2012 09 13 ALRC Special MeetingCity of La Quinta
ALRC Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-guinta.orn
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING
REVIEW COMMITTEE
AGENDA
A SPECIAL Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall — Study Session Room
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
SEPTEMBER 13, 2012
2:00 P.M.
Beginning Minute Motion 2012-003
CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. 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.
III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 4, 2012.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Item .................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2011-921
Applicant........... Lenity Group, LLC
Location............ Seeley Drive, East of Washington Street, South of
Miles Avenue, Within Centre Pointe
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that
the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday,
September 11, 2012 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, September 6, 2012.
DATED: September 6, 2012
CAROLY WALKER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
Public Notices
The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is
needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at 777-7123, twenty-
four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made.
If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning
Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's
office at 777-7123. A one (1) week notice is required.
If background material is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a Planning
Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits,
etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for distribution. It is requested that this
take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00 p.m. meeting.
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A special meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
April 4, 2012 10:05 a.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This regular meeting of the Architectural ndscaping Review
Committee was called to order at 10:0 by Planning Manager
David Sawyer who led the Committee,.' °th g salute.
B. Committee Members Present: ' _ "Gray, n McCune, and
ay Rooker
Committee Member Absent: R. e °,52
C. Staff present: Plann Manager D °_,,,Sawyer, Principal Planner
Wallace Nesbit, and S Monika "_ a*
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
•'3Is, R ;
III. CONFIRMATI O AGEN
IV. CONSENT
Staf Ne
any changes to the Minutes of January 4, 2012.
T e being n' corrections it was moved and seconded by
ittee Moo cCune to approve the minutes as submitted.
AYE mmmb s McCune and Rooker. NOES: None. ABSENT:
None. Tmittee Member Gray.
V. BUSINESS
A. Site Development Permit 2006-863, Amendment NO. 1 has been
submitted by AV Construction, LLC. for consideration of
Architectural, and Unit Landscaping Plans for Alta Verde Coral
Mountain (formerly Pasatiempo); Tract 34243; located on the north
side of Avenue 58, '/a mile west of Madison Street.
Principal Planner Wallace Nesbit presented . the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Planning Department.
Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
April 4, 2012
Planning Manager Sawyer asked the Committee if there were any
questions of staff.
Committee Member Gray asked if the project improvements had
been completed. Staff replied that they had.
There being no further questions of staff, Planning Manager Sawyer
said the applicant had prepared a presentation that they would like
to show to the Committee.
Mr. Andrew Adler, CEO of Alta Verde 315 S. Beverly Drive,
Ste 208, Beverly Hills, CA, introd h ` If and gave a brief
overview of the company's histo aexp' - . ce, explained the
applicant's intent for the propo plject, an cribed in detail
- rm.
why the architectural design _T features were cho'
Mr. Adler noted that the three ritodel homds were being
repainted to match the proposed elopment color palette and
some design element- t had been 5. ived as overly ornate had
been removed to me blend in he new architectural
design.
Mr. Adl of the p osed hones have basic solar systems
install there a porti of the roofs were flat. He explained
the o ner j'° ould be the opportunity to upgrade from
basic sol o, ree, and so forth, at the time of
an reas nergy efficiency of the house.
Mr. Ant Po mcipal with Poon Design, Inc., 315 South
everly Dr Ste O6, Beverly Hills, CA, introduced himself and
the arc ectural style was inspired a lot by the Tuscan Italian
s in its plicity and honesty, speaking with the quality of the
mat teed of the use of ornaments. He gave a brief
overvi of the three different color palettes used, as well as the
differe ce of the front doors, garage doors, window color frames,
etc.
Mr. Adler said the final product was four types of homes with
different facades that did not incorporate a lot of ornate elements,
the architecture had been left simple, and the landscaping variety
had been used almost as a decorative feature.
P:\Reports - ALRO2012ULRC_9-13-12WLRC Min_44-12_Draft Linked.doc 2
Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
April 4, 2012
Mr. Adler explained there were six different color palettes combined
with three different landscape palettes which essentially create
different type homes.
Mr. Adler said general improvements had already been made to the
site, expected pre -sale date of the homes was to begin in
September of 2012, with actual construction commencing at the
beginning of 2013.
