2011 04 06 ALRCwiry of La Quintal
ALRC Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-guinta.org
OF
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING
REVIEW COMMITTEE
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall - Study Session Room
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
APRIL 6, 2011
10:00 A.M.
Beginning Minute Motion 2011-003
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
IL PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled
for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit
your comments to three minutes.
Ill. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 2, 2011.
Q, ttI I 'IALRC
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Item .................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-852, PERIMETER
WALL PLAN
Applicant ........... Crowne Pointe Partners, LLC
Location ............ PGA West; North and East of PGA Boulevard
Request ............. Consideration of Perimeter Wall Design for a 264-
Unit Residential Condominium Project.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS:
Vill. PLANNING STAFF ITEMS:
A. Planning Commission Update
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee will be
adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on May 4, 2011, at 10:00 a.m.
DECLARATION OF POSTING
1, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare
that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Architecture and Landscaping Review
Committee meeting of Wednesday, April 6, 2011, was posted on the outside entry
to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the bulletin board at the La
Quinta Cove Post Office, 51-321 Avenida Bermudas, on Thursday, March 31,
2011.
DATED: March 31, 2011
CAROL WALKER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
ge- da 4 -- 6- C X
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
February 2, 2011 10:04 a.m.
CALL TO ORDER
A. This regular meeting of the Architecture and Landscaping Review
Committee was called to order at 10:04 a.m. by Planning Manager
David Sawyer who led the Committee in the flaq salute.
B. Committee Members Present: Jason Arnold, Kevin McCune, and
David Thorns
Committee Members Absent: None
C. Staff present: Planning Manager David -Sawyer, Principal Planner Wally
Nesbit, and Secretary Monika, Radeva
II. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed
111. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
Staff asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of January 5, 2011.
There being no comments or corrections it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members McCune/Thoms to approve the minutes as submitted.
Unanimously approved.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Tentative Tract Map 36279 (Preliminary Landscaping Plan) a request
submitted by Pedcor Commercial Development for consideration of
landscaping plans for a proposed ±9-acre tentative tract map located
on the southwest corner of Avenue 51 and Madison Street.
Principal Planner Wally Nesbit presented the information contained in
the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department.
Committee Member Thorns said he found the proposed palette of
citrus trees to be appropriate for the site. He expressed concerns
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
February 2, 2011
about relocating the existing trees on the site as citrus trees did not
fare well when relocated. In addition, he noted that some of the trees
on site were not very well maintained.
Staff replied the approved landscaping would be subject to quality
control inspections at the time of installation.
Mr. Ray Lopez, Owner and Landscape Architect with Ray Lopez
Associates, 49374 Gila River Street, Indio, CA 92201, introduced
himself and said the applicant's intent for the proposed landscaping
plans was to maintain the citrus tree as the theme tree recognizing the
historical land use of that general area.
Committee Member Thorns said he was not familiar with the proposed
Washingtonia Fififera hybrid palm tree. Mr. Lopez explained the
differences between the Washingtonia Filifera, Washingtonia Robusta,
and Washington Filifera hybrid palm trees, and the benefits associated
with the proposed hybrid.
Committee Member Thorns asked where the Washingtonia Filifera
hybrids would be used on the site. Mr. Lopez said they would be used
on either side of the main entry way to the development. He also said
that Washingtonia Robusta palm trees would be used in the back near
the water fountain.
Mr. Lopez said the applicant ha I d not yet decided whether or not the
existing water feature would remain and be renovated or if it would be
turned into a planter. Staff said that a condition of approval would be
included to ensure that the water feature was properly reviewed under
the Final Landscaping Plans application.
Staff suggested that the Committee identify in their recommendation
to the Planning Commission whether or not the existing water feature
was being recognized as such or as a planter, as identified on the
submitted final landscaping plans. Staff said they would follow up
and confer with the applicant regarding the intent for it.
Committee Member McCune asked if the water feature was permitted
under the original plans. Staff replied it was not.
Committee Member McCune asked if Committee Member Thoms had
seen the water feature during his site inspection. Committee Member
P:�Reports - ALRM201 IWRC-4-6-11�ALRC MIN 2-2-11_Draft.doc 2
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
February 2, 2011
Thorns replied he did not as he was not able to enter into the
development.
