Loading...
2008 08 06 ALRC MinutesMINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA August 6, 2008 10:00 a.m. CALL TO ORDER A. This regular meeting of the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:02 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. C. Staff present: Planning Manager David Sawyer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen, and Secretary Monika Radeva. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: Staff asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of July 2, 2008. It was moved and seconded by Committee Members Fitzpatrick/Arnold to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Final Landscaping Plans 2008-032 a request of Steve Olshan, Project Architect, for the review of final landscaping plans for the Plaza at Calle Tampico located at the northeast corner of Calle Tampico and Desert Club Drive. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 6, 2008 Committee Member Ronald Fitzpatrick extolled the design, landscaping, and plans of the project and said he appreciated the applicant complying with the suggestions of the Committee. He especially appreciated the pedestrian-friendly design which included a water feature and an outside seating area. Committee Member Ronald Fitzpatrick asked if the project architect was from Santa Monica, California. Mr. Tom Cole replied that the architect had extensive retail experience, which was very beneficial due to the small size of the project and its constraints. Committee Member Fitzpatrick commented on the exposure of the Shops 2 building to the direct afternoon sunlight and questioned the lack of trees and plants to provide shading. Mr. Cole explained the tenants for the building had not yet been identified and expressed the applicant's concern of landscaping that could block sign visibility and drive potential tenants away. However, once the future tenants were established landscaping could be installed to meet the tenants' needs. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked about bike racks being provided. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen replied that bike racks were identified in two locations on the construction plans. Committee Member Fitzpatrick inquired about adjustments made to the outside seating area. Principal Planner Mogensen explained the applicant had adjusted the hardscape, around the central courtyard area, to accommodate an outdoor seating area for a grocery store and any potential restaurant tenant for Shops 1. He added the lighting for the project had been adjusted accordingly. Committee Member Fitzpatrick questioned the use of Star Jasmine as it thrived only in partially shaded areas. Principal Planner Mogensen replied the Star Jasmine would be placed on the north elevations in the shaded areas, for example along the wall on Springtime Way, which was almost always in shadow. In addition, the north elevation of Shops 2 had a vertical trellis on the pilasters with vines feasible for that type of shaded environment. z Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 6, 2008 Committee Member Jason Arnold said he thought the plans were very nicely done. He wanted to comment on the use of Star Jasmine also, as the plant required a shaded area to thrive. He suggested substituting it with Calliandra (Pink Powder Puff) if there was inadequate shade for the Star Jasmine. He added the two plants looked almost identical and most people couldn't tell them apart. Mr. Tom Cole, Director of Construction for Highland Development Company, said he would mention the Committee's suggestions to the applicant. Principal Planner Mogensen said he had previously discussed the use of Star Jasmine with the landscape architect and had confirmed that it would only be placed on the north elevations of Shops 1 and 2, which would provide the necessary shading for the plant to thrive. Committee Member Ray Rooker said he viewed the intersection of Desert Club Drive and Calle Tampico as a major downtown area because of its proximity to Old Town La Quinta and the token fountain across the street. Unfortunately, none of the projects had put any emphasis on developing the corners at the intersections and making them more appealing to visitors and pedestrians. In future projects, Committee Member Rooker would like to see a tendency towards the architectural development of the street corners at major intersections in proximity to the projects to highlight them. Planning Manager David Sawyer commented that an enhanced pedestrian environment at the corner of this project had been discussed by the ALRC and the Planning Commission. However, it was not included due to the traffic patterns and proximity to the area. Another factor was the orientation of the Fresh & Easy grocery store would have also had to be adjusted. Committee Member Ray Rooker expressed his dislike of the fact that there would be a grocery store on a corner lot. This would provide the view of the store wall on one side and the utility drive-in on the back, which would add a negative connotation with its truck traffic. He suggested a corner location would be much better utilized by small shops due to visibility and signage, as well as from an architectural standpoint as the shops would have a more festive appearance for the community. 3 Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 6, 2008 Committee Member Ray Rooker pointed out that there were no trees shown on the street elevation at the fountain at Calle Tampico; however, the plans do show trees. Further, more trees were shown directly above the entry at Calle Tampico with no breaks. He suggested omitting a few of the palm trees to promote pedestrian access. Staff replied that the continuous palm trees along Calle Tampico were planned intentionally as the mid-block crossing was discouraged. In addition, the trees would hide the power transformer from view. Staff has tried unsuccessfully to relocate the transformer. Committee Member Rooker said he was disturbed by the lack of trees on the back of the building. He said he realized the area was mostly shaded and did not require more trees. He encouraged the applicant from an aesthetic standpoint to place a few trees along side the plain wall of the building, which would not pose a signage obstruction for the tenants. The applicant acknowledged Committee Member Rooker's comments and agreed some landscaping should be put in place along side the back wall; however, that would be done at a later time when the tenants were identified. Committee Member Rooker asked about the lighting of the project as it was not indicated on the plans. Staff replied the lighting had already been approved through a separate building permit as it was not a matter for the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee at this time to approve. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if shielded lighting was used. Staff replied all up-lighting had to be shielded and pointed towards a plant or a building. Planning Manager David Sawyer clarified the purpose of the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee meeting in reviewing the Final Landscaping Plans was for the Committee to determine whether the plans were consistent with the already approved preliminary plans and conditions of approval. Despite the excellent comments made by the Committee Members, they would not be applicable at this development stage of the project, but rather at the preliminary review stage. If the 4 Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 6, 2008 conditions of approval had left a door open for additional suggestions then the comments could have been incorporated; however, the Commission did not do that. Planning Manager David Sawyer said that during next month's meeting the Committee would be reviewing a couple of Site Development Permit applications which is the appropriate time for a thorough review of a project and recommendations to the applicant. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if the Committee could make suggestions to the applicant which could later be enforced by the Planning Commission. Staff replied that the Final Landscaping Plans would not be reviewed by the Planning Commission again and the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee was the final approval the applicant needed to move forward with construction of the project. The Committee was to confirm the applicant had complied with the recommendations and conditions posed during the review and approval process. Planning Manager David Sawyer added that a common practice at this stage would be to have the plans approved by the Planning Director; however, the City of La Quinta had elected to have the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee to make a recommendation to the Director prior to his signature. Committee Member Fitzpatrick commented on the bareness of the southern exposure and that something more should have been done to protect the wall from the high temperatures, besides only extending some of the trellises. Committee Member Rooker asked if a suggestion could be made to the applicant to modify the plans. Planning Manager David Sawyer explained that the recommendations would be noted in the minutes, and if there was a way, some minor adjustments might be incorporated through the Planning Director's approval. However, the Planning Director did not have the authority for anything more than that as the plans had already been approved by the Planning Commission and CVWD. The recommendations made by the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, after reviewing the preliminary plans, had already been presented to the Planning Commission. At that stage the applicant could have either adjusted the plans and incorporated s Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 6, 2008 the recommendations or could have waited to find out the decision of the Planning Commission as to if they would be made a condition of approval. There being no further questions, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Fitzpatrick/Arnold to adopt Minute Motion 2008-016, recommending approval of Final Landscaping Plans 2008-032. Unanimously approved. B. Final Landscaping Plans 2008-034 a request of RGA Landscape Architects, Inc. (Rob Parker) for Eisenhower Medical Center (Ali Tourkaman), for the review of final landscaping plans for the Eisenhower Ambulatory Care Center located at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Seeley Drive within the Centre Pointe project area. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Principal Planner Stan Sawa introduced the applicant's representative, Rob Parker with RGA Landscape Architects, Inc. Committee Member Ronald Fitzpatrick thanked staff for providing very detailed information on the project and the history of the building. Committee Member Fitzpatrick said the project design was very well balanced. All of the major elements were equally balanced and the landscaping was abundant and lush. The plans showed large setbacks and big planters in the parking area taking away from the dominance of the asphalt. He liked the water feature on the site and the landscaped island. He found the planting to be very appropriate and in combination with the decorative paving and the elegance of the buildings to achieve a much softer and inviting look. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if the words "ambulatory care" meant that it was awalk-in clinic. Staff replied it was a walk-in clinic, but it also incorporated a lot of other services. Mr. Parker explained the clinic was afull-service, small scale hospital to service patients located in the south end of the valley. The clinic incorporated all services available at the main 6 Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 6, 2008 hospital campus in Rancho Mirage with the exception of surgical facilities which would be part of the future extension phase. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if the applicant had held community meetings and obtained community feedback. Mr. Parker replied several community meetings were held at the beginning stages of the project and many factors were taken into consideration in the design of the plans. Mr. Parker pointed out that the majority of the parking spaces were covered and that the final plans presented to the Committee had been highly upgraded from the originally submitted plans regarding the number and size of plants in the project. Committee Member Fitzpatrick commented on the high elevation on Washington Street. Mr. Parker replied that was one of the biggest challenges with the project. However, retaining walls along the channel on that side were engineered in conjunction with CVWD to accommodate the slope. Committee Member Fitzpatrick questioned the water source for the water feature. Mr. Parker replied the water feature would be supplied by water pumped through a recycling system. Committee Member Ray Rooker asked about the lighting of the parking lot as it was not included in the plans. Mr. Parker explained the plans included the landscaping lighting fixtures only. The majority of the parking lot lighting was up underneath the canopies, covering the parking stalls, which consisted of shielded lights. Committee Member Ray Rooker commented on the lack of outside seating areas for staff and patients. Mr. Parker said the original plans had a connection between the water feature and the center island as a designated outside seating area, but the applicant decided that was not the attention intended for the center section. Mr. Parker mentioned there was a large area in the front of the building with planters, which would serve as an outside area for patients. Also, on the southeast corner of the building there was an outside patio. The entire campus was designated as non-smoking applicable to staff, patients, and visitors. In addition, on the third floor, there was a large terrace for the needs of physicians and employees. Further, Mr. Parker Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 6, 2008 said that more outside areas might develop in the future as the additional usage of the building evolved and the project expanded and there was sufficient ground surface to accommodate future seating areas. Committee Member Fitzpatrick said the plans indicated the project was beautifully landscaped even though it was not very user-friendly. He asked if any plants could be incorporated into the semi-circle area at the entry way. Mr. Parker replied that issue was addressed with the applicant. The architect decided not to use flowers in that area due to safety and other issues. Committee Member Ronald Fitzpatrick asked if the applicant would have any exhaust issues from Applebee's. Mr. Parker replied there were no exhaust issues. Committee Member Jason Arnold commented on the nice and detailed execution of the plans which made them very easy to read. He was pleased with the number of trees being planted, over 200, and the size of them. There being no further questions, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Rooker/Fitzpatrick to adopt Minute Motion 2008-017, recommending approval of Final Landscaping Plans 2008-034. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: Attendance Update: Planning Manager David Sawyer mentioned that the attendance update was attached and staff would like to include it quarterly instead of monthly. The Committee did not have any objections. VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None VIII. PLANNING STAFF ITEMS: Planning Commission Update: Planning Manager David Sawyer said the Madison Square project located at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road was reviewed by the Planning Commission and it underwent an s Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 6, 2008 extensive discussion. The project was approved and it included the majority of the ALRC recommendations, such as the sidewalks along Dune Palms Road conditioned to be moved away from the curb due to the project's proximity to La Quinta High School and the potential school traffic. Currently staff is coordinating efforts with the City of Indio, as well as other local communities, with regards to a potential recreational trail along the Whitewater wash. Due to the proximity of the project to the wash, the Planning Commission asked for an access pedestrian link to be placed from the interior of the project, between buildings 2 and 3, to the recreational trail. Planning Commission asked for Palo Verde and Mesquite for the shade tree pattern, and additional screening was required on the north side of the building along the side of the wash. It was clarified that the berms had to be three feet high measured from the top of the curb on the parking lot side. There was a concern regarding the overflow queue of cars that would come out of In-&-Out Burger, therefore, the applicant was asked to extend out the berming along Highway 111, the length of the frontage. The proposed turf along the curb side was removed because it was there only for aesthetics and it served no other recreational purpose. However, the applicant was given the option to install some good quality artificial turf. Planning Commission asked that the approval of the Final Landscaping Plans for this project be presented back to PC instead of the Planning Director due to the numerous adjustments imposed on the applicant. Committee Member Fitzpatrick asked if there were any comments on the bollard lighting along Highway 111. Planning Manager Sawyer replied there was a general discussion, but no adjustments were enforced. Committee Member Rooker asked if the Committee is to understand that the use of turf for commercial developments was not recommended. Planning Manager Sawyer replied the Planning Commission's position is turf should have a dual purpose such as recreational use for visitors and patrons of a development, in addition to aesthetics. There is a tendency to avoid the use of turf merely for aesthetics. 9 Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 6, 2008 Committee Member Arnold said the use of the Mesquite and Palo Verde trees was not very popular due to the tendency of these types of trees to fall over and break. However, he explained that this was a problem only when single-trunk trees were used. The Mesquite and Palo Verde multi-trunk trees would not be so fragile and there was not an increase in cost in obtaining them. Planning Manager Sawyer asked if there were certain types of Mesquites that were more prone to grow as multi-trunk. Committee Member Arnold replied that there was no tendency amongst the trees, it all depended on how the tree was grown in the nursery. Planning Manager Sawyer said he would look into the procedure rules and find out if the Committee needed to appoint a Chairman and if so the elections would be included in the next meeting's agenda. IX. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Fitzpatrick/Rooker to adjourn this meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a Regular Meeting to be held on September 3, 2008. This meeting was adjourned at 11:03 a.m. on August 6, 2008. Respectfully su MONIKA RADEVA Secretary to