Committee Member Gray asked if there w ar?q sidewalks around
i
the property. Mr. Adler replied there w isting sidewalks within
the development leading to the park a -, would also be used
as a retention basin.
Committee Member Gray ask where jhe pool eq "`` n would be
located on the lots. Mr. A e ied t e hadn't be .- a particular
location selected for the pool a nt s it wo d have to be
determined on a ca a -by -case be s If there was an accessory
structure, it would likely be pl y on the side of it, and if
there were no accesso re, it wo placed on the side of
the landscaping wall. m
Committ er MCC asked taff what was the required
setba for a ,R?. ccessory ,structure. Principal Planner Nesbit
expl in hat code req ants were in terms of size, height,
and setba
Com Me ' McCune asked if the pools would be built as
part of t ome . Adler replied the proposed pools and open
ool struc s/c nas would be offered. as an option to the
eowner He explained there would be three different pool
t_ avail le to choose from and the proposed accessory
stru s ould be in compliance with the City code requirements
in ter height and setbacks.
Committee Member McCune asked if the pools would have a spa.
Mr. Adler said the spa would also be an option for the homeowner
to choose from; however, the spa would be incorporated into the
pool, leaving the pool size the same.
Committee Member McCune asked about the solar option offered
with the homes. Mr. Adler explained that the homes would have
P:\Reports - ALRC\2012\ALRC_9-13-12\ALRC Min_4-4-12_Draft Linked.doc 3
Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
April 4, 2012
base solar system already installed with the inverter located in the
garage. Thus, the solar foundation would be in place and it would
be up to the owner to decide whether or not to expand upon it. He
said provided that the solar tax rebates were still available, it would
cover the cost of the upgrade for the homeowner.
Committee Member Gray asked if the parapet roof wall would be
tall enough to hide the solar panels. Mr. Adler replied it would.
Committee Member Gray asked what me "aANwould be used for
the pools. Mr. Adler replied it would r be plaster or pebble
tech. 2
Committee Member Rooker said
expressed a concern regar
windows incorporated into
were not protected by either
covering which mig t become
months in the desert. also
doors, opening outw
backyards were too clo to
replaced with sliders to ep i t
the lack .
v&y much li "` ' ;,the project. He
the large amoV
exposed
MgA
)pos architecsign that
g r somof a roof
i ue during the hot summer
ad the proposed the French
back =. a homes facing the
Zof an uggested that those be
Bible functional issues with
Mr. fC aid t design to " , ad performed detailed incremental
studies o r % , or to ensure that they meet or exceed
OM blis egwr ` ` "°' by fifteen percent in order to receive
the s' x c.__. available. He explained that the orientation of
the hom L as ed from east to west so that the majority of
he expos ind s were not in direct sunlight during the day.
noted th the windows located on the north and south sides of
t mes, hich would be directly exposed to the sun, had some
typ `" a . "endow treatment. He explained in detail the different
windo eatments used and the measures that had been taken in
order ensure compliance with Title 24 requirements.
Committee Member Rooker said he would have liked for the
proposed color palette to be a bit deeper and richer. He also
suggested the use of a fuller and richer landscaping palette in order
to soften the architectural lines and make the homes appear lusher,
as he found the proposed landscaping palette to be a bit scarce.
Mr. Adler replied he was a big supporter of lush landscaping;
P:\Reports - ALRC\2012\ALRC_9-13-12WLRC Min_44-12_Draft Linked.doc 4
Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee .
Minutes
April 4, 2012
however, it was against almost all of the current desert scape
mandates and water efficiency requirements. He explained why the
proposed landscaping palette was chosen and how it was used to
make the homes appear plusher.
Discussion followed regarding the overall landscaping of the project,
the types of trees and brushes used, the shortcomings of the
landscape renderings failing to provide a realistic image of what
would be actually installed on site, etc.
Mr. Chuck Shepardson, ASLA, Pre:
255 Via Sovana, Indian Wells, CA
said that the selected shrub
Agaves, Yuccas, etc. were in
keep their shape and structur , " vet
of Bougainvillea type shrub
whoever would be handling it.