Committee Member McCune asked Mr. Lopez if he thought the water
feature was salvageable. Mr. Lopez said it definitely had potential, he
explained it was quite large in size and the base for restoring it was
there.
Committee Member Thorns suggested the applicant use a mixture of
the Washingtonia Robusta and Washingtonia Filifera palm trees for the
entrance to create a deviation in the height of the trees. Mr. Lopez
said the proposed landscaping already identified a staggering in the
height of the trees; however, it only asked for the same type of palm
tree. He said he would have to confer with the applicant on this
suggestion. I
Committee Member McCune said' he preferred to have only the
Washingtonia Filifera hybrids for the entrance, as proposed on the
plans, as it would give the entrance a more dominant effect. He said
he liked the proposed groupings of palm trees for the inside and
outside of the wall, and the staggered height of the palm trees as it
led to the retention basin.
Committee Member Thorns asked if all of the trees by the entrance
would be citrus trees. Staff replied the submitted plans identified only
citrus trees.
Committee Member Arnold asked if there was existing irrigation on the
site and if the applicant was planning on renovating it or installing new
irrigation. Mr. Lopez replied there was some irrigation which was not
working. He said the applicant had not yet discussed irrigation for the
site, but Mr. Lopez's suggestion would be to install everything new.
Committee Member Arnold said he was pleased with the proposed
landscaping plan and he was looking forward to seeing the site being
developed.
General discussion foHowed regarding the maintenance and cost of
citrus trees.
Committee Member McCune asked if the proposed equestrian trail
would be covered with decomposed granite (DG). Mr. Lopez replied it
would be possibly a different color DG to create a contrast. He
P:�Raports - ALW201 IALRC-4-6-11ARC MIN 2 2-1 I—Draft.doc 3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
February 2, 2011
explained he was not experienced in equestrian trails and further
research would have be done.
Principal Planner Wally Nesbit said he had consulted with the City's
Public Works Department regarding the trail and the response he
received was that any ADA accessible material would be acceptable.
General discussion followed regarding different cover options for the
trail.
Committee Member McCune said he was very pleased with the plans
and the plant palette. He asked if some type of pavers or cobblestone
would be installed to enhance the entry way. Mr. Lopez said he was
not aware of any such plans.
Committee Member McCune asked if the applicant would put in curb
and gutter along Madison Street. Staff replied the applicant would put
in full street and arterial improvements.
General discussion followed regarding the project site including
compliance with CVWD water conservation requirements, the existing
'water feature, an existing on -site storage barn, limited use of turf,
installation of a rail fence for the trail, etc.
Mr. Lopez asked if horses would be allowed to ride on the proposed
trail. Staff replied they would be allowed. Mr. Lopez asked if that
would affect the DG cover and interfere with ADA requirements.
Staff replied the Public Works Department would be better able to
answer that.
General discussion followed about multi -purpose trails within the City
that include equestrian use.
Committee Member McCune said he liked the proposed lighting, but
suggested that the applicant also consider LED lighting which was
much easier to wire. Discussion followed regarding the benefits of
LED lights.
Committee Member Arnold asked if homeowners could have horses in
the community. Staff replied the area was zoned for it, but the
number of horses allowed would depend on the size of the lot.
P:�Reports - ALRM201 1WRC_4-6-11WRC MIN 2-2.1 1—Draft.doc 4
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
February 2, 2011
There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Thoms/Amold to adopt Minute Motion 2011-
002, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 36279
(Preliminary Landscaping Plan) as submitted, with the following
recommendations:
• The proposed citrus trees shall all be the same size, with a
minimum box size of 24".
• Use a mixture of Washingtonia Filifera and Washingtonia
Robusta palm trees, 2/3 to 1/3 accordingly, at the entrance and
at the inside corners of the project.
• Use cobblestone for the entry way.
