Loading...
1983 01 25 PC Minutes An adjourned meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall La Quinta California January 25, 1983 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER A. The flag salute was led by Commissioner Imkamp. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Commiussioners Goetcheus, Imkamp, Reilly and Chairman Thornburgh Absent.' Commissioner Xlinkiewicz Moved by Commissioner Imkamp, seconded by Commissioner Goetcheus, to excuse Commissioner wl~m~ewicz. UnAn~-ously adopted. 3. 4. CONSENT CALKmXAR 5. BUSINESS SESSION A. The City Manager explained that the hearing regarding Zone Change 3879 and Tentative Tract Map No. 18767 had been ruled upon with approval at The Planning commission meeting of January 11, 1983. This meeting is being held as the Planning Commission requested a continuance of the above regular meeting to further study additional information to be submitted to then by the applicant, Landmark Land Company, for property located on the south side of Avenue 50, between Eisenhower Drive and Washington Street. The City Manager then introduced Sandra Bonner, Associate Planner, who present-ed two reports outlining the tract and a synopsis of the various planning conditions. 1. Sandra Bonner presented the staff report addressing the concerns of the Pl snn~ng Commission which resulted in this continued session so that a more thorough study could be made of the building heights, design of entryway, additional landscaping along Avenue 50 and the location and design of the wall. Based upon the findings presented to the Commission by Ms. Banner, staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract Map No. 18767 in accordance with Exhibits A, B, C and D and subject to conditions of approval, as amended. In Ms. Bonnet's report, she stated that she met with the City Engineer and his f~nd~ngs with regard to the redesign of the roadway along Avenue 50 met with his approval, that it would increase safety and be in the best interests of the community. Chairman Thornburgh invited comments from the Applicant, Landmark Land Company. Kevin XAnn4ng, PlAnner for T~nd~erk Land Company, addressed the Commission expressing Landmark's thanks to staff and the Commission for their diligence in processing this application and for their input at the initial hearing. Chairman Thornburgh opened the meeting to public comment. Bill Camm, ~9-~7 Coachella Drive, La Quinta, President of the Islands Homeowner's Association, expressed his concerns regarding the narrowing of Avenue 50 by 6 feet, no bike paths, and the wall setback at the entrance of this project. He was also concerned that this project request could be brought before the Commission to conclude _ about its adequacy without having filed the General Plan for the develop- ment of this entire area. 3uanita Qayer, ~9-8~5 Lago, La Quinta, stated she agreed with Mr. Camn's comments and also wanted to know why there had not been a fUture traffic OOtlllt o MINUTES - Pt e.-4.~ Co~ission Page Two. Xevin Ne~-4ng, representative of Lax~l~ark Land Cce~pam~, responded to ~r. Ca~m's concerns stating that Condition No. 26 provides for a bike/ golfcart path along the south side of Avenue 50. Regarding ~r. Ca~m's question re the setback of the wall at the entryway of the project, Mr. M~-nt~g stated that their plan provides for a tapering back of the wall to alleviate any traffic situations. Mr. Manning stated that the 6 feet of roadway Mr. Ca~m referred to is being used for an additional 6 foot setback. In answer to MArs. Gayer's question, Mr. ~a~ng stated that at the time of initial presentation of this project to the County of Riverside P~e-~ng Department, the County Staff felt there was no need for au additional traffic survey as T~-d~ark was going to be conditioned to widen the road. Co~m~issioner Xlimkiewica arrived to take his seat on the Co~a~ission at this time. Mr. Ca~a then asked if the bike/golfcart path would be inaide or outside of the planned roadway. The City l~mager replied that the bike/golfcart path would be within the planned roadway. He further co~memted in answer to Mrs. Ga~er' s concern of a traffic count for future use. With present usage, there seeas to be no reason for a count at this time. Ultimately, there will be traffic control devices, funded by the applicant through development fees, located at the intersection of Washington & Avenue 50, Eisenhower & Avenue 50 and Eisenhower and Washington Street. The types of devices and times ~hen they are to be placed at these locations depends on some traffic engineering surveys which are Just now being started. The City M~nager