Mr. Adler said that
suggestion to add pa
give the project an o;
Col
the
the
SA Design Group, 76-
1 oduced himself and
co 'ng of Ocotillos,
y selec ` ;, as they would
in compan ' w h the use
would be i hands of
the architectural team's
andscaping palette to
JGray-if paFhi trees would beinstalled in
med.
f landscaping would be installed in
ed that no landscaping would be
meowners would have the option to have the
ndscaping in the rear yards as an upgrade
to different landscaping design plans.
Gray asked what
tion basin greenway.
ade to it.
landscaping would be
Mr. Adler replied that no
Committee Member McCune asked if it had been maintained over
the years. Mr. Adler replied that recently it had been completely
redone.
Mr. Russell Jones, Construction Manager for Alta Verde Builders,
71-905 Highway 111, Ste G, Rancho Mirage, CA, introduced
PAReports - ALRC\2012\ALRC_9-13-12WLRC Min_4-4-12_Draft Linked.doc
E
Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
April 4, 2012
himself and gave an overview of the landscaping of the retention
basin and the common areas outside and inside the gates.
Committee Member McCune asked if the homes facing the
retention basin through the rear yards would have a lower back wall
than the rest of the homes within the development. Mr. Adler
replied that the CC&Rs required that metal fences be installed for
the back yards of those homes and that there would be no access
to the greenway through the back yards. I AN
Discussion followed regarding the to
the height and type of retention wall
Committee Member Rooker
the homeowners to landsce
such a mandate would not I
Committee Member
for the back yards i
option. Mr. Adler
described its dimens
in
asked if
, etc.
the metal fence and
ids the greenway.
e was a' ' 'yvay to mandate
yards. M to
said that
peable and 's ' ained why.
itio area would be provided
,.
not select a pool upgrade
`'n__ Icl be provided and
ng different finish options for the
he patios, and how those would blend
the height, slopes, and design of the
k
mmittJe
mb ooker suggested to leave the comments made
the ittee on the project merely as comments and not
t
tn the motion, so that the approval of the project is
noti upon them.
Mr. Adfer asked the Committee to consider removing bullet points A
and B under recommendation #2 of the staff report requesting that
the applicant change the arched doors, windows and openings for
the existing Lot 40 unit, to make them consistent with the new unit
types, and to install a stone veneer treatment on the facade of at
least one of the existing units.
P:\Reports - ALRC\2012WLRC_9-13-12WLRC Min_44-12_Draft Linked.doc 6
Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
April 4, 2012
Mr. Jones said the side walls of the existing units facing the street
were currently slump -stone stucco. He noted that those would be
replaced with split -face precision block which would help create a
similar stone look in between each house.
Mr. Adler added that they would like to not have to structurally tear
down the existing units and leave them as they were. He explained
that metal awnings were being added to the windows and the doors
which would hide the existing arches over th,.
Upon being asked if that addressed
Manger Sawyer noted that staf IR
recommendations as listed in the staff
within the development.
Committee Member Gray 'a
the side metal gates of the
not yet been finalized, but it
The Committee
comments and
concerns, Planning
like to keep the
nsure consistency
Sfor had bee yvs'elected for
dler said tat detail had
likely be a soft tan color.
the following
• U .ng doors u . Frenc oors at rear of units
• ssible wiring a in common greenbelt
• ette indow tre nts for sun protection
• Dee a osed color palette
d Ian s g and lusher materials to the proposed
o fuser discussion, it was moved and seconded by
embers McCune/Rooker to adopt Minute Motion
commending approval of Site Development Permit
Amendment No. 1, as submitted with staff's
:ions, but modifying bullet point A to say:
,,All arched doors, windows and openings on the existing units shall
be covered with painted metal screen awnings, consistent in design
with those of the new unit types."
and deleting bullet point B from recommendation #2. Unanimously
approved.
P:\Reports - ALRC\2012\ALRC_9-13-12\ALRC Min_4-4-12_Draft Linked.doc 7
Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
April 4, 2012
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS:
Committee Member Rooker said he was not pleased with the status
change of the Committee to City employees. Staff explained the reasons
that had made the status change necessary.
General discussion followed regarding the statu . change and similar
changes that had been implemented in the o ing cities in the
Coachella Valley.
Vill. PLANNING STAFF ITEMS:
Planning Manager Sawyer gave
presented to the Planning Corn
the actions taken.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being
Committee N
Architectural
be held on
April 4, 2012.
