevations for child care center
C. Tentative Tract 23269; a request of Williams Development Company for
approval of new architectural elevations.
D. Tentative Tract 23519 and Tentative Tract 26188; a request of Santa
Rosa Developers for approval of perimeter landscaping plans.
V. OTHER
A. Street Name Signs for the Village; consideration of street name signs
for the Village Specific Plan area.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
CITY OF LA QiTI1VTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California
June 5, 1991
I. CALL TO ORDER
5:30 P.M.
A. Chairman Rice brought the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. and
Boardmember Walling led the flag salute. Chairman Rice asked for a roll
call.
II. ROLL CALL
A. Present: Boardmembers David Harbison, John Walling, Ted Llewellyn,
Planning Commission Representative H. Fred Mosher, and Chairman
Rice.
B. Absent: Boardmember Michael Platt
A motion was made by Chairman Rice and seconded by Boardmember Llewellyn to
amend the Agenda to add Plot Plan 91-458, as an emergency item. Unanimously
approved
III. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Boardmember Llewellyn moved to approve the Minutes of December 5,
1990, as submitted. Commissioner Harbison seconded the motion and it
passed unanimously.
IV. BUSINESS SESSION:
A. Public Use Permit 91-009: a request of Desert Baptist Church for
construction of an 11,654 square foot church facility at the northeast
corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street.
1. Associate Planner Glenda Lainis presented the information
contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Planning and Development Department.
DRBMIN-6/5
1
Pastor Ted Korlock, pastor of the church spoke briefly
regarding his project. Boardmember Walling asked if he had any
objections to reducing the amount of lawn. Pastor Korlock
responded he did not.
Discussion followed regarding the amount of lawn, a buffer
landscape between the curb and sidewalk with drip irrigation or
bubblers, future building pad being planted with wildflowers,
and the color of the building. All members expressed their
approval of the project.
There being no further discussion it was moved by Boardmember
Llewellyn and seconded by Boardmember Mosher to adopt Minute
Motion 91-007 recommending approval to the Planning Commission
of Public Use Permit 91-009, subject to conditions. Unanimously
adopted.
B. Variance
Tract 26524 and Parcel Map 26525
a request of Chuck Strother for a Variance for a wail nigner t:
feet on the south side of 50th Avenue west of Jefferson Street.
1. Associate Planner Glenda Lainis presented the information
contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Planning and Development Department.
2. Debra Smith, Holt Group, architect and engineer for the project
stated that they were in agreement with Staff's recommendations
and gave a description of the proposed wall. She inquired about
the encroachment permit. Staff clarified that an encroachment
permit would not be required.
3. Chairman Rice asked the Applicant why the added height was
needed. Ms. Smith stated the reason was to preserve the trees
and due to the Noise Study. Discussion followed as to the
grading and purpose of why the wall was needed to be 9 feet.
4. There being no further discussion it was moved by Chairman Rice
and seconded by Boardmember Walling to adopt Minute Motion 91-
008 recommending to the Planning Commission approval of the
Variance for Tentative Tract 26524 and Parcel Map 26525 subject
to conditions. Unanimously approved.
C. Plot Plan 91-464; a request of the Villa La Quinta Homeowner's
Association for approval of a guard gate house and monument sign on
the north side of 50th Avenue at Avila.
DRBMIN-6/5
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.
CO3
Mr. Carl Meisterlin, spoke on behalf of the Association, giving
the Board a description of the proposed project and why they
were in need of a new building. Boardmember Llewellyn inquired
if the Association had purchased the land from CVWD. Mr.
Meisterlin stated they had purchased the land from CVWD as well
as from both property owners on the other side.
3. Mr. Carl Cox, 47-159 Young Love, Indio, spoke on behalf of the
Association to explain why the additional land was needed.
Discussion followed as to what the Fire Marshal had requested.
He further stated that a restroom would be provided for
gardeners.
4. Boardmember Walling commented on the foliage to be used in the
landscaping. Discussion followed as to what plants would do best
in the summer heat.
5. There being no further discussion it was moved by Chairman Rice
and seconded by Boardmember Mosher to adopt Minute Motion 91-
009 recommending to the Planning Commission approval of Plot
Plan 91-464, subject to Staff and the Fire Marshal conditions.
Unanimously approved.