Unanimously approved.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
Vil. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None
VIII. PLANNING STAFF ITEMS: None
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Thoms/McCune to adjourn this meeting of the Architecture and
Landscaping Review Committee to a Regular Meeting to be held on March 2,
2011. This meeting was adjourned, at 10:46 a.m. on February 2, 2011.
Respectfully submitted,
MONIKA RADEVA
Secretary
K�Reports - ALRM201 11ALRC-4-6-1 I�ALRC MIN 2-2-1 1—Draft.doc 5
BI#A
L
4
OF
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE
DATE: APRIL 6, 2011
CASE NUMBER: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-852
(PERIMETER WALL PLAN)
APPLICANT: CROWNE POINTE PARTNERS
ENGINEER: MIDS CONSULTING
PROPERTY
OWNER: CROWNE POINTE PARTNERS
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: GMA INTERNATIONAL (ORIGINAL APPROVALS)
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF PERIMETER WALL DESIGN FOR A 264-
UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT
LOCATION: PGA WEST; NORTH AND EAST OF PGA BLVD.
ZONING: TOURIST COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN (TC/RSP)
SURROUNDING
ZONING / USES: NORTH: GC & RL; GOLF COURSE, SINGLE FAMILY CONDOS
SOUTH: RL; SINGLE FAMILY CONDOS/SFD
EAST: GC & RL; CLUBHOUSE, GOLF COURSE, SFD CONDOS
WEST: RL; TENNIS & GOLF CLUBHOUSE, SFD
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
In nearly all cases, ALFIC review is limited to Site Development Permit applications
to provide specific design review for a project's proposed architecture and
landsbaping, toward a recommendation to the Planning Commission.
In this instance, the project approval conditions delegate the majority of review
authority for the project's perimeter and internal walls to the Planning Director.
However, the approval includes a condition requirement that was intended to assign
review of the aesthetic design of the project's perimeter wall to the ALRC, with the
intent that any proposed design be compatible with the existing PGA Boulevard
streetscape. There is no recommendation to be made to the Planning Commission.
Staff has determined that, based on the applicant's proposal, the ALRC can review
the wall design now as a separate review item, while retaining review authority for
final landscaping under Condition 47 when that time comes. As a result, ALRC
review at this time is confined to the design of the perimeter wall improvements. To
assist the ALRC in this review, the following background and analysis is provided.
BACKGROUND
The project site is the vacant resort core area within PGA West, along the north side
of PGA Boulevard (Attachment 1). The Eden Rock project was approved in April
2008 for 264 residential units, consisting of townhome and condominium style
units. Currently the project is processing its second time extension for the SDP,
which is scheduled to go before City Council on April 19, 2011. Staff has been
reviewing plan check requests from the developer, including rough grading and off -
site improvements. Condition 47 (Attachment 2) requires that a master wall plan be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Director, but does grant review authority to
the ALRC for the perimeter wall design. At the time the condition was written, staff
anticipated that an ultimate wall design specific to Eden Rock might be included
with the final landscape plans to be submitted for ALRC review, and should be
reviewed for its compatibility with the overall PGA Boulevard streetscape.
PROPosAL
As part of the applicant's improvement obligations, Condition 47 requires that the
perimeter wall be installed as part of the initial phase of project construction, due to
concerns raised by PGA West residents and the Master HOA over several years
concerning site conditions, most recently that of the existing green screening fence.
The PGA West Master HOA has expressed their desire to see the existing wall theme
along PGA Boulevard maintained along the Eden Rock site. The developer would like
to achieve this as soon as possible and has proposed installation of the entire
perimeter wall as part of their grading operation. No landscaping improvements are
proposed at this time beyond maintaining the existing landscaping along PGA
Boulevard, supplementing where necessary due to the wall construction.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing a wall design which will mimic the existing PGA West
perimeter wall (Attachment 3). Therefore, the effect is to extend completion of the
overall wall design for PGA West south and east along the northerly side of PGA
Boulevard. As PGA Boulevard is a private roadway, and the HOA has expressed
their desire to see a continuation of the existing design, staff supports the proposed
wall design as submitted. The applicant will need to provide written approval from
2
the PGA West Master HOA for the proposed wall in order to secure a building
permit, as routinely required. It should be noted that any revised wall design and/or
perimeter parkway landscaping would be subject to the same review authority of the
ALRC, consistent with the provisions of Condition 47.