MONIKA
Secretary
the cases 'ffhad been
w and co ideration and
no further buss ss oved and seconded by
M22O
cCune to urn this meeting of the
aping Re w Committee to a Regular Meeting to
This mtirig was adjourned at 11:28 a.m. on
P:\Reports - ALRC\2012\ALRC_9-13-12\ALRC Min_44-12_Draft Linked.doc 8
,ono B I # A
OFQh`/
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE
DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 2012
CASE NUMBER: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2011-921
APPLICANT: LENITY GROUP, LLC
PROPERTY OWNER: LA QUINTA RETIREMENT RESIDENCE, LP
ARCHITECT: LENITY GROUP, LLC
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: LENITY GROUP, LLC
ENGINEER: MSA CONSULTING, INC.
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF SITE, ARCHITECTURAL, AND
LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR THE LA QUINTA RETIREMENT
COMMUNITY
LOCATION: SEELEY DRIVE, EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET, SOUTH
OF MILES AVENUE, WITHIN CENTRE POINTE
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MHDR)
►%%7�i ae
DESIGNATION: MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RMH)
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND USES:
NORTH:
PARKS AND RECREATION (P)
EXISTING COMMUNITY PARK FACILITY
SOUTH:
OFFICE COMMERCIAL (0)
VACANT, UN -ENTITLED LAND
EAST:
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY
WEST:
OFFICE COMMERCIAL (0)
EXISTING MEDICAL HEALTH CENTER
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The purpose of a Site Development Permit is to provide specific design review of a
project's proposed architecture and landscaping. The Architectural and Landscaping
Review Committee's (ALRC) role in reviewing this type of application is to provide the
Planning Commission with a recommendation regarding the design of the proposed
project and its compliance with the City's various development regulations.
When reviewing applications, the ALRC is responsible for reviewing site design,
architectural design, and landscape design. Site related items include exterior lighting
fixtures, project entries, streetscape, water features, pedestrian circulation, and
similar amenities. Architectural items for review include, building mass, scale,
architectural style, and aesthetic details, including materials, roof style, and colors.
Landscape review includes plant types, plant location and size, landscape screening of
equipment and undesirable views, and the emphasis of prominent design features.
Such coordinated review is necessary to promote a unifying project design,
compatibility with other surrounding uses, and aesthetic consistency with existing
architecture and the level of quality prevalent in the community. Once reviewed, the
ALRC's recommendation will be included in the staff report presented to the Planning
Commission.
PROPOSAL
The La Quinta Retirement Community, an approximately 9.5-acre senior retirement
community, is proposed to be located along Seeley Drive, east of Washington Street,
south of Miles Avenue, within the Centre Pointe commercial development
(Attachment 1). The proposed community consists of the following facilities:
• Three-story retirement facility • Two-story assisted living facility
• Four duplex cottage units • One-story memory care facility
Two development phases are proposed. The first phase consists of the retirement
facility and duplex units, along with parking and landscaping. The second phase
consists of the assisted living and memory care facility.
Project Overview:
The project site is currently vacant, with no active entitlements. Located directly
to the north of the project site is Pioneer Park. An existing single-family residential
neighborhood, Desert Pride, is located to the east of the project site. Vacant, un-
entitled property is located to the south of the project site. An existing medical
health center is located directly to the west of the project site (Attachment 1,
Sheet A-1 — A-2).
2
The configuration of the La Quinta Retirement Community consists of multiple
buildings located along a central drive aisle.
The main building, the three-story Retirement Residence, has the following
characteristics (Attachment 1, Sheet A-14 - A-16):
• Approximately 123,000 square foot congregate care facility
• Studio, one -bedroom, two -bedroom units (132 suites; 146 beds)
• Community dining area, activity/multi-purpose rooms, entertainment rooms
• Meals, housekeeping, van transportation, social activities included
• Resident: average age 82; ambulatory (medical/nursing care not provided)
The four single -story Duplex Cottage units have the following characteristics
(Attachment 1, Sheet A-23 - A-24): .