D. Plot Plan 91-458; a request of Robert Barnes for approval of a building
remodel for 51-370 Avenida Bermudas.
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.
Following a brief discussion regarding the appearance of the
building and need for additional treatment to the east side, it was
moved by Boardmember Walling and seconded by Boardmember
Llewellyn to adopt Minute Motion 91-010 recommending to the
Planning Commission approval of Plot Plan 91-458 subject to the
Staff recommendation and condition.
E. Street Name Signs for the Village; consideration of street name signs
for the Village Specific Plan.
DRBMIN-6/5
Principal Planner Sawa stated this matter was before the Board
for their consideration.
It was moved by Boardmember Mosher and seconded by
Boardmember Llewellyn to table the matter to the July meeting.
Unanimously approved. All members were encouraged to find
pictures to submit to the Planning Department for review.
06
OTHER
A. City Entry Signs; a status report only on the progress of the City
entry signs.
V. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Chairman Rice and seconded by Boardmember Llewellyn to adjourn
to a regular meeting of the Design Review Board on July 3, 1991, at 5:30 P.M. This
meeting of the La Quinta Design Review Board was adjourned at 6:04 P.M., June 5,
1991.
DRBMIN-6/5
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DATE: JULY 3, 1991
PROJECT: PUBLIC USE PERMIT 91-011
APPLICANT: LA QUINTA ARTS FOUNDATION
ARCHITECT: WALLING & MCCALLUM
LOCATION: LA QUINTA CIVIC CENTER SITE LOCATED AT SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND CALLE TAMPICO NEAR
EASTERLY END OF SITE
BACKGROUND:
The Arts Foundation is proposing to construct a 6,000 square
foot administrative/display building on the Civic Center site.
The building would be located on the east end of the Civic
Center site approximately midway between Calle Tampico and
Avenida La Fonda.
SUBMITTAL:
Applicant has submitted a site plan, floor plan, and elevations
of the proposed structure. The building would be "southwest"
in nature with the exterior materials consisting of stucco, big
trim, and a tile roof. Windows, for the most part, have been
recessed in order to provide shading of the glass areas.
At this time the landscaping plan has not been submitted.
Landscaping for this site may or may not be a part of the
overall Civic Center plan. Regardless, the Design Review Board
will review the landscaping plans when they are made available.
No signage has yet been submitted for the building. The
signage will be submitted at a later date and reviewed by the
Design Review Board.
STAFF COMMENTS:
1. Staff feels that submitted architectural plans are
attractive and well designed.
2. Detailed hardscape and softscape treatment around the
buildings will be subject to further review when those
plans are made available.
DRB7/3.F3/CS
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Board review the plans
in light of the above comments and if deemed acceptable
recommend approval to the Planning Commission, subject to any
appropriate conditions.
Attachments: 1
2
Location Map
Architectural Plans
DRB7/3.F3/CS -2- '" 007
�I I
LOCATION MAP
CASE MAP
CASE Nm PUP 91-011
52 NO
RT
SCALE:
NTS
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DATE: JULY 3, 1991
PROJECT: PUBLIC USE PERMIT 91-010
PROPOSED PRESCHOOL/DAY-CARE CENTER
APPLICANT: GLENDA & MICHAEL BANGERTER
ENGINEER: ADVANCED ENGINEERING GROUP
ARCHITECT: MOSER ASSOCIATES
LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF SAGEBRUSH AVENUE EXTENSION EAST SIDE
OF DATE PALM DRIVE
BACKGROUND:
1. The proposed preschool/day-care center will care for 230
children (200 children initially and 30 more after Phase
Two) and 23 employees, and comprise three phases, the
first (classroom & administration buildings) 8,851 square
feet, the second (infant and toddler center) (1,056
square feet) and the third (multi -use facility) 2,000
square feet.
2. The facility is located on a triangular shaped lotalong
side the CVWD evacuation channel.
3. The proposed buildings are grouped around a central open
play area located alongside the CVWD channel.
4. The main classroom building has skylights on the north
side of the roof structure thus introducing indirect
light into the building. Portal doorways on the south
side of the building have also been provided producing
shade and element of human scale.
5. Access/internal vehicular traffic circulation on the site
comprises a one-way access loop off Date Palm Drive
suitable for temporary parking during drop off and
pick-up and a larger two-way access parking area on the
northern part of the site.
6. Landscaping plans for this project will be reviewed at a
later stage.