further stated for the P~-~g Co~aission and public infor~a- tien, the City Council has already expressed a concern regarding the traffic impact at Eisenhower Drive and ~aahingt~ Street, with a strong desire to have some type of stop signing at least initially there. We have not yet established sufficient funds for a traffic signal at that location, but what we will probably be putting in are stop signs with fla~ red lights at that three-way intersection. Co~aissioner Reilly questioned if the ehauging of the roadway would cost the City anyt~ and also asked if there would be any advantage to having desert type landscaping in lieu of ~hat ;~eark was requesting as far as saving space, thus not ~k~ug it necessary to have such a large setback. Staff advised Co~missioner Reilly that there would be no coat to the ~ity for .the redesign of' the roa~. Ccemissioner Thornburgh advised her that there was no advantage to having desert type landscaping. Mr. Caa~ requested to know if the bike/golfcart path would be used for two-wa~ traffic. The City Manager replied that this would be true and that it is permissable. Audrey Ostrowski, 77-~00 Calle Sinoloa, La Quinta, asked if the bike/golfcart path were one and the sa~e and if so, she felt that this was a dangerous situation. Staff advised that the path would be used for both types of vehicle travel. Co~aissioner Im~ wondered if the security gate was to come all the way out to the public right of way and requested more information with regard to this gate area. Xevin ~-t~g of T~t~ Land Coapam~ further explained the security gate area with regard to landscaping and the wall design. Chairman Thornburgh requested that the Comaiseion be shown the .landscaping plan when it is presented to staff, Just as a point of review. MINUTES - Ple,-~ ng C~ssion Page Three. Co~aissioner Xlimkiewicz commented that he would like to see developers give serious consideration to the desert type of landscaping using plants indigenous to this area which use less water. He stated he finds it more practical now ~hen we are all worried about water shortages. Co~aissioner ~oetcheus congratulated the applicant for this subdivision which he felt appropriately nice for La Quinta. He felt, however, that it would not be appropriate for this Cc~aission to change the plan of the 7~-foot wide roadway. He felt that they would be giving away road- wa~ that the county thought was necessary. Co=missioner Goetcheus stated that he would not be in favor of reducing the 76 feet that we are pledged to retain. Chairaan Thornburgh stated that he would like to commend staff a~d Land~ark Laud Co,many for co~ing up with a solution ~hen the Cc~aission requested a larger setback for Avenue 50. Ori~-ally, the county only required a 12-foot setback, but after our incorporation when this pro- J ect had to co~e before the La Quinta Pla~n4-g Co~mission, we felt the setback inadequate. Therefore, for the City to get what we wanted and Land~ark to get ~hat they want is of benefit to us all. There being no further public comment, Chairman Thornburgh closed the public hearing. After a short discussion regarding the tract map conditions of approval, the following change to Condition No. 15 was approved. NO. 15. Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the developer shall construct a six-foot-high decorative block wall along Avenue ~O which will be no less than 18 feet from the curb face. Plans showing the location and design of the wall, the landscaping of the setback and right of wa~ areas and the location of the four- foot-wide sidewalk ahall be sutmitted to and approved by the City Department of Co, amity Developaent prior to the issuance of any permits. These plans ~Ball be presented to the Pla-u~ng Cca~isaion for their review. 2. Commissioner I~ka~p made a motion to approve Tentative Tract ~ap No. 18767 in accordance with the approved Exhibits A, B, C and D, and subject to conditions of approval as a~ended. Ccem~ssioner El t~ewicz seconded this action. This motion was approved on a vote of ~ ayes and The City M~ager explained that the second item on the agenda was Plot Plan 8~-OO1, a request for a golf course equilment storage facility on property located at the southe~ corner of Avenida Ultimo and the ~ashingt~n Street Bridge e~b~-~went, ~w~k Land Co~n~, Applicant. The City Manager stated that after a conversation with the City Attorney, it was apparent that the type of approval needed for this plot plan is a~-~,~strative and therefore up to ht~ to ~ake the final approval. However, a public a~.