• Approximately 2,600 square feet (master bedroom and guest bedroom/den)
• Great room, kitchen, laundry room, covered patio, one -car garage
• Resident: slightly younger population (main building services also offered)
The two-story Assisted Living Facility (ALF) with Memory Care Unit (ALZ) has the
following characteristics (Attachment 1, Sheet A-21 - A-22):
• Approximately 77,000 square foot facility
• ALF includes studio, one -bedroom, two -bedroom units (72 suites; 73 beds)
o Dining area, activity room, lounge area
o Resident: seniors in need of assistance, but not nursing home
• ALZ includes private and semi -private suites (17 suites; 32 beds)
o Meals, housekeeping, van transportation included
o Resident: seniors with memory loss needs (medications/routines)
Site Design:
There is a single access point identified for the proposed La Quinta Retirement
Community: off Seeley Drive, adjoining the existing roundabout (Attachment 1,
Sheet A-1). This access will serve as the primary access for residents, guests, and
employees, as well as for delivery and service vehicles.
Vehicular circulation within the community consists of a singular drive aisle that
meanders through the center of the community (Attachment 1, Sheet A-0). The
majority of parking stalls for the project are located along this drive aisle, as well as
access to the cottage units and the service/delivery areas for the Retirement
Residence and Assisted Living Facility. A Fire Department access is located on
Seeley Drive, and gated fire access roads surround much of the perimeter of the
property. When not in use by the Fire Department, the access roads will be utilized
as pedestrian -friendly walking areas.
A total of 135 parking spaces are proposed, including two community van spaces,
3
eight ADA-accessible spaces, and 24 covered parking spaces. The illuminated
steel carport structures are approximately 10'-4" in height, and will be painted to
match the buildings (Attachment 1, Sheet A-25). The vehicular drive aisle and
parking areas are proposed to be lit with 21-foot tall pole lights (Attachment 1,
Sheet A-8). The parking lamps are 250-watt metal halide lamps that are frosted,
shielded, and directed downward.
Also included with this proposal are plans for common areas and amenities
(Attachment 1, Sheet A-0). These areas include multiple courtyard patio areas, a
swimming pool area, a community garden with raised planters, and an artificial turf
putting green. A water feature is proposed near the main entrance to the
Retirement Residence (Attachment 1, Sheet A-1). The feature consists of a three -
tiered fountain with a stone base (Attachment 1, Sheet A-28).
Architectural Design:
Included with this proposal are architectural plans for the main buildings and duplex
cottage units, which have been designed to reflect a Desert Contemporary theme
(Attachment 1, Sheet A-10 - Al2a). This includes architectural elements such as
the use of stucco as the primary exterior building material, the use of flat roofing,
stacked stone, metal awnings, and incorporating shades of tan and brown.
Additionally, balconies, shade trellises, and other design elements provide
architectural articulation to the various building facades.
The main building, the three-story Retirement Residence, incorporates varying
rooflines, with the height of the building, not including the parapet screen walls,
averaging approximately 35 feet in height at its highest ridgelines (Attachment 1,
Sheet A-10). The mechanical equipment parapet screen walls average 3-4 feet in
height. The height of the single -story Duplex Cottage units, at the highest roof
ridgeline, is approximately 17'-2" (Attachment 1, Sheet A-23 - A-24).
The Assisted Living Facility with Memory Care Unit is designed with the two-story
Assisted Living Facility element situated near the center of the proposed
community, and the single -story memory care element situated along the eastern
property line, adjacent to the existing single-family homes (Attachment 1, Sheet A-
18 - A-19a). The height of the two-story Assisted Living Facility averages
approximately 22 feet in height. The height of the single -story Memory Care Unit
averages 12 feet in height.
Landscaping:
Landscaping throughout the project site consists of primarily desert and other low -
to moderate -water use plants (Attachment 1, Sheet A-3 - A-5). Mostly utilized
around the buildings are various trees and shrubs, with minimal use of turf, which
4
has been limited to a community lawn activity area, areas surrounding the Duplex
Cottage units, and adjoining pedestrian pathways. The proposed tree palette
includes Tipu trees, Mesquite, Palo Verdes, as well as Date, Mediterranean, and
California Fan Palms. The shrub palette includes Yucca, Birds of Paradise, and
Sage, among others (Attachment 1, Sheet A-5).