7. The applicant has proposed a desert color scheme for the
project with red tile roof and tan/off white stucco. The
interior of each portal (seven in all) along the south
side of the classroom building will be painted different
colors of the rainbow.
DRB7/3.F2/CS -1 Lri
J
STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The trash enclosure area needs to be relocated to the
east to reduce traffic conflict in the driveway area.
2. More shade possibly in the form of a trellis or tinted
windows should be introduced on the south side of the
classroom building between the entry portals.
3. The Applicant has provided an access of + 13 parking
spaces. These should be eliminated and landscaped areas
created, for example at the southern corner of the site,
adjacent to Date Palm Drive.
4. The architectural style and color scheme of the buildings
is in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review plans in conjunction with Staff comments and determine
acceptability.
Attachments: 1. Site plan
2. Architectural drawings
DRB7/3.F2/CS -2-
CASE No.
ATTACHMENT No. 1
II PA
J LA OUIHTA \
c
RY
50 TH-�
LOCATION MAP
PUP 90-010
RT
M9In .7IZI ONOXN wauwna awxaa VJ ifl() vi w,
............ ..
viriii ... � v,wino ri �
aAlU
i
g.LIS v 9CIVDSQN`d'I 'IOOH S fl'i. m VJNmO V11
ATTACHMENT No. 2
o 0 � g 4 "j a l
HIP
o f
a
0111 HIM X42i � ����� � � 8 �
zz> aa aq
Ou 33 Wia�a °y�$r c7 E {� a��u E3�
I IyLJtl—ice i
µ
o b:, Duo
FP
1a
1
'
II
I I
,r
q
q
A
aa
7�
r ��a
V
r'ScJ
xx
:
i 77
f
_
10"1 RL"
�a wnva a.Lva oos-ar
IOOHOS fl'LLLI'I tl.LNIRO V'I
+
r
— HAIUa ouvnovs
M
adm� vw�no n
Eli
�
i
El
8
Z a
®
c
®
°
c
°
®
o ®`
i
z I11
El
El
�,°
a
...r• �
El
8
®.
®
El
II
4
e
0
1 a
;•���iI��
Ll
P6t
A.p
-�
G7
t La
la
3
. II
44
Il fl
44
II Il
� 44
Il
Il
4
Mi iF
- dl'Itl'J 'vwino w� 7 {
4.... A11Vd 'dLVd OOS66 ;�i •,+h;� 1 � i
_'IOOFi�Sfl'ILLl"Itl.T.NIf1Utl'I- q �,
i
lva
1V7tld 3.LtlU
IIOOH3s H= VIk na --
4 ,
it
J'1 II I� I I b
• t
I I
I I
II II II
II I I.
III
II _ I
I I
II I
i ii ' J
—4G
------
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DATE: JULY 3, 1991
PROJECT: PUBLIC USE PERMIT 91-010
PROPOSED PRESCHOOL/DAY-CARE CENTER
APPLICANT: GLENDA & MICHAEL BANGERTER
ENGINEER: ADVANCED ENGINEERING GROUP
ARCHITECT: MOSER ASSOCIATES
LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF SAGEBRUSH AVENUE EXTENSION EAST SIDE
OF DATE PALM DRIVE
BACKGROUND:
1. The proposed preschool/day-care center will care for 230
children (200 children initially and 30 more after Phase
Two) and 23 employees, and comprise three phases, the
first (classroom & administration buildings) 8,851 square
feet, the second (infant and toddler center) (1,056
square feet) and the third (multi -use facility) 2,000
square feet.
2. The facility is located on a triangular shaped lotalong
side the CVWD evacuation channel.
3. The proposed buildings are grouped around a central open
play area located alongside the CVWD channel.
4. The main classroom building has skylights on the north
side of the roof structure thus introducing indirect
light into the building. Portal doorways on the south
side of the building have also been provided producing
shade and element of human scale.
5. Access/internal vehicular traffic circulation on the site
comprises a one-way access loop off Date Palm Drive
suitable for temporary parking during drop off and
pick-up and a larger two-way access parking area on the
northern part of the site.
6. Landscaping plans for this project will be reviewed at a
later stage.
7. The applicant has proposed a desert color scheme for the
project with red tile roof and tan/off white stucco. The
interior of each portal (seven in all) along the south
side of the classroom building will be painted different
colors of the rainbow.
