Loading...
2008 07 02 ALRC MinutesMINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA July 2, 2008 10:00 a.m. CALL TO ORDER A. This regular meeting of the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:03 a.m. by Planning Manager David Sawyer who led the Committee in the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Jason Arnold, Ronald Fitzpatrick, and Ray Rooker. Planning Manager Sawyer welcomed new Committee Member Ray Rooker. C. Staff present: Planning Manager David Sawyer, Associate Planner Jay Wuu, and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: Staff asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of June 4, 2008. It was moved and seconded by Committee Members Fitzpatrick/Arnold to approve the minutes as submitted. Committee Member Rooker abstained. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: Site Development Permit 2008-902; a request of Highway 111 Partners, LLC for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for Madison Square, an approximately 92,000 square foot commercial development including retail space, a health club, and adrive-through restaurant, at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road. Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes July 2, 2008 Associate Planner Jay Wuu presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Planning Manager David Sawyer asked the applicant's representatives to introduce themselves. Those attending were Dave Prest, Prest Vuksic, 44-530 San Pablo Avenue, Suite 220, Palm Desert CA 92260, Walter Deissler, In-N-Out, 13502 Hamburger Lane, Baldwin Park CA 92706-5855, Brad Sobel, Highway 111 Partners, LLC, 420 S. Beverly Drive #200, Beverly Hills CA 90210, and Steve Sherrill, Landscape Development, Inc., 1874 Tandem Way, Norco CA 92860. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked about the steps in the approval process. Staff explained the application would go on to the Planning Commission. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if this was the Committee's last opportunity to look at this project. Staff replied if conditions were established the Committee would get the final landscaping plan. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if a construction schedule had been established. Brad Sobel replied there wasn't a fixed schedule, but they planned to start grading as soon as possible. He then described the planned schedule of building phases and their expected tenant occupation date target of the third/fourth quarter of 2009. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if every developer contributed to the Art in Public Places program and how the artwork was selected. Planning Director Les Johnson explained the Community Service Department is responsible for the Arts in Public Places Program and he gave a brief overview of the program. Committee Member Fitzpatrick had a question about restrictions on drive-throughs. Staff said there was no restriction on drive-throughs on Highway 111. It was added that the Planning Commission had historically taken the position to add screening on drive-throughs for aesthetic reasons. Committee Member Fitzpatrick commented on screening in a residential area. Staff explained the restrictions on screened drive- throughs of neighborhood commercial districts versus Highway 1 1 1. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if there would be a monument sign to identify the project. Staff said there would be a sign program which would be approved by the Planning Commission. Committee 2 Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes July 2, 2008 Member Fitzpatrick asked if the ALRC would be reviewing the sign program and staff explained that was the responsibility of the Planning Commission. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if there were standards for bollard lighting. Staff said yes and added staff could make available a copy of those standards if he wished. There was a brief discussion of the lighting at The Pavillion project versus the current standards. Committee Member Fitzpatrick said a lot of the conditions and recommendations seemed to relate more to landscaping than architecture. He asked if an architect had to sign the plans. Staff replied the engineer and architect stamps were industry standards handled through the Public Works and Building Departments. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if the landscaper and/or design project person had to be licensed. Staff said State law requires the project has to be addressed by a licensed architect. (Referring to Landscape Development, Inc.) Historically the City had not required a landscape architect to sign off, but the new applications have added language requiring it. Committee Member Fitzpatrick commented on the lack of a licensed architect signature on the plans. Staff replied Mr. Sobel's project was represented by a licensed architect. The new applications would include this requirement. Committee Member Fitzpatrick said it is essential a scaled down version of what would be presented to the Planning Commission also be presented to the ALRC. Mr. Prest said there would not be additional elevations and models presented to the Planning Commission. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked about green space on Highway 111 and, in particular, this project. Mr. Sobel replied a park area would not be financially viable in a commercial development. He suggested that might be a City function. Planning Director Les Johnson suggested the Committee Members focus on the current project and defer the discussion of future Highway 1 11 plans for another meeting. He further noted the project 3 Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes July 2, 2008 being discussed complies with City requirements with regard to percent of landscaped area. Staff went over some of the conditions and the applicant's compliance with those conditions. Committee Member Fitzpatrick said he was looking for a summary of pedestrian-friendly areas. He added, a lot of commercial projects did not include enjoyment of the shopping center in their overall plans. He suggested a plaza, streetscape, or open space could be included. He went on to mention bicycle parking spaces and the possibility of a public fountain. Committee Member Fitzpatrick commented on the LA Fitness building. Mr. Prest said there was no one at the meeting representing LA Fitness, but he went over the details of the building. He included information that their buildings usually have an energy management system. They use lighting, motion, and daylight sensors as well as other energy saving features in other areas of their buildings. The project has to meet California standards. Mr. Prest added the landscaping was designed from adrought-tolerant standpoint and the waste bins included recycling. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked him what his feelings were on solar energy. Mr. Prest said he left that up to the owner. Mr. Sobel replied they did not have any plans for the addition of solar energy at this time. He said it comes down to cost versus benefits. Committee Member Rooker thanked the applicant for a professional presentation. He asked about pedestrian access to the building housing In-N-Out Burger and a paving treatment to the exercise building since staff had suggested a proposed link. Staff showed a diagram to the Committee Members and pointed out where a proposed crosswalk would be placed. Committee Member Rooker asked if there was a building entrance on the north side of In-N-Out. Mr. Sobe- replied there was. Committee Member Rooker said there was a unique architectural situation between Buildings 2 and 3. He asked if there was some intent for that area; such as a small park or a shaded area. Mr. Prest pointed out, on the plans, where they were going to link that area with some type of architectural structure. He said there was a wall with some holes in it and pedestrians would walk under it. He pointed to area portion of the adjacent building where there might be a a Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes July 2, 2008 restaurant and, noted in the future, this location could include a shaded area where shoppers could eat. Committee Member Rooker asked if they would consider a water feature there. Dave Prest said the design would evolve as new tenants arrive. There was the possibility of more things happening in the future. Committee Member Rooker said looking at Building 2, and the southwest exposure, there were only a couple of trees. He suggested more trees. Mr. Sherill went to the landscaping chart and said there could be more trees included. Committee Member Rooker said the plan showed employee parking near Buildings two and #hree, as weld as on the east side. He added the elevations showed palm trees, but the site plan showed nothing. Mr. Sherrill said there was currently nothing there. Mr. Sobel said the area is directly adjacent to the Dunes Center. It is not an exposed side of the building, as there happens to be a building built there so that exposure is blocked. The other exposure is blocked by the wash. He mentioned the trees in the front and said visibility is everything to the tenants and shop owners. It has to do with the ability to gain tenants. They will lose tenants if there is no visibility. Committee Member Rooker said it was a sensitive point. He was just referring to other buildings on Highway 111. He suggested large potted plants be used to break up all the stucco and concrete. Staff replied they did not call out for additional landscaping in that area, (Building two) because between the trees there was actually an architectural feature which included a radius overhang with an awning. He pointed out where the arch was located on an exhibit in the Committee Members' packet. Committee Member Rooker said he understood after seeing the exhibit. Committee Member Rooker had a question with regard to the setback along Dune Palms. He had a topographical map that showed some berms. He said he would like to see that slightly bermed. Mr. Sherrill said the topographical map was correct and it would be rolling topography. Committee Member Rooker commented on how visitors believe we live in an Oasis. He pointed out the amount of green grass on Highway 111 and how it makes you feel as though you're in an oasis. He said 5 Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes July 2, 2008 there was no lawn on the entrances and suggested a little bit of green on each side of the driveway. Mr. Sherill went to the exhibits to clarify what area Mr. Rooker was referring to. Mr. Sherill said, because of special requirements, it might be possible on one side, but not the other. Committee Member Arnold asked if that would change their CVWD requirements. Mr. Sherrill said no. Committee Member Arnold said the project looked great. He had a few concerns, but they had been addressed by the other members. He asked if it was a requirement that the planters in the parking lots be 6 x 6 . Staff said yes. Committee Member Arnold commented on the hybrid trees being of a type he had never heard of and he had to look them up. Mr. Sherrill asked about his position on the mesquites and date palms. Committee Member Arnold said he did not have a problem with date palms or mesquites but that it does need to be noted that both have some long- term maintenance issues.. Committee Member Arnold told of a recent situation in which the whole crown of a date palm was in the middle of Highway 111, pointing out the possible danger if improperly cared for. Committee Member Rooker said staff had asked the Committee to discuss pedestrian amenities and the crosswalk. He asked if it had been addressed properly. Planning Director Johnson said staff had supplied (condition) language with regards to the bicycle racks and all three pedestrian accesses and pedestrian amenities. Items 10, 1 1, and 12 in the staff report suggested conditions noted for the Committee's consideration. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if the Committee should review the placement and the location of the bicycle racks. Staff said the ALRC has the option to discuss where the bike racks can go. At present they were only needed in front of the LA Fitness site. Planning Director Johnson said the Committee Members could include their recommendation as a condition or their interest could be addressed to the applicant. He added, the City of La Quinta was becoming more concerned about the economy and sensitive to the needs of the 6 Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes July 2, 2008 community. This is an auto-oriented area of the community, but we want to make sure there is the convenience and ease of connection for those who choose to use bicycles. Planning Manager Sawyer noted the Committee Members had said they had some suggestions and asked if they wanted to include them as recommendations. He added they should keep in mind that their recommendations will go to the Planning Commission as conditions and suggestions would not. The applicant, oftentimes, will take their suggestions and conditions and, if they have time, will amend the actual site plan before it goes to the Planning Commission. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if the recommendations would show on the plans before the Planning Commission. Staff said they would if the applicant chooses to include them. If it was made a condition it would be included in the Planning Commission staff report. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if there were any recommendations the applicant did not agree with. Mr. Sobel said he didn't have a problem with any of the current conditions. He did ask about the type of bicycle racks. Committee Member Fitzpatrick said he just needed one that bolts to the sidewalk. Mr. Sobel said he didn't have any problem with that. Committee Member Arnold added you could add a professional bike rack for 5250. Mr. Sobel discussed the addition of adding grass. Committee Member Rooker said he would prefer to make this a suggestion; not a recommended condition. Mr. Sobel had issues with adding a specific design to the specific location (corner of the building). He would prefer to have it be tenant- driven. Committee Member Rooker said the recommendation was very general including the pedestrian amenities. Mr. Sobel said he understood. Staff made the suggestion to change the condition language to read "in proximity to"'. Committee Member Arnold asked if the applicant planned to include any boulders in the landscape. Mr. Sherrill said not at the moment, but it would be a nice site use. Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes July 2, 2008 Committee Member Fitzpatrick said it was a very nice project, and very good visually. However, he would like to see a more pedestrian friendly design. There being no further questions, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Fitzpatrick/Booker to adopt Minute Motion 2008- 015, recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2008-902. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: Attendance Update: There was a discussion of rules of attendance and an explanation to new Committee Member Rooker. Commission Minutes: Written directions were distributed to Committee Members with information on how to locate Committee/Commission minutes on the City of La Quinta website (www.la-quinta.org). VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None VIII. PLANNING STAFF ITEMS: 1 . Planning Commission Update: Planning Manager David Sawyer said staff would be giving the Committee updates, at each meeting, of items that had gone on to the Planning Commission or City Council. He also referenced the information on how to print out Commission Minutes as shown above. He went over the directions as printed and distributed and discussed alternative ways of searching. He directed Committee Members to contact staff with any further questions. Committee Member Arnold asked if they would be able to look up Council comments about projects recommended by the ALRC. Staff replied they would be included in the Council minutes. s Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes July 2, 2008 Committee Member Fitzpatrick wanted to know how far in advance of the meeting he could look at the agendas/minutes. Staff explained the procedures on posting documents on the City's website. 2. Brown Act and Ethics Update: Committee Members were advised they would be going through a training session put on by the City Managers office, planned for some time this fall. Staff said they would be formally notified of the date, time, and location of the training. 3. Classes and Seminars: Staff said they would provide updates on classes and seminars which would be available for Committee Members. IX. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Fitzpatrick/Arnold to adjourn this meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a Regular Meeting to be held on August 6, 2008. This meeting was adjourned at 1 1:11 a.m. on July 2, 2008. Respectfully submitted, CAROLYN WALKER Executive Secretary 9