At two locations along the project perimeter, a meandering screen wall is proposed
(Attachment 1, Sheet A-1 - A-2). Located along a portion of Seeley Drive and the
southern property line; the purpose of the walls is to screen views into and out of
the rear yards of the proposed duplex units. The screen walls, which consist of
block walls with stone veneer, will be approximately 3'-6" in height. Also included
in the development plans are a proposed masonry pool wall and fencing for the
memory care facility (Attachment 1, Sheet A-5).
The applicant is also proposing landscape lighting at various locations throughout
the project site (Attachment 1, Sheet A-6 - A-8). Walkway lights are to be placed
along the numerous pedestrian walking paths throughout the site. Wall -washer
lighting fixtures will also be strategically placed on walls throughout the site.
ANALYSIS
Staff finds the overall design of the proposed La Quinta Retirement Community to
be acceptable. Initially, staff had a number of concerns with the site design and
architecture; however, the applicant has sufficiently addressed most of the
concerns, as detailed in the analysis below.
Site Design:
The design of the vehicular access points, internal circulation, and parking areas is
generally acceptable. Within the project, all applicable turning radii for large
vehicles, loading/unloading areas, and pedestrian connectivity meet the La Quinta
Municipal Code development standards. The main drive aisle for the project has a
clear separation between vehicular and pedestrian paths of travel. The proposed
walkways that run throughout the community are sufficient as they provide
connectivity throughout the project site. Staff suggested that the existing
Eisenhower Health Center driveway to the west be utilized as a shared fire access
road, rather than constructing a new road adjacent and parallel to the existing road.
However, an agreement with the Eisenhower Health Center to allow shared use of
the driveway could not be reached.
Based on the parking requirements in LQMC Section 9.150.060 and the parking
analysis done as part of the review process, staff has determined that the proposed
parking area design and spaces provided within the La Quinta Retirement
Community can adequately accommodate the proposed use. The proposal provides
5
for 135 parking spaces, which does not meet the 208 parking spaces required by
the Municipal Code. Staff was primarily concerned with visitor parking and
employee shift changes. However, the applicant has provided information
regarding the proposed parking ratios based on past experience with this type of
land use, which has historically shown that only 20% of independent living
residents and 5% of assisted living residents bring vehicles to the community, and
that most residents utilize the community van for transportation needs.
Furthermore, the applicant has stated that the largest employee shift change would
require 32 parking spaces, which coupled with the number of spaces accounted for
residents with cars, result in approximately 90 parking spaces available for guest
parking. The applicant also provided staff with addresses of numerous facilities
they have constructed with similar unit counts and parking ratios. Through online
resources, staff confirmed the parking ratios at the existing facilities, and has
concluded that the proposed parking ratio should be sufficient.
With regards to the Duplex Cottage units located along Seeley Drive, near the main
entrance of the community, staff had some initial concern with the location and
layout of the proposed units. In particular, the placement of cottage units in such
an isolated location, away from the other cottage units located on the opposite side
of the property, was questioned. Also, the layout of the building was oriented in
such a way that rear yard areas would be exposed to public view. In response, the
applicant has stated that the proposed layout is operationally successful, and a rear
yard screen wall has been incorporated in order to minimize views into and out of
the rear yards. Staff remains concerned with the location of the isolated duplex
units.
Other outstanding site planning details that staff has some concern about include:
• Potential odor issues due to the proximity of proposed trash enclosures to
proposed Cottage Duplex units and existing single-family residential homes
• Design and adequacy of the proposed service/delivery area for the
Retirement Residence
Staff recommends that the ALRC discuss these issues
Architectural Design:
The Desert Contemporary architecture and layout of the project site is for the most
part compatible with the surrounding land uses. Because the existing buildings
within the Centre Pointe development near the proposed facility are of a Modern
and Mediterranean/Spanish architectural style, the Desert Contemporary style does
not conflict with the surrounding built environment. Enough architectural
articulations enhance the buildings, and the height, mass, and scale of the buildings
are appropriate for the proposed location.
L
Furthermore, the visual impact of the three-story Retirement Residence is minimized
from view from the existing residential neighborhood to the east (Attachment 1,
Sheet A-27). The building is set back over 180 feet from the closest existing
residence to the east, and review of the eastern property line transition plan shows
that the Duplex Cottage units and the segments of the Assisted Living Facility
closest to the property line have minimal visual impact on the existing residential
neighborhood due to massing, height, and landscaping buffers.