-1- Il
DRB7/3.F2/CS „j ^
STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The trash enclosure area needs to be relocated to the
east to reduce traffic conflict in the driveway area.
2. More shade possibly in the form of a trellis or tinted
windows should be introduced on the south side of the
classroom building between the entry portals.
3. The Applicant has provided an access of + 13 parking
spaces. These should be eliminated and landscaped areas
created, for example at the southern corner of the site,
adjacent to Date Palm Drive.
4. The architectural style and color scheme of the buildings
is in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review plans in conjunction with Staff comments and determine
acceptability.
Attachments: 1. Site plan
2. Architectural drawings
DRB7/3.F2/CS -2-
ATTACHMENT No. 1
I v
I�
I JPA
LA OUINTA \
�e.
sotNIF
LOCATION MAP
RTH
CASE Nm PUP 90-010
`
our�nuv wwwa tutuae asn
M9IA 0I2I1 VOrIOXd Hvw�novt
!
°i
•• i
9.LIS v 9dNOSUNV I "IooHDs 3 uin vjmno vi
ATTACHMENT No. 2
Willi
III �ill go
W151. Wi.e s'OK b i14
Pi
?—
o_ . 1
101 RLX"
70iIIVJ.�' VIHNb �...
dd WIVd aLva ON-6/
7OOHDS TILL!"! tl. MnD YI
I — anroa oavnovs
tr
� 4 i1e i _ I �► e
W js
� I S
anJan Hsnaaaccroa
j Cis Q,
I !
I
- L
0.1
! ! '
fill _
i
,�l n ,� ,—aJvr�vnsnseaays 1
iosnv� 'VINMOn
as rma azva ON a
100HJS3ILL[I V.1 NMO V'l
A
M
mnvo 'vimno V, J Kwd aLva 00i a
100HOS 3WIn YlKnO VI
I
I
im
an . WWd aLVa roc-S►
-110otus aujn v.Lruna vi
d
�I
I ip
I
I
V�
I I
t h I, II
JL _JL
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DATE: JULY 3, 1991
PROJECT: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS FOR UNITS TO BE
CONSTRUCTED ON 44 LOTS IN TRACT 23269
APPLICANT: WILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
LOCATION: LA QUINTA HIGHLANDS, LOTS 31-72, 165 AND 149,
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND FRED WARING
DRIVE. THESE LOTS ARE LOCATED ON SONESTA WAY,
VILLETA DRIVE , AROSA WAY AND LA PALMA DRIVE.
BACKGROUND:
1. Tract 23269 totaling 255 lots has been developed by a
number of developers including Triad (original subdivider
of whole tract) La Quinta Vistas and Williams Company.
2. The Williams Company has developed a number of tracts in
the northern area of La Quinta including Cactus Flower
and Rancho Ocotillo which are located across Adams Street
to the east.
PROPOSAL:
The table below describes the proposed units:
# Sq. Footage Unit
# Sq. Footage Garage
PLAN 1
1470
640
PLAN 2
1805
647
PLAN 3
1686
656
PLAN 4
1818
598
# Stories
1
1
2
2
# Different
Elevations
3
3
3
3
# Bedrooms
3
3
3
4
# Bathrooms
2
2 1/2
2 1/2
3
# Family Rooms
1
1
1
1
# Car Garages
3
3
3
3
DRB7/3.F1/CS
The applicant has proposed six different color scheme
combinations using two different roof tile colors, red/brown
and beige/brown. Six different alternate colors have been
proposed for facia/barge/trim, garage field/louvers and
stucco. These are all desert colors.
The architectural style used, Spanish/contemporary, is similar
to that used for the surrounding tracts.
Note should be made that the conditions attached to the
approval of this tract require all lots less than 150 feet from
Fred Waring Drive and Adams Street to be one story, less than
20 feet in height. This affects approximately 17 of the lots
(see attachment #2).
STAFF COMMENTS:
1. Front elevations are attractive and well proportioned
2. Side and rear elevations seem to show sufficient
architectural treatment.
3. Eaves overhangs and shading of windows on the sides of
units are minimal. Increased shading on windows on the
side elevations could be achieved by larger pop outs
around the top of windows or by using tinted windows.
4. All units are 50 feet wide and therefore will fit on the
smallest lots provided (60 feet wide).