~n~ strative hear- lng is required, but having ~isunderstood the requirements of the code, we set this application up for a P~-~ng C~ssion hearing. Therefore, we will hear ccmaents at this aeeting and get an advisory co~aent frc~ the Comaission. The City M~nager i~,~er explained that the establiah~ent of an equipaent storage facility at this location has been approved by the City Council. A public hearing was held by them ~here it was deterained that the location of this building, being~ adjacent to the golf course, was appropriate. The applicant has come to us with a request in three regards: 1. Location of gasoline pu~ps to be used solely for the f~eling of ~e~ntenance equipaent, ~xich will be stored in this facility. 2. The reduction of required parking spaces frc~ ~ to 6. 3. Change in roof structure froa flat to peaked. This will be strictly a storage building. No Air-conditioning units or other items will be placed in or on the building. MINUTES - Pla,-~ug Commission Jan-a_~y i 25, 1983 Page Fo~. Commissioner Goeteheus commented that we have received several letters in regard to this request from property owners in the area ~ho seem to feel that the value of their property would be reduced in value should this be approved. The City Manager explained that when the golf course was built, the - property values increased and as this facility is basically necessary to maintain that very golf course, he did not feel that the property values would decrease. In answer to other questions, the City Manager stated that this building would house lawnmowers, tractors, related golf course equipment and tools inside the building only. He further comented that the two fuel pumps stored only 500 gallons each, 1 for diesel and 1 for regular gasoline, and that the pumps were necessary to prevent having to bring in a fuel truck onto the premises. The Fire Marshall from Riverside County and our own Safety Coordinator have ~reviewed these plans and approved them. Commissioner Imkamp requested to know why the large door and the green- belt at the rear of facility were necessary. Xevin M--,~ng, Pl---er for Landmark Land Company, stated that the large door is for the purpose of having a truck enter the building to empty the septic tank. FUrther, the greenbelt would be very much reduced due to the fact that staff is requesting that the parking spaces remain at 8 instead of 6. Co~missioners Imkamp and Reilly both commented that they would rather see this building on the golf course area rather than across the street as they did not feel that this was #adjacent" to the golf course. C. Sandra Bonner, Associate Planner, presented the staff report regarding - Plot Plan 8~-OO3, a request for construction of a single-famAly dwelling on property located at 53-/~O Avenida Rubio, Bruce Ha%ton, Applicant. She explained the factors to be considered in reviewing the proposed house's compatibility with the surro~-d~ng neighborhood. These included siting, building design, building materials and landscaping. Based on the f~ud~-gs of these factors, staff recommends that the Commission approve this plot plan. After a short discussion period regarding the conditions of approval, the following eh-gze to Condition No. 6 was approved. NO. 6. The applicant shall be required to post a cash bond, performance bond or other financial arrangement acceptable to the City Attorney and City Engineer, with the City Community Development Department for the installation of the required street improvements along Avenida Rubio, including curb, gutter and connecting pavement. The amount of this cash bond shall be $2,000, ~ieh shall be sub- mitred to and accepted by the City of La Quinta' s Director of Ccemunity Development and City Manager prior to the issuance of a building per, it. Commissioner Goeteheus made a =orion to approve Plot Plan 83-003 subject to conditions of approval as amended. Commissioner Reilly seconded the action. Un,-~mously adopted. 6. AD~O~ The adjourned meeting of the Pl--m~ng Commission of the City of La Quinta was adjourned to the meet~-~ of Tuesday, February 8, 1983, at 7~00 p.m., in La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California. The adjourned meeting of the Ple--~ug Commission of the City of La Quinta was adjourned at 9:30 p.m., Tuesday, ~anuary 25, 1983, at La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calls Estado, La Quints, California. CHANGE TO MINUTES OF 1-25-83: Page 4 - Add the following between the second and third paragraphs: "Commissioner Reilly requested staff to send letters to those persons who had filed a protest regarding Plot Plan No. 83-001 (Golf Course Equipment Storage Facility) advising them of what has transpired to date.