There was. initial concern regarding the use of the Packaged Terminal Air
Conditioning (PTAC) units throughout the community. In particular, staff believes
that use of the PTAC units result in an undesirable aesthetic impact on the
architecture of the buildings and noise impact on the existing built environment.
However, the applicant has proposed to incorporate decorative screens and grates
to minimize the impact of the PTAC units standing out from the building elevations.
Also, the applicant has provided information regarding decibel levels of the PTAC
units, and noise impact on the existing built environment should be minimal.
Other outstanding architectural plan details that staff has some concern about
include:
• The lack of architectural detail for all building elevations of the Assisted
Living Facility/Memory Care Unit
e The lack of architectural detail on the rear elevation of the van garage
Staff recommends that the ALRC discuss these issues.
Landscaping:
The proposed landscape palette is acceptable. The assorted species of plants
provide diversity and add character to the proposed buildings. The proposed plant
palette reflects the Desert Contemporary architectural style, while providing
sufficient screening and accents around the project site, including the parking lot
area, pedestrian circulation areas, and outdoor use areas. Minimum open space,
shading, and screening requirements have been met, and the proposed turf
installation around the project site is acceptable as it will be utilized in a pedestrian -
oriented environment and meets the City's water efficiency ordinance requirements.
The proposed water feature can be permitted if it meets the City's water efficiency
requirements. Staff has provided a Condition of Approval pertaining to water
features, requiring energy efficient pumps and staff review to ensure that there will
be minimal water loss due to splashing, evaporation, and compliance with water use
calculation requirements. The small-scale water feature located near the main
entrance of the Retirement Residence is appropriate in that its placement and scale
is beneficial towards the pedestrian atmosphere.
The proposed on -site lighting is acceptable, as the proposed fixtures are consistent
with the City's outdoor lighting ordinance. Parking areas will be sufficiently lit by
the strategically -placed poles and carport lights. All lighting will be designed and
located so as to confine direct light within the community boundaries. The
submitted photometric plan confirms that the project will be properly illuminated,
with a lack of excess light and no illuminated hotspots.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee recommend approval of
Site Development Permit 201 1-919 to the Planning Commission, subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
by:
Associate Planner
Attachments:
1. La Quinta Retirement Community Site Development Permit Packet
G
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2011-921
LA QUINTA RETIREMENT COMMUNITY
SEPTEMBER 13, 2012
1. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping
Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans).
2. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians,
retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed
landscape architect.
3. All new and modified landscape areas shall have landscaping and permanent
irrigation improvements in compliance with the City's Water Efficient
Landscape regulations contained in LQMC Section 8.13 (Water Efficient
Landscape).
4. Lighting plans shall be submitted with the final landscaping plans to the
Planning Director for his approval. Exterior lighting shall be consistent with
LQMC Section 9.100.150 (Outdoor Lighting). All freestanding lighting shall
not exceed 21 feet in height, and shall be fitted with a visor if deemed
necessary by staff to minimize trespass of light off the property. The
illuminated carports shall be included in the photometric study as part of the
final lighting plan submittal.
5. All water features shall be designed to minimize "splash", and use high
efficiency pumps and lighting to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
They shall be included in the landscape plan water efficiency calculations per
Municipal Code Chapter 8.13.
6. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be completely screened from view.
Utility transformers or other ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be
fully screened with a screening wall or landscaping and painted to match the
adjacent buildings.
7. The applicant shall submit the final landscape plans for review, processing
and approval to the Planning Department, in accordance with the Final
Landscape Plan application process. Planning Director approval of the final
landscape plans is required prior to issuance of the first building permit
unless the Planning Director determines extenuating circumstances exist
which justifies an alternative processing schedule.
NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the
appropriate City official, including the Planning Director and/or City Engineer.
E
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2011-921
LA QUINTA RETIREMENT COMMUNITY
SEPTEMBER 13, 2012
8. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance
requirements per guidelines in the.AASHTO "A Policy on Geometric Design
of Highways and Streets, 5th Edition" or latest, in the design and/or
installation of all landscaping and appurtenances abutting and within the
private and public street right-of-way.
10