5. only Units 1 & 2 (one story) will be allowed on Lots 31
to 45 and Lots 71 & 72. Each unit has three alternate
front elevations. Staff feels this will provide enough
variety of house design on these lots.
6. Only two color roof tiles have been proposed. A third
roof tile should be used to provide more variety in roof
color for the lots along Fred Waring and Adams Street.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review plans in conjunction with Staff comments and determine
acceptability. The Design Review Board recommendation will
then be forwarded to the Planning Commission.
Attachment: 1. Locality Plan
2. Tract Map
3. Architectural Plans & Elevations
Full scale architectural plans attached.
DRB7/3.F1/CS -2- ��;
ATTACHMENT No. 2
by witli anus Go .
:r-R� wA�iVCz) DFZ
.V.B9°95"/O'E. E 265E.93' 2658. 74) ZZC 8 'J
60'
2376.58 (737 11 i
Yo4�Z/O 1 S 6 7 / /7 27 2J 29 3C3/ !2 33 1I 75 J6 39
1 /39\�\ 2oB ZIl II 6 l! -SFA—{rS'fT— * 99
/96 ivt — 2a7 'f I a,i 8 1J l9 26
\ \ \S 22
N I Zdi 2Z77I<T i P/3 �� 1 10 /3 11
2. T3 o
i 93 7is
/ /69 /GZ AG/ "40 /Si ISi I/57 /5 /55 /J4 /S /2 /s /i � � 6Y�f7�16 15 u=
�. zn 1 711 ZJ9 .
<?32 z3'J /B1 /B6 rs9 OS/ nZ 131 /34 /3s 1X,�H7 [3g /33 /:; /{/ M.,/{3 /44 /'� �'/ /� 6 G'1 611G47v •7r n
L
32
`2
e � 1 w F I �r
/Bs Y zSb-..____-
162 \ 244—f-l#--�.�t�1A-__�- i){2%-Vf--
24/ 248
/B/ Q iJ 2 PRPH P�
163 /BO I 26` 247 /!/ L3J 119 i[d /n /Y /ZJ lK / ? K/ /ZJ' //9 / o /q //L l/5 O{ O 71 p /W rE C
aINNK N MN Z43 246 75 a.l
Nib V ly �. /77 /1B />9 96 97 9B 99 /Po /ol 1K IN 1d I - % /W /Ji l09 y0 /l/ l/Z l/3 C 76
� A ,2° Poc/near+
n1 —F +---�flN1TA---�3R1i%E—f--�
lbi 166 WELL 9{ 93 9Z 9/ 5J B91Q Id7l� BS
_ s/re 2z / or (21ZZZso.6S7
/Ran Z3' 664231 (66425
,7(33. 32. /37
ATTACHMENT No. 3
EXAMPLES OF HOUSE DESIGNS
AND ELEVATIONS
v nNuo�rna vaMno �n NVId WO
Id
SONVIHDIH VIN1(lo tll
'4WO INsaaovAM 80m m l rifnd
5
11
24
k
vwvoAnvo Nimmo vi
SONVIHOIN V1N1110 Vl
•aoa asimovw as saynim
NOIIVA313
V & NV1d
to
vnwvovnvo ,vawino n
SONV1HDIH V1NIn0 Vl
'vvoo awL40vAw N VrnUA
V NOIIVA313
t NVId
A
-
VIA:
k
C
IF
I
1
1/ 1 m
I
n
h
`i
`
YINtlOIn�a YtNVIp vt 8 NO1VA313
SONVINDIH V1Nino Vl
=�.� •aaa iNsa�on�aa s�vmNr � NVId Y '
f '
W
ii iii+i irr ! t 1 � i I
Ilk
j
VIMN0d11V0 'VINOD sl
SONVINDIN V1Nino VI
'dW* AMBOMlsAM snvn uA
NOIIVA313
0 & NVId
F
"^ ' nwuoirna tiiwno r, O N011YA313
' SONVINSIH ViNino VI
�� = •poa irew�ov�sa t�rrtvs - i NVId � � t I'�
I
B
1 �
HI
!r L
9
or7l
all
I
n��
nruo+rna Yiwmo n
SONVIN°JIN tl1NInO tll
•duo* amsmdc m� emYROw
0
Nvid UOOIJ
-- i-Ndld
nNUOAM* IWIMMO t7 V NOLLVA313
SONVINDIH d1Nino V'1 ap
'NOO LILIA09N0 �N�RLM V N` p a r
-,v
Ell
Ml
�t
t E
{.jWJ[LL�,Li�i�
I
l)I .);
X1y
•INW04mo'vlNnO "
SGNVIHDIH V1Nino vl
Vwo arawnmv swvnvr
a NOUVAM
Z NVId
P
nil
e
rlruom * varno n
SONVIHOIH V1Nino VI
,dwo AmzmacuAw onvnva
O NOLLVA3M
L NVId
N
N
_ '- {, "t' a YIMtl01f1Y� Y1MMp Y7 NVId 11M1J
saNVINDIH V1Nino Vl •,- p �W L' i 3
s NVId
.4
rd
i
r _
rum
l w