RECOMMENDATION
By Minute Motion 2011 - _, accept the perimeter wall design as proposed by
the applicant for the Eden Rock at PGA West project, SOP 2006-852, subject to
approval by the PGA West Master HOA.
Prepared by:
Wallace H. Nesbit
Principal Planner
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Condition 47 of SDP 2006-852
3. Perimeter wall design plans (ALRC only)
91
ATTACHMENT # 1
NW
MP
WT-S
EDEN -ROCK AT PGA WEST
ATTACHMENT #2
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2010-55 - EDEN ROCK AT PGA WEST
SDP 2006-852, EXTENSION #1 - CONDITION 47
"The entire perimeter wall design and location, including sound wall areas, entry
wall areas, and property line walls through a master wall plan, shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Department, in accordance with the landscape
review process as conditioned. The wall location shall maintain a minimum 15 foot
setback from face of curb at any point along PGA Boulevard; however, a request
for consideration of an averaged setback may be approved if determined to be
appropriate by the Planning Director. The wall plan shall specify colors and
materials to be used for the walls, capping, pilasters, entry monuments, planters,
and any other such features. The perimeter wall shall be generally designed based
on the existing walls along PGA Boulevard, but create more of a unique yet
compatible appearance that will complement the existing streetscape and wall
improvements and provide some design distinction relative to the Eden Rock project
architecture. It shall be a separate plan sheet(s), to be included with the landscape
plan submittal for ALRC review. The primary perimeter wall surrounding the entire
site shall be installed as part of the initial project improvements phase."
5
ATTACHMENT #3
MOM ON3
-- di
as
to
T1
co
F5
IL
ET:7
lam
�g
j3
r-1
19
_j
t
52
Fl,
—J
Ld
>
A
iz
ce
LQ
2
Lu
u cc
a
02.
LU
0 0
—JZO
CM
Zb
59
C13
a
if
1 11 1 11 114
I ik
I
V.I.; A IR 44
liffil
ilia
fill
4 - a .�j I I A 11 1 s I I
51 six , Ili
I
Is
Ilk III iW 11,1,
I Rv�
ill Rif
:412
IV P11"I'l
if ;11
IV
.411
if
toil
114" X1 R, 1 1.0 1 !is X.1,6 4.1 11 11 1 . I !hls all Ti
i�'j ;
V ..% . 1 M Al
JAI
N
7i
sma
ji
OR
E,-4 N El r A L FJ rf, E E N d N d cA t
-----------
411.
Inal
iO
0*0 Boy 9
16
0, E
ly
10,
19 W
f A.A. M fill.
6W
Vill
ZI
9 HIM
21 1 Ph
Hot I,
l.HDIW 3A0GV MS
41 900-09 Ivis -M Hoi
ig.
gi; q gjgi
ell
H N. H. 19
Vj
9 'ON '133HS 339
09 OVIU-89 -=Nn HO.LVr4
-- —F
; eg,
------------
Ix N
1V
nit
j I j. 10,
ge
is
al
F 01 n :z ZOE
J�L:
IT
ni,
------ Z4
pip
his I
AT
I
:10
9
OW
F
EE--, 719 E ffi� N �3 AU
dcp
03d Qj
.nos
Qdv
Holm
En
j! m4l
N I ILA
Y
I
09
HE
tf
w it
U;i
1 Fig]
IK ESFE!T 1�j L 9 2 e
hi
J i�
L ON 133M 33S f
08 LL'90-9L VIS -Sn HDIVIA4
- - - - - - - - - - -
77
f f
fog s
it
�11 I -T
I I I . �J I 'x
13
a It
OR
lial
H W Z�j
l
lt p;
It
OQZ!
'Zk
IHM RAOIRV
03
CO'00-CL VIS *3hn HDIVY4
H
1
lit
52
;E 2 Z 9 "1" 61 el�= ZZ.-
ZA
ilk
I oil
4d"
-V�
4-if
Cal
I t
IE
Pi
dt
0
0
LLI-
tn
El
z
0
P:
u
w
un
>
G�
ae�
LLL
-C
Lv
cn
5
Nil
'EL
CO
C
r
j
Co
0
PGABLVD.
c
L
00
E
(D
IL
x
ME I w