-------�
OF
' •JkMOJM* Y1MN0 n V NOUEN
SGNVlHO1H V1N1110 vl q
woo Lmmw w"o smvnva
_ i 1
i
i
x I j0
I lul -
n
11�
VIMMO/mO YLNM D h NOLLVAI'2
SONVIHDIH V1NInO VI r
=3 WOO Lm=" "q swmv £ NVId
� 1
IN I
;y I
A
I
' VINWOAIIYO'VlkMO vi O NOUVAT2
SUNVIHJIH V1Nino vi Q NVId M
\ �®
FEI71
I
1
(l51
vm*oirno'Vimmo n
SGNVIHJIH V1NUto VI
WOO AXlXdOl3AM SAMMA
n
V
NVId WOOld
.0
ViNNGinvi WINMO O1
SONVINDIH V1Nino Vl
-dW* AMAVdoll ao anvnvr
U
lahlC'
N
al nn�a In 101 � Ilallll�al A11�
♦INtlalnv* *umm •1
SONVIHOIH VlNIn0 VI
LNaa "Dowoll"a YNYnilm
V NOIIVA313
it NVId
d
aNuoamo'viwmo r, a NOIIVA313
SONVIHDIH V1NI(10 VI
•awoo •waweolvna owvmu► F 10 NVId
N
a
' riwuosrna'rarmo rt
aria a SGNVIH°JIH V1Nino ri
•awa araaw�a�aa •�rmu
7
I
J
rINromra "viwnoNOI1VA313
> SONVIHSIH V1NIno VI e►
3 t c WOO LN3MOvAaa oevnvr V NVId V
.� B
i
Eli ' �S�
STAFF REPORT
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DATE: JULY 3, 1991
PROJECT: TENTATIVE TRACTS 23519, 26188 AND 23935 (MILES
AVENUE ONLY)
APPLICANT/
OWNER: SANTA ROSA DEVELOPERS
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: FOWLER/JOHNSON AND ASSOCIATES
LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND MILES AVENUE
BACKGROUND:
The above three tracts together consist of +340 single family
residential lots on 90 acres. These tracts plus the adjoining
subdivision, TT 25363 are all owned by Santa Rosa Developers.
All the roads in this area will be public streets.
1. LANDSCAPE PLANS
PROPOSAL:
The Applicant has prepared landscaping plans for the perimeter
landscape strip along Miles Avenue and Adams Street.
STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The sidewalk along Miles Avenue needs to meander with
greater radii utilizing the 20 foot landscape lot.
2. The Boston Ivy does not respond well to the summer desert
heat so it should be replaced. The late afternoon sun in
midsummer will still shine on the north facing wall where
this plant is located on the attached landscaping plans.
3. Confirmation is needed from the Engineering Company
working on the grading plans for these projects to ensure
berms required as a result of the acoustical study will
be on the lot side of the perimeter wall. If the berm
needs to be placed within the landscape perimeter area on
Miles Avenue or Adams Road the landscaping plans need to
accommodate this.
DRB7/3.F4/CS -1-
4. The attached landscaping plans show perimeter landscaping
on Miles Avenue between Adams Street and Dune Palms
Road. The landscaping along this stretch will therefore
be consistent and coordinated even though three different
tracts are involved.
5. A drip irrigation system has been used between the
sidewalk and street curb.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review the plans in conjunction with Staff comments and
determine if they are acceptable or if revisions are needed.
Attachments: 1. Locality Plan
Copy of full size landscaped plans attached.
DRB7/3.F4/CS -2- n